September 20, 2013
Uncertainty is the elephant in the room when it comes to a discussion on anthropormorphic climate change. In the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 5th Assessment on Climate Change, the word “uncertain” is used 42 times.
Ottmar Edenhofer, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PICIR), explained: “When scientists are explicit about the underlying uncertainties an immediate response from decision-makers and the public is: ‘Oh, scientists do not really know what they are talking about.’ This is actually an inappropriate response.”
The study asserts: “As much of the debate about climate change concerns the future, it inevitably involves degrees of uncertainty about the timing, pace, and severity of possible impacts, as well as the options for managing and avoiding them.”
The IPCC will admit that they are 95% sure that man is the sole cause of climate change in the 5th Assessment to be published later this month.
This conclusion made by the IPCC is supported by former Vice President Al Gore. With the claims of scientific consensus, environmental activists are at the ready to coerce the general public into believing the climate change scheme.
To combat opposing views and scientific data showing that climate change is not occurring as previously predicted the Climate Science Rapid Response Team (CSRRT) was formed.
Back in 2010, the CSRRT had 135 “experts” in stand-by to insert their propaganda when needed – be it policymakers, the media or simply joining in on the comment threads on websites all across the internet.
Kevin Trenberth, member of the CSRRT and climate scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) asserts that the latest IPCC report will alert the “denial-sphere” of persons who immediately say the research is incorrect.
Trenberth said: “The scientists get nasty emails. Certain websites comment. … So a bunch of us formed this rapid response team to deflate these arguments.”
In Chicago, at a Climate Change Reality Leadership Training Corps, Al Gore told the crowd: “Shout at your leaders for protecting the planet by reversing the root causes of climate change.”
Gore personally trains average people to become troll-like alarmists in Chicago and Istanbul to go out into their communities and admonish elected officials to vote based on lowering carbon emissions, implementation of carbon taxes on governmental levels and forcing media to abide by the climate change agenda by inundating social networks and media outlets in the comment section to coerce the audience into believing man is solely responsible for global warming.
Last May, Gore spoke at the 2013 Milken Institute Global Conference in Beverly Hills, California claiming that: “This is for real. It is not made up. The scientists are not in a conspiracy to lie to us.”
Gore carried on, saying: The generation of people alive today will be held accountable. Our children and grandchildren … if they exist in a world that has been devastated by these consequences that have been predicted and are beginning to unfold — they would be well justified in asking of us: ‘What in the hell were you thinking? And what in the hell were you doing? And why were you so willfully blind of what was happening on your watch?’”
Gore believes that the collective wisdom (i.e. social media) filters out ideas through social pressure and education of the masses by one another. Gore knows that environmental policies must be brought to the masses to unite them and encourage them to rise up against those who do not conform whether through online groups or social media because after this mindset changes, the reflection will be seen in the real world.
Gore leads the climate change march with authoritarian fervor by declaring that “all weather events are now affected by global warming pollution.” Just as human behaviors lead to disease, according to Gore, the rising sea levels are evidence that this ideology is true.
In a study published in 2002, there was a clear conclusion that with the fear-mongering ideology associated with Gore’s abrupt climate change, the “causes have not been clearly established, but the triggering of events is likely to be the result of multiple natural processes.”
Jim Lakely, spokesman for the Heartland Institute (HI) said: “The goal is to inform the public, scientific community and media that the upcoming IPCC report doesn’t have all the science to make informed judgments.”
HI released a report entitled, “Climate Change Reconsidered II” that “uses layman’s language to present solid evidence that today’s climate changes are well within the bounds of natural variability.”
Robert Carter, former marine geologist at James Cook University (JCU) explained: “Real world observations tell us that the IPCC’s speculative computer models do not work, ice is not melting at an enhanced rate, sea-level rise is not accelerating, the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events is not increasing, and dangerous global warming is not occurring.”
One contributor to the HI report is the Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), which is headed by Fred Singer.
Singer is also affiliated with the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (SCDGC), a group who receives funding from ExxonMobil.
The Cato Institute (CI), who accepts financial support from Charles Koch, has challenged the new IPCC report in mainstream media wars by posting an op-ed.
Using writer Pat Michaels, CI has reminded the public that the IPCC report is littered with flaws and unscientific conclusions.
Michaels writes: “That’s what a responsible organization would do, but it would also mean the end of the IPCC. So it is understandable that they wouldn’t commit professional suicide.”
With both sides of the climate change debate so insistent on their version being the right one, the effect on the sun on the solar system and each individual planet is ignored by the masses – but not by the one perpetuating the divide and conquer tactic.
NASA estimations of solar variations show that they caused 25% of the 1.1 degree F warming that has been scientifically observed over the 20th Century. NASA also confirms that there is evidence the Little Ice Age was caused by the cooling in solar activity – or the end of a warming trend.
Solar activity of heating and cooling affects the temperature of Earth by the magnitude of sun spots and the orbit oscillations taken by our planet.
The European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) revealed scientific correlations between sun spot activity levels and the measured cosmic rays entering our planet’s atmosphere which is causational to surface-cooling cloud formations.
Since sunspots are localized magnetic activity coupled with high energy streams of charged particles that shoot out from the sun’s surface, the expulsion of those particles in the solar wind can and do penetrate the Earth’s atmosphere and accumulate in low-level clouds which creates more intensive cloud cover and obvious cooling influences.
Jasper Kirkby, experimental physicist said in 1998 that this solar influence “will probably be able to account for somewhere between half and the whole of the increase in the Earth’s temperature that we have seen in the last century.”
Kirkby created the Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets (CLOUD) that experimentally investigated cosmic rays and aerosols under controlled conditions.
CERN posted CLOUD’s progress report which found that there is a connection between cosmic rays and aerosol nucleation in which “ion‐enhancement is particularly pronounced in the cool temperatures of the mid‐troposphere and above, where CLOUD has found that sulphuric acid and water vapor can nucleate without the need for additional vapors.
This result leaves open the possibility that cosmic rays could also influence climate. However, it is premature to conclude that cosmic rays have a significant influence on climate until the additional nucleating vapors have been identified, their ion enhancement measured, and the ultimate effects on clouds have been confirmed.”
Knowing that there is another reason for the cycle of our planet’s weather and keeping this fact from the general public, the debate can continue on while the underlying agenda will remain on schedule.
One example from history of this point can be found in the Mayan and Aztec cultures.
Mayan priests tracked the sun’s path through the sky with great accuracy over long periods of time. The ecliptic cycles were depicted in artwork as a Double-Headed Serpent.
Harvey Bricker, an anthropologist, confirmed that the Mayan persists were able to track solar eclipses with amazing accuracy; not just for their time, but far off into the future.
Bricker found that after analysis of the Dresden Codex, there was “real data” that showed their impressive ability to monitor solar cycles and eclipses – even to the extent of accurately predicting (within a day) a solar eclipse that occurred in 1991.
With many gods and goddesses attached to planetary cycles, ceremonies were created by the Mayan priests to demand human sacrifice to the gods for a phenomenon that the priesthood knew was naturally occurring.
The Aztec, like the Mayan culture, tracked the planets and sun. They had “achieved a deeper understanding of solar eclipses” than the Mayan; while also attaching their own pantheon of gods that demanded the citizens conduct ritual sacrifices to.
By forcing the population of the Aztec territories that humanity would repay their debt to the gods with the offering of human blood, the priests were able to keep the ruse.
Aztec priests removed the heart from the victim’s chest while still beating as a way to appease the gods while “liberating the istli (or heat from the Sun) and reuniting it with the sun itself.”
What if the climate debate is a modern day Aztec solar sacrificial ceremony and we have all been tricked?