Global Warming: A Pollution Ponzi Scheme?

Global Warming Doomsday Called Off gives very good scientific information on the subject, seldom found.


Over the last few years, how many times have you  heard the following questions: Are the temperatures we're experiencing unusual? Is the climate becoming more variable or extreme? What role does human activity play in the current global warming trend? Does global warming even exist?

Well, in answer to the last question, if it does exist, it's probably not anthropogenic (man-caused) according to Glaciologist Jorgen Peder Steffensen, curator of the Neils Bohr Institute, Department of Geophysics, and scads of other scientists who up until recently, were under a gag-order.  As Steffensen said, those who came to the "global warming is man-made" conclusion, conducted an extremely poor experiment.  They started observing meteorology at the coldest spot in the last 10,000 years - only 140 years ago - so, of course, the 20th century temperature spike looks like an anomaly.  Moreover, when you start following the money (carbon trading: potential multi-trillion dollar business), it becomes all too clear as to why the "global warming is man-made" conclusion was constructed.

Steffensen, extracted ice core samples from Greenland, which bear the fingerprints of climactic conditions over the last 120,000 years. From that sample, the temperature data revealed longer periods with much higher temperatures than we experience today. The coldest point occurred 140 years ago in what they call the "little ice age". Other core samples, from Greenland and elsewhere around the globe, in addition to using other methods such as carbon-14 dating from organic matter from peat bugs and tree-rings confirm the pattern. In other words, major fluctuations in climate are normal, and the recent warming may be a natural consequence of leaving the little ice age in 1875, the lowest point we've had over the last 10,000 years.

Former senior official of the United Nations and billionaire industrialist, otherwise known as the Godfather of the international environmental movement, Maurice Strong,  who played a major role in organizing the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm, Sweden in 1972, thus launching the "Green movement" is the "wizard behind the curtain" regarding the global warming scam.

He organized the U.N. sponsored conferences, including Kyoto, Japan in 1997 (Kyoto treaty on greenhouse gas emissions, aimed at fighting global warming) and he was instrumental in establishing the IPCC  (International Panel on Climate Change). In 2005, Strong stepped down from his UN post because he was involved in the food for oil scandal. Evidence later showed that Strong, in 1997, while working for Kofi Annan, endorsed a check for $988,885, made out to “Mr. M. Strong,” issued by a Jordanian bank.   Strong is also one of the nine directors on the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX)which describes itself as “North America’s only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.”  Climate scientist, Dr. Benjamin Santer, supposedly Strong's right-hand man, altered a crucial United Nations report on climate change to convey the misleading impression that there is a "discernible human influence on climate".

And we can't forget Al Gore, appointed poster boy and expert on global warming. Not only is Gore a partner in  Hara Software, who helps companies manage their "carbon footprints," and who admittedly stands to rake in between 10% to 50% of the trillion dollar business its supposed to become in the next few years, but he and David Blood (former CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management) co-founded Generation Investment Management (GIM), in 2004 “to take financial advantage of new technologies and solutions related to combating global warming”.

In November 2009, Gore minimized the significance of the so-called "Climategate" scandal that grew out of confirmed reports that the top scientists at the Climate Research Unit (CRU) in England, possessor of the world's largest temperature-data set, had secretly and repeatedly manipulated scientific evidence in order to conceal or destroy data that contradicted their claims.

Links:

The Hockey Stick Illusion

Read more...

Know the "Agenda" of Your" Proxy Representation"

The representation of people through professionals whose whole career is based on the knowledge of a certain subject or field is sometimes absolutely necessary, but that doesn't mean you (the one being represented) is required to passively accept everything your representative or "expert" says and/or does. Quite the contrary, if you can speak for yourself, then you should do so, but if you must seek representation, you should speak up as well because no one knows "you" as well as you.

After reading Gore After Gore in Vanity Fair Magazine, it occurred to me that letting someone else represent or stand or act in place of you, as a substitute, proxy, or agent is a very risky enterprise considering everyone has a personal and professional "agenda." Not only that, the representative’s organized plan for matters to be attended, or things to be done on your behalf, may be based on one or a combination of many different reasons that range from selflessness, empathy, compassion, love, altruism, idealism to ambition, greed or the desire to gain financially, anger, hatred, revenge, sexual and the list goes on indefinitely, but usually falls under one or many of the categories I mentioned above. The scariest part of "agenda" is that the person serving as a representative may not be conscious that his "agenda" exists, or cognizant that it is completely at odds with the "agenda" he is aware of.

Journalism and law are perfect examples of professions that demand a certain level of objectivity.

Take for example an attorney who works for a firm. Above and beyond all else, he must zealously represent his or her client to the best of his ability, defending the rule of law our Justice system has established and he must also be mindful of the deficiencies in the administration of justice concerning the ability to afford legal representation. This attorney must also establish a career and a reputation amongst the judges and his or her peers that he will be associating with now and in the future. And then of course, there is one's personal "agenda"...conscious or subconscious, one's personal "agenda" is not supposed to play a part in representing his client, but it most certainly does for better or worse.

The problem is that many "professionals" do not admit to having a bias or that their view is somewhat limited depending on the prism of popular culture, personal experience and significant others have had on influencing the construction of their reality and belief system. Therefore, it's best that the person "representing" is as aware as he can be of his personal bias and acknowledge it so that he can recognize when it starts to interfere with his duties.

Unfortunately, many "professionals" do not admit to or are not aware of their personal bias. It's up to "us" as consumers, clients, citizens to know the person representing "us" is indeed human, and that his past, present and what he hopes for the future all will affect the quality of his representation or in a journalist's case, reporting.

Read more...

The Politics of the Sopranos.

Who knew that tree-hugging ex-politicians loved “The Sopranos”? It turns out that Al Gore is a die-hard fan, but when the series finale loomed in early June, he and his wife, Tipper, had to be on a plane for an appearance in Istanbul.

So Mr. Gore, now better known as the star of “An Inconvenient Truth” than as the former vice president of the United States, called Brad Grey, the chairman of Paramount whose studio distributed his documentary, for a favor. Mr. Grey is also an executive producer of “The Sopranos,” from his previous incarnation as a Hollywood manager. Could Mr. Gore get an advance copy of the final episode, he wanted to know?

No way, said Mr. Grey. “I’ve turned down everyone who’s asked,” he recalled telling Mr. Gore. That episode was the holy grail, and he couldn’t risk it being leaked.

But after a night of tossing and turning, Mr. Grey had a change of heart. On the Sunday of the finale, he had a Halliburton-made steel case, containing a copy of the episode, delivered to the tarmac where Mr. Gore’s plane sat in Chicago. The case was locked with a code (some might call it a “lockbox”). Mr. Gore could not open it until the plane was in the air, when he was instructed to call Mr. Grey’s office for the numeric code. Mr. Gore sent Mr. Grey a photo of himself trying to pry open the case, which Mr. Grey now keeps on his desk.

And unlike that final episode, this story had a postscript. After the tale of Mr. Gore’s special delivery made the rounds of Hollywood political circles, the Republican candidate Rudolph W. Giuliani called Mr. Grey, a longtime friend, to complain. Why didn’t he get a special “Sopranos” delivery, too?

Read more...