A new Pentagon report says that climate change is an “urgent and growing threat to our national security” and blames it for “increased natural disasters” that will require more American troops designated to combat bad weather.
Some studies have questioned whether such a trend exists.
Says the Pentagon report released Wednesday, “Global climate change will have wide-ranging implications for U.S. national security interests over the foreseeable future because it will aggravate existing problems — such as poverty, social tensions, environmental degradation, ineffectual leadership, and weak political institutions — that threaten domestic stability in a number of countries.”
The report’s reference to “increased natural disasters” is not backed by several studies. The United Nations‘ latest report on global warming said there was insufficient evidence to say there have been increased storm, flood or drought activity. A climate center in Colorado said its study of decades of weather patterns failed to show any increase in tornadoes, hurricanes or other natural disasters.Still, the Pentagon report, called “National Security Implications of Climate-Related Risks and a Changing Climate,” has tasked U.S. combat commanders around the globe to plan for “persistently recurring conditions such as flooding [and] drought.” It states that “higher temperatures increase the strain on fragile states and vulnerable population by dampening economic activity.”
The report also tells commanders there are “more frequent and/or severe extreme weather events that may require substantial involvement of DoD units, personnel and assets in humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.”
It cites as example Super Storm Sandy in New York and New Jersey in 2012 and flooding in Pakistan in 2010, which it said was the worst in recorded history.
The report also cites decreases in Arctic ice cover and sea level increases.
Roger Pielke Jr, a professor of environmental studies at the Center for Science and Technology Police Research at the University of Colorado, studies global weather trends and makes conclusions at odds with the Pentagon report.
Current datasets indicate no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century,” he wrote in 2013. “No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin.”
“In summary, there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale.”
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a big advocate of changing human behavior to combat global warming, acknowledged there is little evidence of increased natural disasters.
It said last year there is “low confidence” in any long-term increase in cyclone and hurricane activity. It also said there is “low confidence” in increased tornadoes and hailstorms.
Global warming skeptics says that temperature models put out over a decade ago have proven to be wildly inaccurate today.
Have three climate change scientists been ASSASSINATED? The astonishing claim made by a Cambridge professor
- Professor Peter Wadhams insists three scientists may have been murdered
- Seymour Laxon died after a fall while Tim Boyd was struck by lightning
- Katharine Giles was crushed to death by a truck while cycling in London
- Prof Wadhams believes they were killed by oil lobby workers
Published: 21:38 GMT, 25 July 2015 | Updated: 03:37 GMT, 26 July 2015
A Cambridge professor has claimed that three scientists investigating climate change in the Arctic may have been assassinated.
Professor Peter Wadhams insists Seymour Laxon, Katharine Giles and Tim Boyd could have been murdered by someone possibly working for the oil industry or within government forces.
The trio had been studying the polar ice caps – with a focus on sea ice – when they died within a few months of each other in 2013.
Scroll down for video
Professor Peter Wadhams (pictured) believes three scientists who were investigating climate change may have been assassinated
Professor Laxon, 49, a director of the Centre for Polar Observation at University College London, was at a New Year’s Eve party in Essex when he fell down a flight of stairs and died.
Meanwhile oceanographer Dr Boyd, 54, was out walking his dogs near his home in Port Appin, Argyll, western Scotland, in January 2013 when he was struck by lightning and killed instantly.
Just months later in April, Dr Giles, 35, was cycling to work at UCL where she lectured when she was hit by a tipper truck in Victoria, central London, and died.
Professor Wadhams, Cambridge University’s head of Polar Ocean Physics Group, claims that in the weeks after Professor Laxon’s death, he was targeted by a lorry trying to force him off the road.
He reported the incident to the police but did not express his concerns about the scientists over fears he would be labelled a ‘looney’, he told The Telegraph.
‘It’s just very odd coincidence that something like that should happen in such a brief period of time,’ he said.
Dr Katharine Giles (left) died after she was crushed by a truck while cycling in London. Dr Tim Boyd (right) was struck by lightning while walking his dogs in Argyll and died instantly
Professor Seymour Laxon, 49, (pictured) a director of the Centre for Polar Observation at University College London, was at a New Year’s Eve party in Essex when he fell down a flight of stairs and died
‘They [the deaths] were accidents as far as anybody was able to tell but the fact they were clustered like that looked so weird.’
He added: ‘I thought if it was somebody assassinating them could it be one of our people doing it and that would be even more frightening. I thought it would be better not to touch this with a barge pole.’
But his comments have left Professor Laxon’s partner, Fiona Strawbridge – also a close friend of Dr Giles – furious and she has labelled it ‘outrageous and very distressing’.
Satellites: Earth Is Nearly In Its 21st Year Without Global Warming
After September of this year, the Earth will be entering its 21st year without statistically significant warming trend, according to satellite-derived temperature data.
Since September 1994, University of Alabama in Huntsville’s satellite temperature data has shown no statistically significant global warming trend. For over 20 years there’s been no warming trend apparent in the satellite records and will soon be entering into year 21 with no warming trend apparent in satellite data — which examines the lowest few miles of the Earth’s atmosphere.
Satellite data from the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) group also shows a prolonged “hiatus” in global warming. After November of this year, RSS data will be in its 21st year without warming. Ironically, the so-called “hiatus” in warming started when then vice President Al Gore and environmental groups touted RSS satellite data as evidence a slight warming trend since 1979.
For years, climate scientists have been debating the “hiatus” in global warming, pushing dozens of explanations for why global temperatures had not risen significantly in the last decade or so in the surface record and for the last two decades in the satellite record. but the debate was cut short in June when the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration published a study claiming the “hiatus” never existed.
“Newly corrected and updated global surface temperature data from NOAA’s [National Centers for Environmental Information] do not support the notion of a global warming ‘hiatus,’” wrote NOAA scientists in their study.
The study was highly criticized for inflating the temperature record since the late 1990s to show vastly more global warming than was shown in older data. The warming “hiatus” was eliminated and the warming trend over the period was more than doubled.
“There’s been so much criticism of NOAA’s alteration of the sea surface temperature that we are really just going to have to use the University of East Anglia data,” Pat Michaels, a climate scientist with the libertarian Cato Institute, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
“I don’t think that’s going to stand the test of time,” Michaels said of NOAA’s recent adjustments.
But what Michaels and others say is more problematic is the growing divergence between NOAA’s new temperature data versus satellite data and records from the UK Met Office. NOAA’s data shows significantly more warming than Met Office or satellite records.
“It’s a major problem because outside of the north polar region, the upper troposphere is supposed to warm faster than the surface,” Michaels said.
“Pretty much every projection made by our climate models for sensible weather is simply not at all trustworthy,” Michaels said.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact email@example.com.
America’s Most Advanced Climate Station Data Shows US In A 10-Year Cooling Trend
Data from America’s most advanced climate monitoring system shows the U.S. has undergone a cooling trend over the last decade, despite recent claims by government scientists that warming has accelerated worldwide during that time.
The U.S. Climate Reference Network was developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to provide “high-quality” climate data. The network consists of 114 stations across the U.S. in areas NOAA expects no development for the next 50 to 100 years.
The climate stations use three independent measurements of temperature and precipitation to provide “continuity of record and maintenance of well-calibrated and highly accurate observations,” NOAA states on its website. “The stations are placed in pristine environments expected to be free of development for many decades.” In essence, NOAA chose locations so they don’t need to be adjusted for “biases” in the temperature record.
Data compiled from these stations shows a slight cooling trend over the U.S. for the past decade.
”Clearly, a ‘pause’ or ‘hiatus’ exists in this most pristine climate data,” writes Anthony Watts, a veteran meteorologist and publisher of the science blog Watts Up With That. “In fact, a very slight cooling trend appears.”
Watts’s plotting of U.S. Surface Climate Observing Reference Networks (USCRN) data comes after NOAA researchers put out a study claiming there’s been no “hiatus” in global warming– a 15-year period with no significant rise in the world’s average temperature. Basically, NOAA made adjustments to weather stations, buoys and ships that increased the warming trend from older data.
“Newly corrected and updated global surface temperature data from NOAA’s [National Centers for Environmental Information] do not support the notion of a global warming ‘hiatus’,” NOAA scientists wrote in their study.
NOAA found that from 1998 to 2012 there was “more than twice as much warming as the old analysis at the global scale,” at 0.086 degrees Celsius per decade compared to 0.039 degrees per decade.
“This is clearly attributable to the new [Sea Surface Temperature] analysis, which itself has much higher trends,” scientists wrote. “In contrast, trends in the new [land surface temperature] analysis are only slightly higher.”
NOAA’s latest climate adjustments were sharply criticized by climate scientists skeptical of man-made global warming. Skeptics argued NOAA’s data adjustments were largely unwarranted and excluded data that didn’t fit with the global warming narrative.
“My bottom line assessment is this,” wrote Dr. Judith Curry, a climate scientist at Georgia Tech. “I think that uncertainties in global surface temperature anomalies is substantially understated.”
“The global surface temperature datasets are clearly a moving target,” Curry added. “So while I’m sure this latest analysis from NOAA will be regarded as politically useful for the Obama administration, I don’t regard it as a particularly useful contribution to our scientific understanding of what is going on.”
What’s interesting about the USCRN data is that it was created to provide scientists with “long-term sustainable and robust climate observations that are necessary to document long-term climate change trends for the United States,” according to NOAA. Much of this relies on the fact that these climate stations are placed in areas that don’t need to be adjusted for interference, like urban heat created in cities.
NOAA’s latest temperature update did not include USCRN data. One reason for this may be that the USCRN stations only have about a decade of data on them, which could be considered too short of a time period to use them in their analysis.
It should also be noted that USCRN only covers the U.S., including Hawaii and Alaska, but the rest of the world lacks these high quality weather stations that don’t require temperatures to go through ex post facto adjustments by NOAA.
Skeptics, however, argue that USCRN data could deflate future arguments of rapid warming made by NOAA and others.
“So, since this state of the art network requires no adjustment, we can most surely trust the data presented by it. Right?” Watts asked.
“While we seldom if ever see the USCRN mentioned in NOAA’s monthly and annual ‘State of the Climate’ reports to the U.S. public, buried in the depths of the [National Climatic Data Center] website, one can get access to the data and have it plotted,” Watts added. “We now have 10 years, a decade, of good data from this network and we are able to plot it.”
Swedish Official Admits Toxic Chemtrails Are Real & NOT Conspiracy
Official lifts the lid on what chemtrails are…
From WorldTruth.tv (source): Those long, white streams of persistent, cloudy haze commonly blasted into blue skies by unmarked airplanes are not your typical contrails, says Swedish Green Party leader Pernilla Hagberg. As reported by the Swedish paper Katrineholms Kuriren, Hagberg, the first major political leader to come forward on the issue, has openly admitted that these unusual cloud trails, which fail to dissipate like normal contrails do, are actually a toxic mix of chemicals, viruses, and metals that she has collectively referred to as “Chemtrails.”
Climate change is UN-led hoax to create ‘new world order’ – Australian PM’s adviser
Maurice Newman, the Australian PM’s business adviser (Reuters/Daniel Munoz)
The Australian prime minister’s chief business adviser says that climate change is a ruse led by the United Nations to create a new world order under the agency’s control. The statement coincided with a visit from the UN’s top climate negotiator.
Maurice Newman, chairman of Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s business advisory council, said the UN is using false models which show sustained temperature increases because it wants to end democracy and impose authoritarian rule.
“It’s a well-kept secret, but 95 percent of the climate models we are told prove the link between human CO2 emissions and catastrophic global warming have been found, after nearly two decades of temperature stasis, to be in error,” he wrote in an opinion piece published in The Australian newspaper on Friday, without providing evidence.
“The real agenda is concentrated political authority. Global warming is the hook,” he said, adding that the UN is against capitalism and freedom and wants to create a “new world order.”
— RT (@RT_com) May 1, 2015
The adviser’s inflammatory comments coincided with a visit from UN climate chief Christiana Figueres.
According to Newman, Figueres is “on record saying democracy is a poor political system for fighting global warming. Communist China, she says, is the best model.”
Figueres was in Australia to discuss practical climate change action, urging the country to move away from heavily polluting coal production. She also urged Australia to play a leading role at the climate summit in Paris in December.
But that call is unlikely to be heeded. During November’s G20 meeting in Brisbane, Abbott warned that the Paris summit would fail if world leaders decided prioritize the cutting of carbon emissions over economic growth.
Abbott, who called the science behind climate change “crap” in 2009, also repealed a tax on carbon pricing and abolished the independent Climate Commission advisory body in Australia.
The prime minister has been reluctant to take part in climate change politics, trying but failing to keep it off the agenda at last year’s G20 summit.
Both Abbott’s office and the United Nations have so far declined to comment on Newman’s statements.
A well-known climate change skeptic, Newman has made similar provocative comments in the past, calling the notion a “myth” and a “delusion.”
— RT UK (@RTUKnews) March 23, 2015
In February, he criticized renewable energy policies. Citing British charity Age UK, he stated that elderly citizens in Britain often die of “winter deaths” because they can’t afford power. He blamed renewable energy policies which drive up the price of energy.
However, when asked about his claim by The Guardian, the charity sent back a statement which referenced high energy costs, but failed to mention anything about renewable energy.
Just a few months earlier, in November 2014, Newman cited a Scottish government-commissioned study which allegedly said that for every job in the renewable sector, 3.7 jobs were lost elsewhere. However, the report itself made no mention that it was commissioned by the government. In fact, the government called the study “misleading,” adding that the industry would actually have the opposite effect on jobs.
According to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the global mean temperature could rise by up to 4.8° Celsius (40.6° Fahrenheit) this century alone. The prediction is seen as a recipe for droughts, floods and rising seas.
The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever
New data shows that the “vanishing” of polar ice is not the result of runaway global warming
When future generations look back on the global-warming scare of the past 30 years, nothing will shock them more than the extent to which the official temperature records – on which the entire panic ultimately rested – were systematically “adjusted” to show the Earth as having warmed much more than the actual data justified.
Two weeks ago, under the headline “How we are being tricked by flawed data on global warming”, I wrote about Paul Homewood, who, on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog, had checked the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming.
This was only the latest of many examples of a practice long recognised by expert observers around the world – one that raises an ever larger question mark over the entire official surface-temperature record.
Watch: Climate change explained in 60 second animation
Following my last article, Homewood checked a swathe of other South American weather stations around the original three. In each case he found the same suspicious one-way “adjustments”. First these were made by the US government’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN). They were then amplified by two of the main official surface records, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss) and the National Climate Data Center (NCDC), which use the warming trends to estimate temperatures across the vast regions of the Earth where no measurements are taken. Yet these are the very records on which scientists and politicians rely for their belief in “global warming”.
Homewood has now turned his attention to the weather stations across much of the Arctic, between Canada (51 degrees W) and the heart of Siberia (87 degrees E). Again, in nearly every case, the same one-way adjustments have been made, to show warming up to 1 degree C or more higher than was indicated by the data that was actually recorded. This has surprised no one more than Traust Jonsson, who was long in charge of climate research for the Iceland met office (and with whom Homewood has been in touch). Jonsson was amazed to see how the new version completely “disappears” Iceland’s “sea ice years” around 1970, when a period of extreme cooling almost devastated his country’s economy.
One of the first examples of these “adjustments” was exposed in 2007 by the statistician Steve McIntyre, when he discovered a paper published in 1987 by James Hansen, the scientist (later turned fanatical climate activist) who for many years ran Giss. Hansen’s original graph showed temperatures in the Arctic as having been much higher around 1940 than at any time since. But as Homewood reveals in his blog post, “Temperature adjustments transform Arctic history”, Giss has turned this upside down. Arctic temperatures from that time have been lowered so much that that they are now dwarfed by those of the past 20 years.
Homewood’s interest in the Arctic is partly because the “vanishing” of its polar ice (and the polar bears) has become such a poster-child for those trying to persuade us that we are threatened by runaway warming. But he chose that particular stretch of the Arctic because it is where ice is affected by warmer water brought in by cyclical shifts in a major Atlantic current – this last peaked at just the time 75 years ago when Arctic ice retreated even further than it has done recently. The ice-melt is not caused by rising global temperatures at all.
Of much more serious significance, however, is the way this wholesale manipulation of the official temperature record – for reasons GHCN and Giss have never plausibly explained – has become the real elephant in the room of the greatest and most costly scare the world has known. This really does begin to look like one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time.
World’s top climate scientists told to ‘cover up’ the fact that the Earth’s temperature hasn’t risen for the last 15 years
- Leaked United Nations report reveals the world’s temperature hasn’t risen for the last 15 years
- Politicians have raised concerns about the final draft
- Fears that the findings will encourage deniers of man-made climate change
Published: 19:40 GMT, 19 September 2013 | Updated: 06:47 GMT, 20 September 2013
Scientists working on the most authoritative study on climate change were urged to cover up the fact that the world’s temperature hasn’t risen for the last 15 years, it is claimed.
A leaked copy of a United Nations report, compiled by hundreds of scientists, shows politicians in Belgium, Germany, Hungary and the United States raised concerns about the final draft.
Published next week, it is expected to address the fact that 1998 was the hottest year on record and world temperatures have not yet exceeded it, which scientists have so far struggled to explain.
The report is the result of six years’ work by UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is seen as the world authority on the extent of climate change and what is causing it – on which governments including Britain’s base their green policies.
Concerns: Scientists have been urged to cover up the fact that the Earth’s temperature hasn’t risen for the last 15 years amid fears it would provide ammunition for deniers of man-made climate change
But leaked documents seen by the Associated Press, yesterday revealed deep concerns among politicians about a lack of global warming over the past few years.
Germany called for the references to the slowdown in warming to be deleted, saying looking at a time span of just 10 or 15 years was ‘misleading’ and they should focus on decades or centuries.
The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has changed its tune after issuing stern warnings about climate change for years
Hungary worried the report would provide ammunition for deniers of man-made climate change.
Belgium objected to using 1998 as a starting year for statistics, as it was exceptionally warm and makes the graph look flat – and suggested using 1999 or 2000 instead to give a more upward-pointing curve.
The United States delegation even weighed in, urging the authors of the report to explain away the lack of warming using the ‘leading hypothesis’ among scientists that the lower warming is down to more heat being absorbed by the ocean – which has got hotter.
The last IPCC ‘assessment report’ was published in 2007 and has been the subject of huge controversy after it had to correct the embarrassing claim that the Himalayas would melt by 2035.
It was then engulfed in the ‘Climategate’ scandal surrounding leaked emails allegedly showing scientists involved in it trying to manipulate their data to make it look more convincing – although several inquiries found no wrongdoing.
The latest report, which runs to 2,000 pages, will be shown to representatives from all 195 governments next week at a meeting in Stockholm, who can discuss alterations they want to make.
But since it was issued to governments in June, they have raised hundreds of objections about the 20-page summary for policymakers, which sums up the findings of the scientists.
What it says will inform renewable energy policies and how much consumers and businesses will pay for them.
The report is expected to say the rate of warming between 1998 and 2012 was about half of the average rate since 1951 – and put this down to natural variations such as the El Nino and La Nina ocean cycles and the cooling effects of volcanoes.
A leaked copy of the United Nations report, compiled by hundreds of scientists, shows politicians in Belgium, Germany, Hungary and the United States have raised concerns about the final draft. Above, the United Nations headquarters building in New York
A German climate scientist – Stefan Rahmstorf, who reviewed the chapter on sea levels – yesterday admitted it was possible the report’s authors were feeling under pressure to address the slowdown in warming due to the ‘public debate’ around the issue.
The draft report, which is not new research but a synthesis of all the work being done by scientists around the world, is likely to be highly disputed at the three-day meeting.
It will make the case that humans are causing global warming with carbon emissions even more strongly upgrading it from ‘very likely’ in 2007 to ‘extremely likely’ it is manmade.
But scientists are under pressure to explain why the warming has not exceeded 1998 levels although the decade 2000-2010 was the hottest on record.
Alden Meyer, of the Union of Concerned Scientists based in Washington, said yesterday: ‘I think to not address it would be a problem because then you basically have the denialists saying: ‘Look the IPCC is silent on this issue.’
Jonathan Lynn, a spokesman for the IPCC said yesterday: ‘This is the culmination of four years’ work by hundreds of scientists, where governments get a chance to ensure the summary for policymakers is clear and concise in a dialogue with the scientists who wrote it, and have the opportunity to raise any topics they think should be highlighted.’
Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released… and here is the chart to prove it
- The figures reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012 there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures
- This means that the ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996
Published: 21:42 GMT, 13 October 2012 | Updated: 13:59 GMT, 16 October 2012
The world stopped getting warmer almost 16 years ago, according to new data released last week.
The figures, which have triggered debate among climate scientists, reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012, there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures.
This means that the ‘plateau’ or ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996. Before that, temperatures had been stable or declining for about 40 years.
global temperature changes
Research: The new figures mean that the ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996. This picture shows an iceberg melting in Eastern Greenland
The new data, compiled from more than 3,000 measuring points on land and sea, was issued quietly on the internet, without any media fanfare, and, until today, it has not been reported.
This stands in sharp contrast to the release of the previous figures six months ago, which went only to the end of 2010 – a very warm year.
Ending the data then means it is possible to show a slight warming trend since 1997, but 2011 and the first eight months of 2012 were much cooler, and thus this trend is erased.
Some climate scientists, such as Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, last week dismissed the significance of the plateau, saying that 15 or 16 years is too short a period from which to draw conclusions.
Others disagreed. Professor Judith Curry, who is the head of the climate science department at America’s prestigious Georgia Tech university, told The Mail on Sunday that it was clear that the computer models used to predict future warming were ‘deeply flawed’.
Even Prof Jones admitted that he and his colleagues did not understand the impact of ‘natural variability’ – factors such as long-term ocean temperature cycles and changes in the output of the sun. However, he said he was still convinced that the current decade would end up significantly warmer than the previous two.
Disagreement: Professor Phil Jones, left, from the University of East Anglia, dismissed the significance of the plateau. Professor Judith Curry, right, from Georgia Tech university in America, disagreed, saying the computer models used to predict future warming were ‘deeply flawed’
Warmer: Since 1880 the world has warmed by 0.75 degrees Celsius. This image shows floating icebergs in Greenland
The regular data collected on global temperature is called Hadcrut 4, as it is jointly issued by the Met Office’s Hadley Centre and Prof Jones’s Climatic Research Unit.
Since 1880, when worldwide industrialisation began to gather pace and reliable statistics were first collected on a global scale, the world has warmed by 0.75 degrees Celsius.
Some scientists have claimed that this rate of warming is set to increase hugely without drastic cuts to carbon-dioxide emissions, predicting a catastrophic increase of up to a further five degrees Celsius by the end of the century.
The new figures were released as the Government made clear that it would ‘bend’ its own carbon-dioxide rules and build new power stations to try to combat the threat of blackouts.
At last week’s Conservative Party Conference, the new Energy Minister, John Hayes, promised that ‘the high-flown theories of bourgeois Left-wing academics will not override the interests of ordinary people who need fuel for heat, light and transport – energy policies, you might say, for the many, not the few’ – a pledge that has triggered fury from green activists, who fear reductions in the huge subsidies given to wind-turbine firms.
Flawed science costs us dearly
Here are three not-so trivial questions you probably won’t find in your next pub quiz. First, how much warmer has the world become since a) 1880 and b) the beginning of 1997? And what has this got to do with your ever-increasing energy bill?
You may find the answers to the first two surprising. Since 1880, when reliable temperature records began to be kept across most of the globe, the world has warmed by about 0.75 degrees Celsius.
From the start of 1997 until August 2012, however, figures released last week show the answer is zero: the trend, derived from the aggregate data collected from more than 3,000 worldwide measuring points, has been flat.
Surprising: News that the world has got no warmer for the past 16 years will come as something of a shock. This picture shows drifting ice in Canada
Not that there has been any coverage in the media, which usually reports climate issues assiduously, since the figures were quietly release online with no accompanying press release – unlike six months ago when they showed a slight warming trend.
The answer to the third question is perhaps the most familiar. Your bills are going up, at least in part, because of the array of ‘green’ subsidies being provided to the renewable energy industry, chiefly wind.
They will cost the average household about £100 this year. This is set to rise steadily higher – yet it is being imposed for only one reason: the widespread conviction, which is shared by politicians of all stripes and drilled into children at primary schools, that, without drastic action to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions, global warming is certain soon to accelerate, with truly catastrophic consequences by the end of the century – when temperatures could be up to five degrees higher.
Hence the significance of those first two answers. Global industrialisation over the past 130 years has made relatively little difference.
And with the country committed by Act of Parliament to reducing CO2 by 80 per cent by 2050, a project that will cost hundreds of billions, the news that the world has got no warmer for the past 16 years comes as something of a shock.
It poses a fundamental challenge to the assumptions underlying every aspect of energy and climate change policy.
This ‘plateau’ in rising temperatures does not mean that global warming won’t at some point resume.
But according to increasing numbers of serious climate scientists, it does suggest that the computer models that have for years been predicting imminent doom, such as those used by the Met Office and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, are flawed, and that the climate is far more complex than the models assert.
‘The new data confirms the existence of a pause in global warming,’ Professor Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Science at America’s Georgia Tech university, told me yesterday.
‘Climate models are very complex, but they are imperfect and incomplete. Natural variability [the impact of factors such as long-term temperature cycles in the oceans and the output of the sun] has been shown over the past two decades to have a magnitude that dominates the greenhouse warming effect.
‘It is becoming increasingly apparent that our attribution of warming since 1980 and future projections of climate change needs to consider natural internal variability as a factor of fundamental importance.’
Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, who found himself at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal over leaked emails three years ago, would not normally be expected to agree with her. Yet on two important points, he did.
The data does suggest a plateau, he admitted, and without a major El Nino event – the sudden, dramatic warming of the southern Pacific which takes place unpredictably and always has a huge effect on global weather – ‘it could go on for a while’.
Like Prof Curry, Prof Jones also admitted that the climate models were imperfect: ‘We don’t fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans, and because we don’t fully understand it you could say that natural variability is now working to suppress the warming. We don’t know what natural variability is doing.’
Headache: The evidence is beginning to suggest that global warming may be happening much slower than the catastrophists have claimed – a conclusion with enormous policy implications for politicians at Westminster, pictured
Yet he insisted that 15 or 16 years is not a significant period: pauses of such length had always been expected, he said.
Yet in 2009, when the plateau was already becoming apparent and being discussed by scientists, he told a colleague in one of the Climategate emails: ‘Bottom line: the “no upward trend” has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.’
But although that point has now been passed, he said that he hadn’t changed his mind about the models’ gloomy predictions: ‘I still think that the current decade which began in 2010 will be warmer by about 0.17 degrees than the previous one, which was warmer than the Nineties.’
Only if that did not happen would he seriously begin to wonder whether something more profound might be happening. In other words, though five years ago he seemed to be saying that 15 years without warming would make him ‘worried’, that period has now become 20 years.
Meanwhile, his Met Office colleagues were sticking to their guns. A spokesman said: ‘Choosing a starting or end point on short-term scales can be very misleading. Climate change can only be detected from multi-decadal timescales due to the inherent variability in the climate system.’
He said that for the plateau to last any more than 15 years was ‘unlikely’. Asked about a prediction that the Met Office made in 2009 – that three of the ensuing five years would set a new world temperature record – he made no comment. With no sign of a strong El Nino next year, the prospects of this happening are remote.
Why all this matters should be obvious. Every quarter, statistics on the economy’s output and models of future performance have a huge impact on our lives. They trigger a range of policy responses from the Bank of England and the Treasury, and myriad decisions by private businesses.
Yet it has steadily become apparent since the 2008 crash that both the statistics and the modelling are extremely unreliable. To plan the future around them makes about as much sense as choosing a wedding date three months’ hence on the basis of a long-term weather forecast.
Few people would be so foolish. But decisions of far deeper and more costly significance than those derived from output figures have been and are still being made on the basis of climate predictions, not of the next three months but of the coming century – and this despite the fact that Phil Jones and his colleagues now admit they do not understand the role of ‘natural variability’.
The most depressing feature of this debate is that anyone who questions the alarmist, doomsday scenario will automatically be labelled a climate change ‘denier’, and accused of jeopardising the future of humanity.
So let’s be clear. Yes: global warming is real, and some of it at least has been caused by the CO2 emitted by fossil fuels. But the evidence is beginning to suggest that it may be happening much slower than the catastrophists have claimed – a conclusion with enormous policy implications.
MIT scientist ridicules IPCC climate change report, calls findings ‘hilarious incoherence’
Published: 04:39 GMT, 30 September 2013 | Updated: 04:39 GMT, 30 September 2013
Amused: MIT climate professor Dr Richard Lindzen blasted the IPCC report, calling it ‘hilariously incoherent’
Not all experts agree with the latest United Nations report on global warming, some are even amused by its findings.
A climate scientist from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has come out blasting the report for blaming humans for a global warming trend that appears to have cooled in recent decades – and then glossing over the warming slowdown.
‘I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence,’ Dr. Richard Lindzen told Climate Depot – a site known for questioning the theory of global warming.
Dr Linzen’s amusement from the lack of correlation between predictions and actual conditions.
‘They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase,’ Dr Linzen continued.
The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change asserted in the report that it is 95 per cent sure humans’ use of fossil fuels is the cause of global warming.
The report also provided what Dr Linzen felt was a shoddy explanation for the lack of warming over the past 17 years.
‘Their excuse for the absence of warming over the past 17 years is that the heat is hiding in the deep ocean,’ the amused scientist said. ‘However, this is simply an admission that the models fail to simulate the exchanges of heat between the surface layers and the deeper oceans.’
Difference of opinion: Activists gather outside the the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in support of the group’s findings
This slapdash explanation for the lack of warming, Dr Linzen stressed, is proof the IPCC knows little about what is actually happening.
‘They now, somewhat obscurely, admit that their crucial assumption was totally unjustified,’ said the amused scientist.
Dr Linzen’s derision of the IPCC report comes amid evidence that warming hasn’t occurred over the past 17 years, and that polar ice caps are even expanding.
Despite strong evidence that global warming may be on hold, the IPCC still insisted that the report’s findings should alarm anyone denying the theory.
But global warming has stopped: Dr Linzen correctly points out that the climate hasn’t warmed in 17 years, a trend the IPCC report virtually dismisses while blaming humans for impending doom
The report found support among American politicians. Chief among them, Secretary of State John Kerry.
‘Those who deny the science or choose excuses over action are playing with fire,’ Secretary of State John Kerry said shortly after the report’s release.
‘Once again, the science grows clearer, the case grows more compelling and the costs of inaction grow beyond anything that anyone with conscience or common sense should be willing to even contemplate,’ he added.
A revised UN report on climate change is set to be released Monday.
MUMBAI: Two of three scientists at a session on climate change and society at the Indian Science Congress on Tuesday felt fears of man-made global warming were greatly exaggerated. Their presence at the conference was particularly significant in light of the current ‘development-versus-envir- onment’ debates.“While I agree that glaciers are melting because of global warming, if this is because of man, then what was the reason for the melting of the glaciers in the Gondwana period long before man arrived on the planet?” asked Dhruv Sen Singh, Centre of Advanced Study in Geology, University of Lucknow.
“Climate change is a natural phenomenon while pollution is caused by man. We are definitely accelerating the process of climate change, but we cannot predict the rate or extent of climate change that can be attributed to man,” Singh said.
According to him, fears of climate change amount to propaganda and “unnecessarily cause panic”.
“The Cretaceous period 65 million years ago was the hottest in the history of the earth. Man was not around at the time,” he added.
Singh said that if climate change was the cause of glaciers retreating, they should all be retreating at the same rate. “But in reality they are retreating at different rates, and some were advancing,” said Singh. “Despite the melting of glaciers, only at some places the sea level is rising, whereas at others it is constant, possibly due to the sinking of land,” he added.
As for extreme climatic events such as the Uttarakhand cloudburst, he said such cloudbursts were not new to the Himalayas. “These are cyclical events but not catastrophes. The devastation in Uttarakhand was caused by people living in hazard-prone areas, a function of India’s high population density,” he added.
Rajesh Agnihotri senior scientist at the Radio and Atmospheric Science Division, National Physics Laboratory, who mapped changing trends in India’s monsoons, said there was nothing to suggest that this was because of man-made climate change.
Hypothetically, even if man stopped industrial activity, stopped using cars and stopped using air-conditioners, monsoon patterns would still change,” said Agnihotri.
“Natural forces like solar intensity appear to be dominating monsoons to a greater extent than man-made climate change,” he added.
Scientist Confesses: “Global Warming a $22 Billion Scam”
Monday, 09 Feb 2015 03:03 PM
Imagine, for a moment, sitting at a prestigious steakhouse in Palm Beach, Florida, a hot spot for some of the most wealthy and famous — Donald Trump, Tiger Woods, Oprah Winfrey, James Patterson, Rush Limbaugh, and hundreds more.
And, imagine dining with a handful of men you’ve only read about. Some of them are worth millions, others published best-selling books, and some have held prominent positions at the White House.
In essence, you’re sitting at a five-person table of VIPs.
You’re about to take a bite of your New York strip when one of the men, a top U.S. intelligence agent, slams a 164-page document in the middle of the table.
This document, you soon find out, contains damning evidence that a network of politicians, corporations, and scientists have conspired together to promote the fear of “global warming” . . . despite evidence clearly stating no such “global warming” exists.
The motive: $22 billion per year.
To be clear . . . that’s $22 billion of taxpayers’ money . . . the amount that our government pays to stop the “global warming” epidemic.
That comes out to $41,856 every minute.
Or, to put it in perspective, that is twice as much as what our government spends on securing our borders.
Then, imagine this top U.S. intelligence agent turning to you, and asking for you to join him on a mission to out those involved in the “global warming” lie.
Doing so would cost a lot of money, a lot of time, and could cost you your reputation. But, pretending you never saw the document, and carrying on with your life, would allow the scandal to continue and actually put lives at risk.
So, imagine if you were at that table, and the scenario I just described happened to you.
How Would You Respond?
My name is Tom Luongo, and I’ve recently had this exact experience.In the following few pages, I am going to show you the alarming research in the document that was laid before me that night in Palm Beach.
I will tell you why this network of politicians, corporations, and scientists tried to hide this research . . . and how you can be part of a newly formed initiative with the aim of getting this research into the hands of every American.
This research proves, once and for all, that “global warming” is a sham . . . a sham perpetuated by a network of dirty government officials, greedy corporations, and bought-off “scientific” organizations.
How you respond will be up to you.
I can guarantee you one thing: After reading the next few pages, you will never look at government officials the same way . . . you will never trust what you hear in the media again . . . in fact, you will become skeptical of any and all authority figures going forward.
It’s unfortunate, but the betrayal you’re going to discover today runs very deep, and revealing the truth about “global warming” comes with great risk.
As a scientist for over 20 years, I’ve always upheld the truth.
I’ve worked with the University of Florida to do some amazing things . . . I’ve helped make crop yields more productive for third world countries . . . I helped create an intermetallic coating for gun barrels that dropped maintenance requirements on firearms by half . . . and I’ve helped cure diseases.
I have seen a lot of research go across my desk. But none of it can compare to the 164-page document that landed in front of me that night in Palm Beach.
That’s why I’m going to lay the facts from this document before you today, and then I’m going to ask that you join me, and the man who composed this document, on our mission to defund the “global warming” sham . . .
All it will take is a click of your mouse.
With one click, you’re going to put more momentum behind what I hope to be the largest effort . . . ever . . . to annihilate the “global warming” lie and defund the government’s multibillion-dollar spending frenzy to keep it alive.
Now, before we begin, I ask that you excuse any “rough” elements in this letter. What I’m sharing with you today is so urgent that I’ve made a huge effort to get the research in this 164-page document available to you as quickly as possible . . .
With President Obama’s recent speech about getting tougher on “global warming” issues I think it’s critical that we don’t waste a minute in getting this information out.
The sooner we get this information into the hands of the public . . . your hands . . . the more informed voters will be when they cast their ballots.
First, you should know who put this document in my hands — a man whom Al Gore is personally attacking . . .
His Name Is John Casey.
John is a former White House space program adviser, consultant to NASA headquarters, and space shuttle engineer. He is now one of America’s most successful climate change researchers and climate prediction experts.
In short, John is the very definition of a government insider. He spent 35 years conducting classified research, examining confidential documents, and directing critical scientific programs.
For example: In 1986, when the space shuttle Challenger tragically exploded, killing seven crew members, John testified before Congress on the cause of the accident. After the testimony, Congress instructed NASA headquarters to bring John in to chair a special internal investigation into why these critical systems failed.
Now, keep that in mind for a moment: Capitol Hill and NASA trusted John’s detailed analytical approach and his engineering credentials so much they asked him to investigate the cause of one of our nation’s greatest tragedies.
After 35 years of serving his country, John quietly retired in Florida. He planned on living peacefully, spending time with his wife, children, and grandkids.
But on one April afternoon in 2007, John made an “unfortunate” discovery that changed everything.The discovery would ultimately lead him to abandon his plans for retirement in order to support a cause that was bigger than himself . . . that was bigger than anything he had done in his 35-year career.
In fact, this discovery would result in him becoming hated by all those who once heralded him as their friend and adviser.
After this outright rejection, John realized that despite his science not changing, despite the thousands of pages of irrefutable data, and despite millions of lives at risk . . . he was alone.
The responsibility of letting the world know about this discovery rested solely on his shoulders, and those who would listen to him.
Indeed, what he has to say goes contrary to everything you have been told about “climate change.”
I initially rejected what John had to tell me. But when he showed me what was in his 164-page document, I couldn’t argue with him.
Facts are facts.
What John discovered that fateful afternoon was . . .
‘Global Warming’ Is an Outright Sham
You see, John found evidence — buried right in the government’s own environmental studies — that destroys their argument for “global warming.”
Using their own data, John has proven, once and for all, “global warming” is a sham. And perhaps the most expensive — and lethal — sham in American history.
A sham that our government spends $22 billion a year financing. Think about that: our government spends $22 billion a year financing “global warming” initiatives.
Again, that’s almost double what the government spends on securing our borders.
Or, to break it down to real numbers . . .
That’s $41,856 Every Minute!
But this is just the tip of the iceberg.
John’s research also uncovered a different looming cataclysm that will ruin every nation that’s not prepared . . . a calamity that has been accelerating for the last 17 years . . . and brewing for over 200 years.
This impending catastrophe is as natural as the sun rising in the east and setting in the west. And just as unstoppable.
I’m talking about a tectonic shift in the world’s economies that will . . .
- Send oil to over $300 a barrel
- Cause food prices to triple and in some places make food completely unavailable
- Lead to violence erupting in the streets of your suburban neighborhood
- Cause governments to topple, nations to descend into chaos, and international wars to break out.
In the 164-page document John handed me, he went to great lengths to explain exactly how serious this crisis will be. It’s going to be worsened by the fact our politicians are bullheadedly ignoring it.
The result will be every American being blindsided . . . unable to see it coming because of Al Gore and his cronies preaching false dogma.
As I said before, I didn’t believe it either until I saw the evidence in John’s dossier. And even then, it took me hours of talking to John afterward to digest it.
John’s research has now been corroborated by 17 independent scientific individuals and organizations. These are some of the top scientific minds in the field of climate science . . . in the world.
But That Hasn’t Stopped the Hostile Attacks…
When John retired, he had many allies and supporters in the government.
However, when he turned that same analytical approach Washington loved so much on Washington itself . . .
He became, in essence, their “public enemy No. 1.”
Let me explain.
As mentioned, in April of 2007, already into a comfortable retirement, John began examining some solar and environmental physics research (these are his hobbies).
The “unfortunate” discovery he made would make any honest American sick to the stomach. John immediately took the evidence and called his colleagues and fellow government insiders to alert them to the situation.
He even sent notices to the White House warning them of the crisis.
Silence, and then rejection.
And every year since, John has continued to notify every state governor, every U.S. senator, the House of Representatives, state attorneys general, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Obama’s Science Adviser Dr. John Holdren, and Dr. Jane Lubchenco, then head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
You see, all of John’s “friends” suddenly “forgot” his name and number when he revealed the inconvenient truth about Uncle Sam’s most expensive sacred cow . . . and showed them solid, scientifically sound research that obliterates the idea of “global warming.”
At the Heart of John’s Discovery Were Several Blatant Lies… Here Are 3 of Them
*Lie No.1: The World Is Getting Hotter . . .FAST!
You’ve heard how the earth is rapidly heating up . . . causing drought and mayhem.
For sure, the media jumps on the “global warming” story every time there is a heat wave and each time a hurricane hits the East Coast.
But how much has the world really warmed?
Well, according to NASA’s own data, the world has warmed .36 degrees Fahrenheit over the last 35 years (they started measuring the data in 1979).
I think you would agree that a .36 degree increase in temperature over the last 35 years is hardly anything to get in a panic about.
Granted, that does mean the world is warmer, right?
The problem with that argument is that we experienced the bulk of that warming between 1979 and 1998 . . . we’ve actually had temperatures DROPPING ever since!
Fact: We Haven’t Seen Any ‘Global Warming’ for 17 Years!
The reality is this: The world is 1.08 degrees cooler than it was in 1998.
Just take a look at this chart from Remote Sensing Systems, which provides data to NASA, NOAA, and other scientific organizations.
If you’re like me, this makes a lot of sense.
We’ve had cooler summers and longer winters.
Again, take one more look at the chart above — global warming reversed its rise in 1998. In the dossier John handed me, he explains exactly why this happened . . . and what’s going to happen next.
But for now, just keep this fact in your back pocket: the case for “global warming” is dead in its tracks.
Lie No. 2: The Oceans Are Getting Warmer
“Global warming” proponents have said for a long time we’d see a heating of the oceans.
This proposition is necessary, since it means all those big chunks of ice are supposed to melt, killing off polar bears and causing states like Florida to get swallowed up by water.
In 2007, while accepting his Nobel Prize for his “global warming” initiative (and quietly pocketing millions of dollars), Al Gore made a striking prediction . . .
“The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff. It could be completely
gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.”
Fact: The North Polar Ice Cap Is Increasing in Size!
It is seven years later, and recent satellite images show that not only have the icecaps not melted . . . but they’ve expanded in size by 43% to 63%.
Here’s what a Globe and Mail article had to say: “An area twice the size of Alaska — America’s biggest state — was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice.”
I think we know who’s using actual science, and who’s fear-mongering their way to wealth and fame.
Since 2002, the ocean temperatures have fluctuated less than 1 degree Fahrenheit. There is no warming.
Again, there is nothing to get hysterical about here.
Lie No. 3: Scientists Agree — Humans Are Causing ‘Global Warming’ FAST!
You’ve heard for years how climate change has been caused by . . . well, you!
Al Gore and his liberal friends have stood onstage blaming you and your “gas-guzzling” car, standard four‑bedroom house, and the factory downtown.
Shame on you, right?
Of course, the hypocrisy of the claim is that Al Gore himself racks up annual electric and gas bills of $30,000, more than 20 times the national average.
Now, while I am all for keeping the environment clean (I recycle, drive a fuel-efficient car, and reuse materials), humans have not caused “global warming” . . . nothing can be further from the truth.
Indeed, “global warming” alarmists and their allies in the liberal media are famous for saying that scientists agree that man has caused “global warming.”
President Obama even tweeted on May 16, 2014, “97% of scientists agree: climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” John Kerry, Al Gore, and a host of others have championed this statistic.
Shame on Them, Because That 97% Figure Is Completely Fabricated.
As The Wall Street Journal reported, “The assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction.”
When further review was done, it was discovered that a mere 1% of scientists believe human activity is causing most of the climate change.
In outrage, a petition was signed by more than 31,000 scientists that states “there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of . . . carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”
Indeed, even a founding father of the man-made “global warming” theory — Claude Allegre — recently came out and renounced his position by admitting, “The cause of this climate change is unknown.”
Fact: There Has Always Been, And Always Will Be Climate Change
The reality is simply this: The climate changes over time.
When Alexander the Great was conquering Persia, climate change was a big factor. And we all learned in high school that the “little ice age” that rocked Europe killed hundreds of thousands of people from the 1600s through the 1800s. Additionally, we know about the heat wave and drought that wiped out much of America during the 1930s. Thousands of people were dislocated in search of survival.
Were those events caused by man-made “global warming”?
Of course not.
And, the reality is, most scientists who advocate “global warming” today know mankind has nothing to do with climate change.
Remember: Temperatures have only risen .36 degrees since 1979 . . . and the bulk of that happened during the 1990s! We haven’t seen any warming for the last 17 years . . . in fact we have seen a drop in temperatures.
Now, the Question Is . . . What Does Cause Climate Change?
Well, think about it.
Every year, the temperatures rise and fall with spring, summer, fall, and winter. A year is simply a 365-day cycle.
Every day, the temperatures rise and fall with daytime and nighttime. A day is simply a 24-hour cycle.
These two cycles happen automatically. We can neither change them nor stop them any more than we can stop the Earth’s rotation. It’s impossible. The temperatures fluctuate based on these cycles.
So clearly, the Earth’s temperatures rise and fall based on its exposure to . . . the sun.
Well, here’s the breaking news. And you must pay close attention . . . because what I’m about to tell you has been deemed a “forbidden theme” in the scientific community.
Talking about it gets you a black mark at the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or the World Meteorological Society.
You see, there are larger cycles of the sun . . . “solar cycles.”
This may not seem earthshattering, but solar cycles are — bar none — the most devastating argument against man-made “global warming.”
Essentially, there are times when the sun gets hotter and times when it cools off as measured by “sunspots.” And John Casey found multiple solar cycles that determine the temperatures of the Earth.
The thing about these cycles is that they are predictable, and therefore it’s not difficult to see what is coming in the years ahead.
Indeed, if scientists were paying attention to these “solar cycles” years ago, they could have told you that the Earth would get warmer during the 1990s, and then it would cool . . . just like it has.
In fact, this climate cycle, along with several other cycles, has allowed John to make 11 accurate predictions about the Earth’s climate over the past few years, and it has allowed him to make a catastrophic prediction which I will share with you in a moment.
Ironically, as John released his data on these solar cycles, the ugly lie about man-made “global warming” started leaking out.
Evidence Leaked That the ‘Global Warming’ Faction Has Blatantly Lied.
You probably already knew somewhere deep inside that something wasn’t right about the “global warming” theory.
Sure, during the 1990s, we all noticed it getting warmer. But, to say that it is directly tied what humans are doing seemed to be a stretch, and, we have all noticed it getting a LOT cooler lately.
So it might not come as a surprise to say that “global warming” is a sham. But what does come as a surprise to many is the evidence of outright lying that is now leaking out of trustworthy scientific agencies.
Shortly after John exposed the truth about “global warming,” 1,000 emails and 2,000 documents from leading “global warming” scientists were found . . . revealing potential conspiracies, collusions, data manipulation, destruction of information, and even admission of flaws that were buried.
- One leading scientist — Kevin Trenberth — admitted “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty we can’t.” A travesty simply because they were worried about losing their government funding.
- In another email, Dr. Phil Jones — a leading “global warming” advocate at the United Nations — admitted that he used “Mike’s Nature trick” in a 1999 graph to “hide the decline” in temperature.
- And another study done by Stephen Goddard at Real Science revealed just how ridiculous “climate scientists” can get with data manipulation. Here is what he had to say: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models.”
There are several other documents just like these.
More recently, Professor Robert Stavins — who helped write the 2014 United Nations Climate Report — came out to Breitbart News . . . and revealed that politicians demanded he change and edit parts of the report to fit their needs!
In short, governments, and government-funded scientists, want to make sure that any “global warming” research published . . . will say exactly what they want it to say.
Now, everyone knows from their high school education that the No. 1 rule of doing scientific research is that it cannot be undertaken with an end goal in mind because you will only use the data points that support your end goal.
That’s not real science.
But that’s exactly what “global warming” scientists are doing! They are only using partial data . . . the data the supports their end goal . . . to make their point that there is man-made “global warming.”
So, we’re being told that the survival of our planet, of the human race, relies on tackling “global warming” . . . yet the whole thing is a sham.
Why would this network of politicians, corporations, and scientists do such a thing?
Well, think about it.
Our federal government spends $22 billion on “global warming” research each and every year (twice as much as we spend on protecting our border!).
Again, that is $41,856 every minute.
If government-funded scientists came out and said “global warming” didn’t exist, their funding would be cut immediately.
But “global warming” has been kept on life support for another crucial reason: It has been a practical ATM for every in-the-know political figure.
Al Gore, for example, has been one of the most vocally aggressive crusaders for “global warming.”
In 2001, before leaving office as vice president, Gore was worth less than $2 million. Since then, he has grown his wealth to $100 million . . . almost entirely by investing in a handful of “green-tech” companies . . . 14 of which received more than $2.5 billion in loans, grants, tax breaks, and more from the Obama administration.
The Telegraph reports Al Gore could become the “world’s first carbon billionaire” thanks to his investments in green companies . . . all of which benefit from tax dollars and government loans to “prevent global warming.”
And he’s not alone.
President Obama Has His Hand in the Cookie Jar Too.
You are likely familiar with the story of the failed Solyndra green energy initiative, which cost taxpayers $500 million; President Obama took a lot of flak for that.
But here’s a little-known side of the Solyndra story I bet you haven’t heard: Obama, in essence, used taxpayer money to finance his re-election campaign . . . by funneling it through Solyndra.
You see, when Solyndra fell on hard times, it passed into the hands of two large private equity investors . . . Goldman Sachs and George Kaiser. When $500 million in taxpayer money was given to Solyndra, both Goldman Sachs and George Kaiser benefited. Coincidentally, both have made contributions to Obama’s election campaigns adding up to roughly $1.25 million.
It doesn’t stop there.
- In 2010, another federal loan of $400 million went Abound Solar. That resulted in a bankruptcy as well. But investors in Abound Solar seemed to do just fine . . . investors like billionaire heiress Patricia Stryker. Stryker has famously contributed $500,000 to the Coalition for Progress while throwing $85,000 toward Obama’s inaugural committee. It’s just a coincidence that the government handed a company she invested in $400 million just before bankruptcy . . . right?
- There’s also A123 Systems, which paid one lobbying firm $970,000 to secure money from the government — and received $279 million in federal assistance. The CEO of A123 Systems went on to fund multiple Democratic senators and contributed to Obama’s campaign.
- First Solar received $646 million in government loan guarantees, and has since contributed more than $180,000 to Democratic campaigns.
- GE is notorious for spending tens of millions of dollars a year to “buy” green energy credits for its wind turbines and other green technologies — credits which helped the firm pay ZERO taxes in 2011.
There are a host of other examples of liberals getting wealthy off “global warming” initiatives just like these.
You can see why green energy is such a profitable business — CEOs and executives get to rake in millions of dollars, while politicians get lucrative donations for their campaigns . . . and scientists get all the funding they need to keep them going . . . all on your dime.
But here’s the cherry on top . . .
While $22 billion of our money is being redistributed every year to greedy scientists, politicians, and corporations . . .
The Real Cost Is $1.75 Trillion
$22 billion is just what is spent on these “global warming” initiatives.
The reality is, these initiatives have ripple effects . . . mainly the regulations (from government agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency) that shackle free enterprise and force us to rely on foreign energy.
According to Forbes, the total cost of these ripple effects is a staggering $1.75 trillion annually.
I want you to really think about that for a moment.
We’re watching $1.75 trillion per year . . . $3,329,528 per minute . . . go to waste.
It’s worse when you note that the U.S. Energy Information Administration says these regulations could ultimately cause gasoline prices to rise 77% over baseline projections . . . send 3 million Americans to the welfare line . . . and reduce average household income by a whopping $4,000 each year.
Washington knows all of this . . . and is still barreling forward with its nonsense policies!
They’re just letting you foot the bill, while they pocket the benefits.
Fact is, organizations like the Environmental Protection Agency have handcuffed capitalism . . . based on a theory even its staunchest supporters (like the aforementioned Dr. Allegre) have already renounced.
The result: reduced business, higher energy and food costs, higher taxes, lost jobs, and more money going overseas.
With $1.75 trillion in annual costs, you would think someone out there would listen to John and his research, but . . .
They Mocked Him
When John discovered that the world was indeed cooling, he urgently shared his findings, only to get lambasted.
Al Gore himself specifically called John a “pseudo-scientist” and discarded his findings.
“Global warming” advocate Dr. Benjamin Kirtman simply dismissed John’s warnings as the “usual nonsense.”
Media Matters has published two personal attacks against John — saying he has “no background in climate science” (which isn’t true) and calling him a “scam artist.”
But think about something for a moment.
Why would John take on this mission to expose the truth about “global warming” if he didn’t fully know that his evidence was fact? Why would he risk his reputation, his retirement, and his way of life?
It would have been much easier to walk away.
But John isn’t the type to walk away from the truth . . . especially when it would put his family, country, and even the world at risk.
That is why John has taken on this mission, even if it means doing it alone.
It is why he has exhausted his savings and retirement funds to spread the word about his research through his organization, Space and Science Research Corporation (SSRC).
He will let nothing stop him.
After 7 Long Years of Fighting . . . HOPE!
John’s persistence is finally paying off.
A small movement is starting . . . one that I am proud to be a part of, and one that I will invite you to join in a moment.
Helping fuel this movement has been the series of cold winters and cool summers that John predicted would come. The media no longer could ignore the irony in front of them. Here is what they have reported recently.
And now, a small but distinguished group of scientists and researchers are publically aligning themselves with John Casey and his organization.
One such organization recently named John . . .
‘America’s No. 1 Climate Forecaster’
Perhaps that is because unlike some of the “global warming” darlings and proponents — NOAA, NASA, and the IPCC — John’s research has consistently predicted weather patterns correctly.
Since he first began sharing this work in 2007, John’s 11 predictions have come true (mind you, these are MAJOR events, not predicting that tomorrow will be slightly cloudy with a chance of rain).
I could walk you through all 11, but they are very extensive and heavy on the science. John has accurately predicted everything from a drop in solar activity (NASA later adjusted their own projections to fall in line with his) to a rise in historic earthquake activity (10 months before the earthquake that hit Japan and caused the Fukushima meltdown).
Please know, all 11 of his predictions of have been verified — by myself and other third parties. All of them have been attacked by government-funded scientists, only for those same scientists to eat their words later.
Each and every one of John’s predictions have been made publicly and shared with top government officials and the mainstream media for the last seven years.
John has made every effort to share this information. But instead of listening, the media and the left treated him like a leper and have done their best to smear his name.
Science and politics have worked this way for hundreds of years.
Galileo was ridiculed by scientists invested in the idea the sun revolves around the Earth.
Robert Goddard — the man who ushered in the Space Age and rocket ships — was ridiculed endlessly during his life for proposing . . . traveling to the moon.
William Harvey was ostracized for proposing the theory of blood circulation . . .
Opponents could never refute the science — they could only attack the man behind it. Just like they do with John today.
But there is a small group of scientists that are starting to listen, and take action!
17 Scientific Masterminds Speak
Unlike the “scientists” who want to present information that has been twisted to fit a political agenda, and slam anyone who rebels against the accepted dogma . . .
John has done nothing but put his research up to public scrutiny for the last few years.
And now some of the top scientific minds in the world are rallying to him. Here’s what they have to say . . .
- Dr. Fumio Tsunoda, professor emeritus of geology at Japan’s Saitama University, testified, “ [John’s] work is quite a revelation that marks a step toward a new scientific civilization ” and his findings “add a brilliant page to the history of science.”
- Dr. Natarajan Venkatanathan, professor of physics, SASTRA University, said, “ [John’s] ideas may be opposed by conventional scientists, but they will have to accept his theory because the truth prevails. ”
- Dr. Boris Komitov, one of Europe’s top solar physicists and a professor at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, was so impressed with John’s work, he reached out to John and joined the Space and Science Research Corporation (SSRC). Here’s what Dr. Komitov had to say: “These problems brought on by this next climate change that Casey ably discusses . . . are more important than ever. ”
- Dr. Ole Humlum, professor of physical geography at the University of Oslo, said, “The history of science is filled with examples of individuals with new ideas being met by the current scientific establishment not with enthusiasm, but rather with disregard and sometimes, even ridicule. These hypotheses were considered outrageous by many contemporary scientists, but today they represent the very foundation for much of our present understanding of planet Earth’s dynamics. New hypotheses based on empirical observations should always be welcomed warmly. This also applies very much to [the work] by John Casey.”
- Dr. Giovanni Gregori, who has served on the National Research Council of Italy since 1963 and serves on multiple astronomical councils and in several societies, went so far as to say that John Casey is the modern day Leonardo da Vinci. He also said: “[John Casey’s work] is an important contribution for understanding and facing the environmental challenge, in its multifaceted and often disquieting manifestations.”
- Dr. Dong Choi, editor-in-chief of the New Concepts in Global Tectonics newsletter, calls John’s work “earth-shattering.”
Each of these scientists has reviewed John’s work and had no choice but to agree with his conclusion after seeing the evidence, just as I did.
John even confided in me that several other scientists secretly support his work. They agree with his conclusions. They think “global warming” and the accepted climate science is hogwash.
But they can’t say anything about it.
In John’s words: “If you work for the government and you stand up and say, ‘Man-made climate change is all nonsense’ you can kiss your government job goodbye. They’ll either make it hell to work there, or fire you outright.”
It’s easy to get upset with these scientists, and we should be, but in reality, they are just trying to keep their jobs. We should put the bulk of the blame on our government.
We have a government that prefers comfortable delusion to uncomfortable truth.
Look, I Love This Country.
I am proud to be an American and I think God has really blessed this country.
When it comes down to it, no other nation has ever given every man, woman, and child the chance to enjoy so much prosperity.
And more importantly, so much control over their lives.
However, our nation has made a hard turn over the last few years — we’ve spent more time furthering agendas of a handful of politicians than actually protecting the American people.
John’s research is just one example.
Rather than being, as he says, “one of hundreds” sharing this information . . . John and his small organization have been doing it all.
And as a result of their tremendous effort, a small movement has started.
However, this small movement is at risk of dying in its tracks without help from bold Americans like you.
That’s why . . .
We Are Making a Stand . . .
As I said earlier, my name is Tom Luongo.
I’ve been a scientist for the better part of my life.
I’ve worked to make crop yields higher in third world countries, I’ve done hundreds of chemical tests to make firearms less maintenance-intensive, and I have worked to help cure diseases.
I used the “scientific” approach in other areas of my life as well.
For example, I’ve been able to turn every $5,000 into $34,000 using a scientific approach to investing.
I used the scientific method to teach myself economics . . . and, as a result, started buying gold in 2001 — watching it jump 473% since.
I even used it to deduce the housing bubble was coming, three years in advance (and, along with my wife, took special precautions to avoid the fallout).
John Casey knows I have a knack for getting things done, and done right.
That’s why, at a dinner in Palm Beach not long ago, John set a 164-page document in front of me. This document is the culmination of his years of work — it’s all his research in one bound volume.
John knew I would validate his claims, and upon doing so, take action.
Since that fateful night, John and I have teamed up to take that document and rewrite a good bit of it into a simple-to-read and easy-to-understand book, so that we could publish it, and get it into every home in America.
The book is called Dark Winter . . . and I want you to have a FREE copy of it!
In it, John holds nothing back. He names names. He shows the evidence. And he reveals the cold truth about “global warming.”
- This book includes every alert, every warning, every scrap of information he has sent urgently to our government.
- John reveals the science behind his 11 accurate predictions in simple-to-understand terms, and why he foresees more significant events like tornadoes, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions.
- John also reveals 33 crushing scientific dissections he performs which make “global warming” even more of a farce.
- Most importantly, Dark Winter makes an alarming prediction. There is a looming cataclysm that will ruin every nation that’s not prepared . . . a calamity that has been accelerating for the last 17 years . . . and brewing for over 200 years. This event will cause international wars as governments topple and nations descend into chaos.
- John even exposes why we may soon see oil rise to $300 a barrel and food prices triple (and in some places, food will become unavailable).
- Best of all, John reveals a three-step plan to protect yourself if his latest predictions come to fruition just like his last 11.
Again, I want you to have a copy of this book . . . for free.
I want to get it in your hands . . . and in the hands of every other American out there!
And that is why we need your help.
You’ve seen for yourself how “global warming” is a farce. You’ve seen how an entire community of scientists, politicians, and corporations are padding their pockets with $22 billion of taxpayers’ money every year in the name of “global warming.”
And you have seen how John has made 11 accurate predictions and a team of scientists are rallying around him.
Most of all . . . you have seen how John has spent his retirement time and money preaching this message to anyone who will listen. Yes . . . they are few and far between. But some are now listening.
John’s not doing this for money. As I said, he’s actually exhausting all of his savings to get this message out.
But we can’t stop here.
And John can’t do it alone.
He is facing a $22 billion budget along with years of “global warming” brainwashing. Some battles have been won, but the war is far from over.
We Are Fighting Back With the Cold Truth Initiative.
I have personally poured my own blood, sweat, and tears into putting this initiative together.
I figured it was the least I could do for my good friend John Casey after all he has done for us.
The Cold Truth Initiative will send an audacious message to those who have perpetrated this blatant lie called ‘global warming’ — a message that will stop their malicious deceit in its tracks.
We will achieve this mission by completing three bold goals before January 1.
We have ambitious goals, no doubt.
Thankfully, because of good people like you, within the last week we have raised tens of thousands of dollars. We have used that money to reach an estimated 2 million people with the truth.
John Casey and I have been working day in and day out, shoulder to shoulder, to spread this message.
But now we need your help!
Unite With Us!
You can join the Cold Truth Initiative right now.
All we ask is that you make a one-time contribution of $5 that we will use to fulfill our mission.
Once you join, you will receive a free copy of John Casey’s book Dark Winter (a $29 value): This 164-page document is a death sentence for the dogma of the “climate believers.”
This book reveals the groundbreaking research that forced John to reverse his belief in “global warming.” He spent most of his life buying into the dogma . . . that is, until that fateful evening in April, 2007.
Once he saw the truth, there was no going back.
I am willing to bet this information will have the same effect on you.
However, your FREE copy of Dark Winter is just the first item you will receive today when you join the Cold Truth Initiative.
Your FREE Cold Truth Initiative Introductory Packet
John and I want to give you an arsenal of weapons to help spread the truth.
That’s why the book Dark Winter is just the first item we will be arming you with today. We are holding nothing back for this initiative.
- The Lost Video Interview (a $29 value): This is the private conversation I had with John after reading his 164-page document. During the course of this interview, John revealed more cold hard facts about the end of “global warming.” I think you’ll be just as floored as I was (particularly when John explains the real reason Russia is invading Ukraine, and why it could be very bad for America).
- The Dark Winter Survival Guide (a $49 value): In John’s book, Dark Winter, he goes beyond blowing “global warming” out of the water . . . he reveals a calamity far worse than most climate scientists can imagine — all based on proven solar cycles. I worked hand in hand with John to create a DETAILED action plan for you to avoid the biggest pitfalls and even thrive during this coming era of chaos.
- The Dark Winter Investment Guide (a $49 value): As a seasoned investor, I feel it’s important to help you get all your ducks in a row. Money makes the world go round — and having enough of it, especially during the potential dark days ahead, can make your life much easier. I’ll show you how to effectively invest your money — and possibly, like me, turn every $5,000 into $34,000.
- A 3-Month Subscription to My Resolute Wealth Letter (a $24 value): I write a monthly newsletter that is distributed to about 10,000 people. Think of this newsletter as your monthly road map not only to wealth (I hand-pick several home-run investments every month for my readers) . . . but also to honest science, real economics, and alternative, practical ways of living outside of Uncle Sam’s reach. I bring in top experts to help me share little-known strategies for protecting your privacy, slashing your taxes, and even living “off the grid.” You get all of this information delivered straight to your inbox every single month — free — for three months. And then, if you choose to renew the subscription, it is only $97.95 for the full year.
That’s a Total Velue of $180 . . . in Return for Your $5 Contribution Today.
Every dollar you contribute will be spent to spread the truth about “global warming” and on equipping you with the tools you need to tell others about this lie . . . so that you and your fellow citizens can be prepared for what is to come.
None of the money will be kept.
To be clear, the minimum contribution when you join the Cold Truth Initiative is $5. But you are allowed to contribute more . . . in fact, I estimate that every $5 you contribute helps us reach 20 more people with this message through online advertising, media buys, and campaign speeches.
That’s 20 more people who will know the truth and who will spread the truth.
Just think . . . if it were not for somebody else’s previous contribution, you wouldn’t be reading this message right now. You likely wouldn’t know that the Earth’s temperatures have risen a mere .36 degrees over the last 35 years, that the icecaps were actually increasing in size by 43% to 63%, or that our government is wasting $41,856 every minute in the name of “global warming.”
However, because of one of your fellow Americans . . . an anonymous contributor you will never meet . . . you are now getting the information you need.
So . . . What Will You Do Now?
John has put 100% of his life into spreading this message.
I have made a commitment to print thousands of copies of Dark Winter along with the other critical items in your Cold Truth Initiative Introductory Kit . . .
Thousands of others have already financially supported us through contributions to the Cold Truth Initiative.
So what will you do now that you have seen the evidence for yourself?
My hope is that you don’t walk away in silence as a network of dirty politicians, greedy corporations, and bribed scientists rob you year in and year out.
That’s exactly what they want you to do.
They want you to think that your contribution won’t make a difference. They want you to think your voice is too small to change things.
Remember, this information isn’t just important, it is vital!
$22 billion of your money is being spent every year to keep the “global warming” lie alive . . . consumers and corporations take a blow of $1.75 trillion a year because of useless legislation.
Imagine how the American economy might look if we weren’t effectively flushing this money down the toilet . . . imagine how much your taxes could drop if the government wasn’t spending your money on nonsense programs . . .
The only way we can win this war is if we unite together.
Thousands have already contributed to the Cold Truth Initiative. We are making headway, but we have a long way to go.
Now is your chance to make a difference.
Today, you can strike back at the lies, and more importantly, you can help other Americans protect themselves.
I urge you to click the button below and make a small contribution of $5 or more today.
We’ll rush you a free Cold Truth Initiative Introductory Packet that includes John’s book Dark Winter along with The Lost Video Interview, The Dark Winter Investment Guide, The Dark Winter Survival Guide, and a three-month subscription to my Resolute Wealth Letter.
View pictures of paedophiles and the royal family https://jewishpaedophilia.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/jimmy-savile-ted-heath-and-queen-elizabeth-ii-pictures/
Learn more about the British police https://jewishpaedophilia.wordpress.com/2015/01/21/how-much-do-you-think-you-can-trust-the-british-police/
Learn more about people trying to murder you and your family https://jewishpaedophilia.wordpress.com/2015/02/05/proof-someone-is-trying-to-damage-the-human-body-brain-and-cause-cancer-to-kill-people-slowly/
Learn more about Freemason paedophile rings https://jewishpaedophilia.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/international-freemason-paedophile-rings-america-britain-france-holland-jersey/
Learn more about the paedophile ring thats been operating inside the British and American intelligence agencies https://jewishpaedophilia.wordpress.com/2015/05/22/opilluminatuspiedpiper-northamptonshire-police-helping-cover-up-unitarian-paedosadist-with-satanic-royal-connections-mp-cyril-smith-scandal-because-of-his-royal-connections-force-said-secur/