Regardless of the intentions of environmental activists and their shoes, “climate change” has been hijacked by big business, governments, power elites, and the Green Parties. The likes of Al Gore have made tens of millions from it – and these people still jet about like there is no tomorrow.
The brokers of Climate Change Agendas push the line that people are responsible for global warming, and this requires the taxing and controlling of hapless populations. [How convenient!] This also creates huge disadvantages for developing countries that are dissuaded from using fossil fuels to advance their economies.
We are made to feel guilty, and this allows “power structures” to take advantage of the people, while activists even applaud the control and the restrictions. So whom to trust in this debacle that is now the climate religion?
The history of humans
And those people who say humans do not have an effect — well — humans have changed the globe in many devastating ways. And more recently much of the destruction has been done by corporate entities with no regard to future generations.
There are seven billion of us, and we are part of this huge “system” where everything affects everything else.
If we look back into history to see how society has been influenced and controlled, it is clear that “elites” have been trying to control the resources and people of the world for centuries – possibly millennia.
Nothing has changed. And it is true (as Norm Sauer says), “If government can control carbon, it can capture our wealth and control our lives.”
Of course the “elites” are planning to control everything. They will use anything and everything to maintain power – from taxes to terrorism. We need to pause and ask whom we should trust.
Perspective and Time
Politicians and even scientists often refer to only decades (e.g., this decade is hotter and cooler than the last one). But to debate climate and our impact, we need to view historically as to how homo sapiens has treated the environment.
I found Jared Diamond’s book, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, fascinating. Yes, humans make choices regarding their environment – good and bad – but it is generational transformation that is possibly our undoing. The changes are slow, and following generations adapt to what they see and have, and as a result we have no perspective of the slow changes.
Easter Island
Diamond uses Easter Island as a principal example of man’s inability to manage the environment. Records demonstrate deforestation, and depletion of species and food-sources. Other (fringe) authors claim the deforestation was as the result of rats, but the example of Easter Island is a warning. This is an extract describing Hancock’s book (here):
“Easter Island was settled perhaps around the 900s when it had an abundance of trees, game, fish and shell fish… When the Dutch explorer Jacob Rovveveen arrived in 1722 he found no trees over ten feet tall. Without big trees there was no wood for making canoes – canoes with harpooning platforms for taking porpoises and tuna on the open sea. Fish were now caught only in the shallow waters. Deforestation had led to soil erosion by rain and wind. Compost for agriculture was no longer available. Land birds had disappeared. Shellfish had been over-exploited and people instead were eating small black snails. Over-hunting had decreased the availability of small animals. When Captain Cook arrived in 1774 he found the islanders “small, lean, timid and miserable.” People were still growing food but there had not been enough to sustain their numbers. Starvation and cannibalism had appeared.
Diamond does not believe that Easter Islanders were exceptionally foolish. Easter Island was more vulnerable to bad choices than were some other islands in the Pacific…”
Carl Sagan put human survival into perspective with, “Extinction is the rule, survival is the exception.” The question we face is: Is the earth vulnerable to our bad choices? we are making some exceptionally bad choices.
To those in the alternative media who say we have little or no influence on climate, I disagree. How much is human-induced or how much is GAIA doing her thing is debatable – but really we are “screwing” with one amazing system.
Making sense of the science
I remember when I was doing an Honours in Botany and Ecology in the 1970s, I was disheartened at the rate of deforestation. We were taught that the great forests were the lungs of GAIA. The elimination of huge tracks of forest and their unique systems (and species) were apparently decimated for profit. It has only got worse since then, as humans have become more efficient in the “art of decimation.”
I believe the present debate – of ice sheets, air temperatures, of scientists vs scientists, believers vs skeptics have become sidetracked by the same people and governments that are destroying the environment. How do we sort this mess when scientists can’t agree?
Greenland’s moulins
Conflicting Evidence
Take the Antarctic ice sheet for example. For a decade or more we have heard from scientists who say it is shrinking and melting. Even last night on Foreign Correspondent (ABC) there was a program on warming and how the Antarctic ice sheet was melting and breaking up. The ABC program interviewed Professor Pete Convey – a British ecologist who has apparently spent 15 summers and one winter in the Antarctic.
This extract (from ABC’s Southern Exposure program here):
“CAMPBELL (narration): The average annual temperature on the peninsula has risen 2.8 degrees in 50 years – that’s the biggest rise in the southern hemisphere and a sign of what the future could hold.
PROF. PETER CONVEY: It’s like we have a very complicated system, we’ve pushed it beyond the bounds of what it’s done naturally in the last at least several million years. We have essentially knocked the global climate system out of kilter and I would say rightly we should be very scared about what’s going to happen to humans.”
But look at this report (3 November 2015) in The Australian quoting NASA:
“Antarctica is gaining more ice than it is losing and is helping to slow the rise in global sea levels, a NASA study suggests.
The findings contradict claims by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that the Antarctic ice sheet has been losing ice for the past two decades. The ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tonnes of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. The net gain slowed to 82 billion tonnes per year from 2003 to 2008.”
What?
Maybe this explains it:
“The most common misconception regarding Antarctic sea ice is that sea ice is increasing because it’s cooling around Antarctica. The reality is the Southern Ocean surrounding Antarctica has shown strong warming over the same period that sea ice has been increasing… from 1955 to 1995, oceans have been warming at 0.1°C per decade.”
A few years ago I was hired as a director for the Africa episode of a climate series. I had the privilege of travelling back to Africa and interview many scientists working in the field. At a research station in the middle of the Namib desert, Professor Richard Washington described how the earth’s precession (causing the angle of the sun to change over thousands of years) slowly changes the climate of (sub-Saharan) Africa – back and forth – over the millennia.
I spoke to scientists studying the Agulhas Current. They seemed to have no agenda and were just excited about the transformations in their data – either way. Ocean currents redistribute much of the heat around the globe, so the thawing of the Arctic – for example – could disturb warming currents in the Atlantic Ocean and lead to land mass cooling in Northern Europe. But the The Agulhas Current, too, pushes warm salty water from the Indian ocean, around the bottom of South Africa (my original home) into the Atlantic. Were this to stop (which it has briefly in the past) this could also change the climate in Northern Europe (possibly cooling it).
“Global warming” or “climate change” cannot be measured accurately by ice sheet expansion, or air temperatures. The system – the globe – is continually adjusting to imbalances, and warming seas and warming tundra may result in some very unexpected future events. And we still have to understand how earth is affected by changes in the sun and galaxy.
There are dire predictions to mankind if and when the sea levels rise by one metre. But let me put sea rise into perspective.
100 metre rise in sea water
Forget one metre rise – what about 100. Let us again reflect to the not so distant past to generations before us.
Researcher Graham Hancock in his book Underworld writes graphically about events not so long ago:
“Between 17,000 years ago and 7000 years ago, at the end of the last Ice Age, terrible things happened to the world our ancestors lived in. Great ice caps over northern Europe and north America melted down, huge floods ripped across the earth, sea-level rose by more than 100 metres, and about 25 million square kilometres of formerly habitable lands were swallowed up by the waves, with a wall of ice 1 kilometre high.”
Underwater pyramids of Yonaguni (Japan)
I say we have no idea what is in store for us. And so I believe we should treat our environment as respectfully as possible, in the hope that it allows our survival as a species.
Respect for the environment
Why not migrate to cleaner energy? Who wants to live in a smogged up city. California’s solar industry employs more than 55,000 people – more than Twitter, Google, Facebook and Apple combined. And why not stop fracking the frack out of our lands and poisoning the water?
Powerful corporations have also bought thousands of innovative patents – and are suppressing them for a later date.
Paris is all about control.
What we need to do is expose those people, leaders and organisations who protect the crimes – like the 9/11 event. We need to vote out politicians who do the bidding of corporations. Then maybe we can have a honest debate about the climate.
We also need to be talking about over fishing, species loss, deforestation and pollution.
We don’t have that much control over the climate – but we can begin immediately by respecting the earth, and start cleaning up our act – otherwise in 2074 – Captain Alien Cook will arrive to planet earth and find humans “small, lean, timid and miserable.”
How is this possible? How could Dee compose a lengthy article and never mention either the controlled demolition of Building 7 or Gen Wesley Clark’s predictions that the US would destroy 7 countries in 5 years?
Because those who are not stupid enough to believe the official 911 government/msm fairy tale have sufficient intellect to be informed and observe all the other government/msm crap and expose it. ( the big picture!!)
We will get back to the mass murderers who did 911, they are all identifiable as being in the same corporate globalist paddock of whoremongering with lying fascist agendas and antidemocratic greedy control freaks,
They are whimpering: France wants to make illegal ‘conspiracy theorists. I.E., those who expose the conspiracies.
The public is working out who the
conspiracy criminals are.
Love your work Dee and Mary.
I sense that Dee was subliminally inferring that if you add up the numerical value of the letters A-L-G-O-R-E (58) and multiply by 9/11 and round down, you get 47, which is the number of storeys in WTC Building 7 … Q.E.D.
Ned failed to mention that the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office has declared that George Soros’s Open Society Institute and the Open Society Institute Assistance Foundation were a threat to the foundations of Russia’s Constitutional order and national security.
No doubt you are right, Peter.
When I first heard of Climate Crisis I had no time to delve into it, but as soon as I saw “58” connected to it, I knew it was bunko.
Of course, as the years went by, I came to understand that there is indeed a climate crisis and that it’s run by a gaggle of Dr Strangeloves.
Or maybe I am wrong and imagining the whole thing? That would be nice.
Mary, when I was involved with the biodiesel business, I made a trip to Canberra and visited the Australian Greenhouse Office (AGO) while I was there. Although biodiesel was ‘carbon neutral’ there seemed to be no interest in it by the person I talked to. I figured he was just an uninformed flunky, so four months later, when I again visited Canberra, I tried another visit to the AGO.
I talked to a different person in another office – and it was the same run around. It was apparent – THEY WEREN’T INTERESTED IN DECREASING CARBON DIOXIDE! It was just a propaganda mill to feed into the media and the schools. They made lots of videos, glossy brochures, lobbying, etc. – and the bottom line was a ‘carbon tax’ that we just had to have.
Unfortunately, although my BS detector had gone off, I didn’t have any solid information – I had to wait until the ‘Climategate Emails’ were released.
The environmental movement has been taken over by a bunch of psychopaths who want to turn people’s concern for the environment into a money spinner with more control over the dumbed-down masses.
My research indicates that were are actually going into a ‘little Ice Age’. Here’s a video that has a pretty good explanation -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojL7XoJ6ijY
Terry, I think that is right.
Ok, let us poor dung beetles burrow the globalist BS where it belongs.
Look up Dr, Day and the NWO exposed by insider in 1969.
The plan has been carried out and it is simple: planned product obsolescent products, designed to fail in the short term and have to be replaced.
One example: speaking to a Samsung fridge person today. The hinge on the door has worn so the door does not close properly on the fridge.
I whinge to the parts super: why a new hinge and something to balance it on the door. Yadda yadda about a hundred in parts.
I mention to him that my parents bought a Fridigaire in the Mid 1930’s, it was still running in the mid 1980’s.
He says he has something similar in and old farm shed.
The criminal hypocricy of our climate
Drama queens is obvious, anyone from the green brigade out there?
So we dig up coal and iron ore, transport it to ‘ Bunnings’ China using up oil fuel. Then China heats up its industry with our coal to make crap goods. Then they transport the product to Bunnings for idiots to buy on credit cards.
No one raises this aspect in the Federal Parliament when addressing the rape of our planet.
Won’t” hear the Get Up’ fifth column ever raise planned obsolescence as planned by the Dr. Day exposures re NWO exposed 1969. Time for groups like ‘get up’ to get lost.
Hey Greenie dimwits, you lot are exposed.
So who is financing the Greens?
Those who profit finance and play both sides while the idiots watch dancing with whoever.
Thank you for that disquisition, Ned, sad though it may be.
Lets stop putting CARBON DIOXIDE in all those fizzy soft drinks and alcoholic beverages…. Surely this is an easy thing to do (just turn off the gas lines at the filling machines in all the worlds bottling plants). This would have an immediate effect and results in no harm and or loss to the people.
Oh crap, i forgot about the losses to the corporations…. Even more reason to turn it off!!
The Truth about CO2
https://youtu.be/WDWEjSDYfxc
Maybe we should stop spraying the skies with chemicals? What ever they are and for and what ever made up reason they say they are not doing this to us is for any person who cares to look at the sky once in a while a joke. Again it’s pretty simple stop flying across the world for the purpose of geo-engineering (sorry that does not happen) and see what happens to the worlds climate? Surely less chemicals in the atmosphere is a good thing and you have the added bonus of less jet exhaust gases/fuel in the atmosphere too. And again it would cost nothing to the people.
Oh crap, i forgot about the corporations again….
Political Authority – An Examination
https://youtu.be/S7zaR-qwZz4
The Freedoms That You Are losing Now
https://youtu.be/aetMk84hQa0
POPE FRANCIS PREACHES CULT CLIMATE RELIGION
http://www.newswithviews.com/Berry/ed101.htm
Paris climate conference: 10 reasons why we shouldn’t worry about ‘man-made’ global warming
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/paris-climate-change-conference/12025836/Paris-climate-conference-10-reasons-why-we-shouldnt-worry-about-man-made-global-warming.html
I have been researching this new conference to better understand what it all means…..
I will be honest and say that initially i thought COP21 was a new global police force created to implement and enforce new laws to protect ourselves from ourselves. Then i found the alleged real meaning below:
COP 21 – the 21st session of the Conference of the Parties – will see more than 190 nations gather in Paris to discuss a possible new global agreement on climate change, aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions to avoid the threat of dangerous warming due to human activities.
To be honest i think both versions of the COP21 are the same….
I wonder what was discussed at the previous 20 conference of the parties?
Ok, they say that Human activities such as burning fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas are increasing the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) and the absorption of Carbon from forestry, etc is being reduced due to human activities…
It’s just another idea but maybe if we stopped all wars this would see a huge decrease in the levels of CO2 and other chemicals into our atmosphere (less vehicle/aircraft/boat usage worldwide) and no bombs/weapons, etc to create carbon dioxide and who knows what ever else. Plus no war means no destruction of natural habitat, cities, homes, lives and therefore this would reduce the need to rebuild saving our natural resources….
It’s not rocket science is it?
Below, Terry Shulze says this:
“The environmental movement has been taken over by a bunch of psychopaths who want to turn people’s concern for the environment into a money spinner with more control over the dumbed-down masses.”
My comment: MACABRE.
Still, there is hope. We never knew about these twists, and now we do.