Aaron Dykes
Infowars.com
August 2, 2010
Members of We Are Change San Francisco caught up with David de Rothschild, heir to the notorious Rothschild family, and asked him some relevant questions.
Heir to a global system of manipulation, lies and enslavement for the average family, David de Rothschild has put his reputation on the line to push for climate change taxation. David de Rothschild shilled for the Copenhagen climate summit and stumped for his ‘earth saving’ plastiki boat that runs on human feces fuel. He has boldly advocated carbon taxes that his family’s carbon exchange firm would benefit directly from. He has even gone so far in the name of arguing for phony global warming as to claim that icecaps melt on Mars because the planet is closer to the Sun than Earth.
There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example, during the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today. The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 18 times higher than today.
The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon influence earth temperatures and global warming.
Global Temperature and Atmospheric CO2 over Geologic Time
Average global temperatures in the Early Carboniferous Period were hot- approximately 20° C (68° F). However, cooling during the Middle Carboniferous reduced average global temperatures to about 12° C (54° F). As shown on the chart below, this is comparable to the average global temperature on Earth today!
Similarly, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Early Carboniferous Period were approximately 1500 ppm (parts per million), but by the Middle Carboniferous had declined to about 350 ppm -- comparable to average CO2 concentrations today!
Earth's atmosphere today contains about 380 ppm CO2 (0.038%). Compared to former geologic times, our present atmosphere, like the Late Carboniferous atmosphere, is CO2- impoverished! In the last 600 million years of Earth's history only the Carboniferous Period and our present age, the Quaternary Period, have witnessed CO2 levels less than 400 ppm.
Today the Earth warms up and cools down in 100,000- year cycles. Geologic history reveals similar cycles were operative during the Carboniferous Period. Warming episodes caused by the periodic favorable coincidence of solar maximums and the cyclic variations of Earth's orbit around the sun are responsible for our warm but temporary interglacial vacation from the Pleistocene Ice Age, a cold period in Earth's recent past which began about 2 million years ago and ended (at least temporarily) about 10,000 years ago. And just as our current world has warmed, and our atmosphere has increased in moisture and CO2 since the glaciers began retreating 18,000 years ago, so the Carboniferous Ice Age witnessed brief periods of warming and CO2-enrichment.
Top Climate Scientists Speak out on the Satellitegate Scandal
By John O'Sullivan Monday, August 16, 2010
US Government admits global warming satellite sensors “degraded” - temperatures may be out by 10-15 degrees. Now five satellites in controversy. Top scientists speak out.
In an escalating row dubbed ‘Satellitegate’ further evidence proves NOAA knew of these faults for years. World’s top climate scientists and even prior governmental reports cite underfunding and misallocation as the trigger for spiraling satellite data calamities. Key flaws with five satellites undermines global data.
Most disturbing of all is that it took publication of my article last week to persuade the authorities to withdraw the errant NOAA-16 satellite from service. But as Dr. John Christy indicates, the real Satellitegate is not about one satellite. The scandal is endemic with comparable flaws across the entire network; the scandal is also that it took a tip off from a member of the public and the widespread broadcast of my article before one of the offending junk boxes, NOAA-16, got taken down.
Readers who missed the details when this sensational story first broke can see here at Climatedepot.com.
NOAA’s chief Program Administrator, Chuck Pistis, at first disingenuously tried to discredit my report and whitewash the matter with disinformation. Indeed, we may have a smoking gun of a cover up when we contrast and compare latest announcements with the offending satellite’s AVHRR Subsystem Summary.
The official summary shows no report of any ‘sensor degradation’ since its launch in September 2000. Yet on the advice of top climate scientists I’m reliably informed that such failures were made known to NOAA years ago.
Nonetheless, the U.S. agency continued to sell its flawed data products to numerous international institutions without making it public that satellite sensors were “degraded” and unreliable for assessing climate change.
NOAA-16 had been commissioned as a polar-orbiting satellite featuring AMSU, AVHRR and High Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder (HIRS) measuring instrumentation which were discovered by a member of the public last week to have suffered catastrophic failure. Dr John Christy drew my attention to specific concomitant flaws he had uncovered and reported with the AMSU years ago.
NOAA in Fear of Rush of International Lawsuits?
The snuffed out satellite had been run continuously up until being taken offline soon after my article went viral (August 10, 2010) in which I exposed the full extent of how seriously degraded it’s sensors were. The automatic readings had been contaminated by hundreds, if not thousands, of false and absurdly high temperature readings, some as high as 612 degrees Fahrenheit (boiling point of water is 212 F.). We now know NOAA was aware of these outrageous anomalies at least since 2006 but they were not remedied ( see below).
Worryingly, as to how many of its users (mostly international meteorologists and climate researchers) were affected has not beent revealed by NOAA. But we know the automated numbers were sold throughout the world and it’s readings of land and ocean temperatures have been used by climate scientists in their models since the satellite’s launch in September 2000. As a consequence and without full disclosure by NOAA, it is feared innumerable scientific studies about rising global temperatures are now rendered entirely invalid.
It is open to speculation whether NOAA may have been hesitant to admit to long standing faults for fear of a rash of lawsuits from its customers, mainly national governments and university research institutes. Based on such data most scientists agree that our planet may have warmed by 0.6 degrees Centigrade during the 20th century (with a margin of error of 0.5C degrees-but this error margin now looks way off).
From analysis of the bogus online temperature data before NOAA removed it from view, it may be determined that almost all the false temperature readings were far in excess of expected averages—many by a factor of four or five - almost none of the bogus temperatures were lower than average.
US Government Foresaw Satelligate Failures Mounting
But it wasn’t just a handful of skeptical climatologists sounding the alarm. The National Academy of Sciences, in its 2007 455-page report concluded that because of degradation in the U.S. satellite network, the country’s ability to monitor the climate and severe weather was “at great risk.”
By coincidence, in the same week my article led to the shut down of NOAA-16, Susan Bohan published her excellent article here in which she exposes the broader systemic failures in the wider satellite network. Among the calamities Bohan reported, “the satellite, Landsat 7, is broken. And it’s emblematic of the nation’s battered satellite environmental monitoring program.”
The term ‘satelligate’ was coined by the CO2insanity.com blog after it diligently picked up on the piece.
At Least Five Climate Measuring Satellites Compromised
Crucially, Bohan’s article wasn’t based on any so-called unsubstantiated ‘big oil’ funded skeptic disinformation plot, a dying urban myth anyway, but on a US Government Accountability Office report (GAO). GAO concedes that nine new climate instruments on the latest generation of satellites were canceled or their capabilities scaled back in 2006. GAO is the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress.
As a consequence at least five such satellite programs have been identified as being either degraded or seriously compromised:
* Landsat 7 (currently in orbit) is broken leaving data gaps. Scientists do not get all the information they should.
* NPOESS (National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite) will not have any sensors that measure the sun’s energy output on the 2nd and 4th satellites.
* GOES-R (Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-R Series) has had 14 sensors cancelled. No data for cloud base height, ozone layer, ocean color, ocean turbidity and cloud imagery, snow cover, etc. Effectively neutered.
* No sensor for movement of greenhouse gases and pollutants. No sensor to monitor temperature changes on Earth over time. (NOAA didn’t even bother to try to get the funding to keep the eliminated sensors!).
* The sensor to measure how Earth’s temperature reacts to changes in Solar energy was cancelled by the Obama Administration at the end of June 2010.
Perhaps its no accident that the current head of NOAA, Dr. Jane Lubchenco and hand picked by President Barack Obama, declared that her agency would play its role in developing a green economy.
Thus, despite the US Government spending in excess of $80 billion in climate research a failure to allocate sufficient funds to the satellite program has now resulted in serious damage to the credibility of the entire data set (note: the cost of a typical NOAA satellite is around $11 million and the network recoups the US government millions by selling data worldwide).
Evidence from Climate Experts Points to Conspiracy to Deceive
Dr. Roy Spencer commented, “Obviously, whatever happened to NOAA-16 AVHRR (or the software) introduced HUGE errors. We always had trouble with NOAA-16 AMSU, and dropped it long ago. It had calibration drifts that made it unsuitable for climate monitoring.”
Dr Christy particularly addressed faults exclusively with the AMSU instrumentation and not problems with the AVHRR system. He advised me, “We spent a lot of time in 2006 trying to deal with the issues of NOAA-16, but the errors were so erratic, we ended up eliminating it as one of the backbones of our dataset.”
As many such analysts have long been advising, these failures go way beyond the shockingly absurd numbers of 604 degrees recorded at Egg harbor, Wisconsin.
Dr. Timothy Ball, climate consultant to the military and lead author of a new book
debunking the greenhouse gas theory, observes, “At best the entire incident indicates gross incompetence, at worst it indicates a deliberate attempt to create a temperature record that suits the political message of the day.”
Mainstream Media Turn Blind Eye to Another ‘Gate’ Scandal
In 2006 Christy and Spencer had sought to complete a technical analysis on NOAA-16’s AMSU but Christy reveals that it, “was very tedious and we chased a lot of rabbits that turned out to be dead ends.”
Such appalling facts just don’t appear in the ‘on message’ mainstream media and all the while researchers have been struggling in vain to keep pace with the ever-increasing numbers gap due to ongoing sensor degradation. For example, each month Dr. Christy works with Dr. Spencer trying to piece together the faltering patchwork of global temperature datasets given by a total of eleven instruments flying on eleven different satellites since 1979.
Over such a long time period it has been suggested that cosmic rays or particle impacts may be deteriorating the highly sensitive instrumentation on board the crafts.
Spencer publishes his findings on his blog while a fuller assessment of the satellite problems found by Dr. Christy is found here.
Will Systemic Measuring Failures Cost Even more Lives?
Respected internationally for his world leading weather forecasts, Piers Corbyn, of Weatheraction.com is another expert lamenting the scandalous failures in the satellite network.
Piers thundered on the Climate Realists blog, “This revelation further confirms something I and Tom Harris said on Russia Today TV Feb (5th) 2010 namely that WE JUST DO NOT reliably KNOW what world temperatures are and have been doing over the last decade or century.”
Corbyn had correctly forecast this summer’s West Russia heatwave and a general increase in VERY extreme events (evidenced by Pakistan & China horrendous floods and “super cold” in parts of S hemisphere) weeks and months in advance.
A Growing List of Global Warming Satellite Measuring Failures
Satelligate points to yet another infuriating government cover up of fudged global warming numbers. Despite the clamor for years from scientists from all sides of the global warming debate for more transparency and better access to such data, zealous gatekeepers within NASA and Britain’s CRU have refused such requests and unlawfully defied Freedom of Information (FOIA) demands.
As indicated on WattsupWithThat such errors and deficiencies along with plain old-fashioned data fraud have long been swept under the carpet with ever more lives put at risk.
Indeed, public confidence in the reliability of official warnings of apocalyptic doom from purveyors of NOAA’s trumpeted fake data has been met with increasing cynicism. A growing number of taxpayers are voicing opposition to the zealous rush towards crippling tax hikes dismantling first world standards of living without first having ascertained the proper facts.
Questions NOAA Refuses to Answer.........
In light of concerns that NOAA has officially admitted to only withdrawing “images” from its archives without confirming all bogus data has also been dumped, I posed the following and yet unanswered questions to NOAA’s Dr. Jane Lubchenco:
* What steps have you taken to ascertain the scope and extent of this data error and what action will be taken to avoid further recurrence?
* Have you identified whether these temperature anomalies impact other data sets and findings; in particular does this undermine in any way the credibility of official government statements already made about climatic changes, and if so by how much?
Until Lubchenco comes clean I fear we may be witnessing another ‘Phil Jones’ in the making. For without full transparency and frank answers then the endless media hype about the dangers from the so-called ‘greenhouse gas theory’ remains just that—hype
Climate Change Propaganda 10-10 mini-movie - No Pressure
MUST SEE!
MOVIES
Jesse Ventura Global Warming
LINK TO EYE ON THE EU BELOW
LINK TO EYE ON THE UN BELOW
LINK TO EYE ON THE UK BELOW
Greek PM says it at last: carbon taxes are just another way to raise revenue
Janet Daley
Telegraph
November 17, 2010
George Papandreou, the Greek prime minister has said that there may need to be new Europe-wide forms of taxation to help pay for the bail-outs that will be needed by the growing number of crashing economies in the euro-zone. His suggestions include “carbon dioxide taxes” which, he says, could provide “important revenues and resouces for funding such a [bail-out] mechanism.”
I’ve never actually heard a major politician (let alone a national leader) admit this before: what Mr Papandreou is saying is that carbon taxes would have not have the effect of reducing emissions – because if they did, they would be useless as an additional form of revenue. All the hokum that is talked about protecting the planet by taxing carbon use is just a front for the real purpose of such penalties on industry and consumers which is to raise more money for governments to spend (in this case, on trying to remedy their own political follies).
THE NEXT TIME SOMEONE SAYS THERE IS TOO MUCH CO2 IN THE ATMOSPHERE, ASK THEM IF THEY KNOW HOW NUCH IS REALLY THERE. OF COURSE THEY WON'T KNOW, BECAUSE IF YOU REALIZE THAT THERE IS ONLY .035 % CO2, WHICH PLANTS NEED TO LIVE, YOU WILL BEGIN TO WONDER HOW SUCH A SMALL AMOUNT OF ONE GAS CAN MAKE SUCH A BIG DIFFERENCE, THEN LOOK AT THE HISTORICAAL CO2 RECORDS AND SEE THET WE ARE IN A CO2 DEFICIT HISTORICALLY,
UPDATED JAN 30, 2012
browser caching disabled
CERN Scientists Gagged On ‘Politically Incorrect’ Global Warming Data
Physicists ordered not to draw conclusions from study which seeks to confirm that the sun drives climate change
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
In a shocking illustration of how the man-made climate change establishment has seized control of the scientific process, physicists at the CERN lab in Geneva were gagged from drawing conclusions about data that seeks to replicate studies which prove the sun is the main driver of climate change, after their boss told them that such heresy was politically incorrect
ABOVE ILLUSTRATES THAT COSMIC RAYS FROM THE SUN CREATE NUCLEI FOR CLOUD FORMATION-CONCLUSION THE SUN AFFECTS CLIMATE. THE UN SAYS THAT IS HERESEY, THEY CLAIM MAN IS THE ONLY FACTOR OF CLIMATE-CHANGE. YEAH RIGHT! POLITICIANS ARE THE NEW INQUISITORS. NEXT THEY'LL BE BURNING SCIENTISTS AT THE STAKE FOR HERESEY.
“The chief of the world’s leading physics lab at CERN in Geneva has prohibited scientists from drawing conclusions from a major experiment. The CLOUD (“Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets”) experiment examines the role that energetic particles from deep space play in cloud formation. CLOUD uses CERN’s proton synchrotron to examine nucleation,” reports the Register.
The experiment is likely to confirm data from earlier studies which found cosmic rays are pivotal in the formation of clouds and that, “Tiny changes in the earth’s cloud cover could account for variations in temperature of several degrees,” an impact massively more significant than the comparatively minor level of warming caused by man-made CO2 emissions.
Suggesting that the data in the yet to be published study has validated this hypothesis, physicists involved in the project were gagged from making any interpretations of the data by their boss, not because of problems with accuracy, but because such a conclusion was not politically correct as it did not fit with the “consensus” that man is the main culprit behind climate change.
In an interview with Welt Online, Rolf-Dieter Heuer, Director General of CERN, stated, “I have asked the colleagues to present the results clearly, but not to interpret them.”
Heuer’s reason for gagging his own scientists is that their conclusions would enter, “Immediately into the highly political arena of the climate change debate.”
In other words, Heuer doesn’t want the data to circulate freely in the public domain because it presumably contradicts the notion that man is the main driver of climate change.
It goes without saying that Heuer’s approach represents the antithesis of what science is supposed to be all about, impartial observation and following where the data leads, not following an artificial “consensus” manufactured by politicians for the purpose of legitimizing a global carbon tax system.
As physicist Nigel Calder writes, “The once illustrious CERN laboratory ceases to be a truly scientific institute when its Director General forbids its physicists and visiting experimenters to draw the obvious scientific conclusions from their results.”
Despite the fact that global warming alarmists have claimed there is no link between the huge raging fireball in space that is over 100 times bigger than the earth, drives the seasons and causes ice ages, and climate change, the data produced by Henrik Svensmark’s studies shows a clear historical correlation between cosmic ray penetration and temperature, as can be seen from the graph below.
Despite the sun’s obvious and significant impact on climate change, the IPCC refuses to include cosmic ray penetration as a factor in temperature change.
“CERN has joined a long line of lesser institutions obliged to remain politically correct about the man-made global warming hypothesis,” writes Calder. “It’s OK to enter ‘the highly political arena of the climate change debate’ provided your results endorse man-made warming, but not if they support Svensmark’s heresy that the Sun alters the climate by influencing the cosmic ray influx and cloud formation.”
As we reported in September last year, increasing public skepticism over claims that man significantly drives climate change has prompted alarmists to re-brand global warming as overpopulation.
A leaked UN blueprint for establishing global governance emphasized the need to adopt this new public relations ploy to combat the increasingly discredited foundation of the anthropogenic climate change myth in the aftermath of the 2009 Climategate scandal.
Efforts to cement a carbon tax in Australia are a litmus test for its planned global implementation, so the fact that a sizeable majority of the Australian electorate has vehemently rejected the proposals is a clear indication that the global warming hoax has largely failed.
“Political experts believe the battle to sell the carbon tax to the Australian public has been lost and the Prime Minister can do nothing to change voters’ minds on the issue,” reports the Brisbane Times.
That’s why the establishment is keen to use the threat of overpopulation, which amounts to little more than unscientific quackery, in addition to isolated weather events such as this year’s drought, as a means of forcing through a carbon tax via the backdoor
The next climate debate bombshell READ ENTIRE ARTICLE AT>>>
http://www.infowars.com/the-next-climate-debate-bombshell/
FROM >>Canadian Free Press
July 21, 2011
Get ready for the next big bombshell in the man-made warming debate. The world’s most sophisticated particle study laboratory—CERN in Geneva—will soon announce that more cosmic rays do, indeed, create more clouds in earth’s atmosphere. More cosmic rays mean a cooler planet. Thus, the solar source of the earth’s long, moderate 1,500-year climate cycle will finally be explained............................................
ALL LINKS ON THIS SITE TESTED SAFE WITH MCAFEE SITEADVISOR
Aliens may destroy humanity to protect other civilisations, say scientists
Rising greenhouse emissions could tip off aliens that we are a rapidly expanding threat, warns a report
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 18 August 2011 19.04 BST
ALIENS UNDER THE COMMAND OF AL GORE TO FORCE HUMANS TO PAY CARBON TAXES
When they see what a mess we've made of our planet, extraterrestrials may be forced to take drastic action. Photograph: PR
It may not rank as the most compelling reason to curb greenhouse gases, but reducing our emissions might just save humanity from a pre-emptive alien attack, scientists claim.
Watching from afar, extraterrestrial beings might view changes in Earth's atmosphere as symptomatic of a civilisation growing out of control – and take drastic action to keep us from becoming a more serious threat, the researchers explain.
This highly speculative scenario is one of several described by a Nasa-affiliated scientist and colleagues at Pennsylvania State University that, while considered unlikely, they say could play out were humans and alien life to make contact at some point in the future.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman of Nasa's Planetary Science Division and his colleagues compiled a list of plausible outcomes that could unfold in the aftermath of a close encounter, to help humanity "prepare for actual contact".
In their report, Would Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysis, the researchers divide alien contacts into three broad categories: beneficial, neutral or harmful.
"When the Sun is especially strong, its magnetic field tends to push the cosmic rays away from Earth, preventing clouds from forming and leading to a hotter planet. Likewise, when activity on the Sun weakens, so too does its magnetic field, allowing more clouds to form and leading to a cooler planet."
CERN experiment overturns global-warming orthodoxy
Global warming scam run by government and Wall Street while taxpayers foot the bill
Jonathan Benson Natural News October 19, 2011
Climate Change Scare Machine Cycle: see how your tax dollars are converted into alarming messages
* 5,000 leaked emails reveal scientists deleted evidence that cast doubt on claims climate change was man-made
* Experts were under orders from US and UK officials to come up with a 'strong message'
* Critics claim: 'The stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering'
* Scientist asks, 'What if they find that climate change is a natural fluctuation? They'll kill us all'
Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
 (300 x 164).jpg)
