Attribution For Featured Image (cartoon)
|Roger Maynard||Ketchikan Daily News – Aug 16, 2008||© 2008 Fiddlestix Graphics||EditorialCartoonists.com|
Fallacy ⇔ Fallacia (Latin) … meaning deceit or trick.
Table of Contents
|Tweet #1||Hillary Clinton wants to reduce CO2||scroll|
|Tweet #2||World Nuclear Assoc: City of London lobby group||➡|
|Tweet #3||21st Conference of the Parties||➡|
|Tweet #4||Attorney Carol Browner – Archetype Useful Idiot||➡|
|Tweet #5||G7 Leaders must each homage that ‘Jewish’ Wall||➡|
|Tweet #6||Facebook, the Millennials, infantile white males||➡|
|Tweet #7||America’s Elite have got a “Nuclear Fleet”||➡|
|Topic #A||Always Remember To Follow The Money||➡|
|Topic #B||We Must Practise Coherent Thinking||➡|
|Topic #C||Geo-Engineering Is The Culprit — Not CO2||➡|
This blog post is PART-1 of a 3-Part set. To access the other two parts, click on Collections in the Top Menu then select "CO2 + Radionuclides" from the drop-down list.
Science is not a belief system. Science is a formalized system of inquiry that must at all times be open to critical peer review. For this inquiry to function properly, it has to be free of emotional influences, political manipulation, and the economic persuasion of wealthy donors or other private interests.
Like it or not, universal truths are … well … universal! That is to say, there is no corner of the universe where they do not apply. There is one universal truth that posits there are always many wrong answers but only one right answer.
With that said, we already know the Universe is not “black and white”. Shades of grey do exist. Long ago, science learned to account for uncertainty. There are some conclusions (or certain types of conclusion) we can never be certain of.
- A lack of supporting evidence;
- Whatever evidence does exist is contradictory;
- A non-linear process is being evaluated that is still not yet understood;
- A process is being evaluated that contains as yet unidentified inputs (variables);
Modern science (especially since the advent of the computer) has long coped comfortably and consistently with uncertainty. Either science employs formal measures of uncertainty (i.e., standard statistical measures of Probability) or it makes a series of approximations using more exotic methodologies, such as Bayes Theorem and Fuzzy Logic.
If zealous people manipulated by a hidden agenda wish a certain thing to be true because it suits their nefarious purposes, then that is not science … no matter how many renegade ‘scientists’, polemicists, or scientific institutions subscribe or pledge their allegiance to it.
Truth and reality are not determined by those who wear white coats, or have letters after their name. Truth can only be determined by its repeated testing, and/or by having a hypothesis stressed under alternative conditions or scenarios, and by different people.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a scientific intergovernmental body operating under the auspices of the United Nations. By its own admission, its policy recommendations are solely predicated upon the outputs of sophisticated computer models of our entire climate.
These models are maintained by the so-called “Climate Research Unit” housed in the School of Environmental Sciences, at the University of East Anglia, near Norwich, England.
Building academic models is not science. Undoubtedly, this is an activity that can be very useful to science (and scientists) but it is still not science per se. Drawing bold or extreme conclusions from such models, even less so.
A so-called “climate model” is only a computational expression of one particular hypothesis designed to be fed data. If any of the inputted data is wrong, or if the computational model itself contains errors or bad assumptions, then the resulting outputs (conclusions) will, by definition, be very wrong.
Unfortunately, since the early 1990s an entire (radically leftist) global movement that advocates harsh legislation and a globally imposed “carbon tax” — with the objective (so it is claimed) of “eradicating” climate change via the irrational reduction of atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (an essential plant nutrient!) — has gradually taken hold of the Western World’s conscience: injecting it with unhealthy angst and hysteria.
It is shockingly easy to refute the pseudo-scientific arguments presented (with predictable emotional intensity) by these crypto-Communist (Collectivist) agitators. To counter their non-sequiturs all that is needed is a modest investment of time and attention.
Global Warming and the Climate Change hysteria are both “emotion-driven tricks” that have been created (or sponsored) by criminally minded persons in the hope of pushing us all ever closer to totalitarian world governance.
This tyrannical power-grab — being conducted by a plethora of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) originally set-up by the usual cast of billionaire characters (Rothschilds, Rockefellers, et al) — is to be quietly ushered-in (if we continue to allow it) via the complex auspices of the United Nations, with the assistance of regional power blocks such as the European Union, ASEAN, and NAFTA.
Pussy-footing on issues of survival can negatively affect one’s mortality! Can we afford to continue acting so passively? Blindly giving one’s trust to politicians and TV pundit ‘experts’ (many of whom are little more than charlatans) is surely a luxury reserved only for children, and the chronically infantile.
Grab a coffee, roll up your sleeves, and get stuck in. It’s actually a lot of fun deciding (even belatedly) to be an authentic adult, a sovereign, and a free-thinker.
— Nuclear Energy Inst. (@NEI) July 30, 2015
Tweet observation: Hillary Clinton – described as a dishonest lawyer by her former employer, and indirectly linked to the mysterious deaths of over 30 persons formerly employed by the Clinton’s political campaign organizations – is known to be richly financed by Zionist organizations and favoured by Israel’s Likud party. She has also been (recently) described as America’s most incompetent Secretary of State (served 2009 to 2013 under POTUS Obama).
— World Nuclear Assoc. (@WorldNuclear) June 29, 2015
Tweet observation: The World Nuclear Association is a nuclear industry lobby group (currently led by the Swedish Feminist, Agneta Rising) that invites global/international participation. Its single obsession is to promote nuclear power in order to prevent “Climate Change”. The WNA also happens to be headquartered in the very heart of Europe’s sodomy and paederasty capital: the City of Westminster, London. In the light of recent child molestation disclosures, Westminster could now be considered an unfortunate (discredited) location for any entity seeking respectability to headquarter itself.
— Jonathan Cobb (@JonathanWorldNu) June 29, 2015
Tweet observation: “COP21” is vernacular for the 21st yearly session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 21) to the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It is scheduled to be held December 2015, in Paris, France. The website is: http://www.cop21paris.org/. At this highly anticipated event, a jamboree of Climate Change zealots (Communists) plan to sign agreements [authorized by the U.N.’s Agenda 21] that all governments will then be obliged to follow — leading directly to you and I being forced to pay Carbon taxes (i.e., a global tax regime).
— Nuclear Matters (@Nuclear_Matters) July 14, 2015
Tweet observation: Those unfamiliar with Washington DC’s “Beltway Politics” will be asking, who the hell is Carol Browner, and if we did know, should we care? Just as with Maurice Strong (here, and here), Browner is yet another one of those intellectually shallow Communist Apparatchiks who leave a trail of vacuous nappy-poop wherever they have been sent or promoted to. Clearly, you do not have to be a household name in order to be left free to wield immense influence over global events … the kind of freedom that should radically disturb you, me, all of us.
¶-2 Following her 11 January 1993 confirmation hearing, Carol Martha Browner became Mommy America’s 8th Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the 23rd of that month (under Bill Clinton’s first Presidency); a position she then held until 20 January 2001. President Barack Obama then appointed the twice-divorced Browner: Director of the Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy. She held this new position—she was dubbed the “Climate Czar”—from 22 January 2009 until March 2011, whereupon it was abolished. This means that Carol Browner was the Point ‘Man’ when BP’s Deepwater Horizon rig had its catastrophic incident in the Gulf of Mexico.
¶-3 Between the Macondo Prospect well blow-out date (20 April 2010) and its eventual capping date (15 July 2010) both crude oil and associated flows of methane gas entered the rich fishing grounds (especially shrimp and crab) of the economically important Gulf. By all accounts, Browner proved herself to be yet another incompetent female appointed to high office by Mommy America. For example, she was unable to stop, minimize, or legislate against the use of an oil dispersant called Corexit (here, and here).
¶-4 Crude oil, when left alone, will break down naturally due first to the evaporation of volatiles, followed by wave action, and then bacteria. Excessive use of Corexit (banned by the United Kingdom) changes crude oil into tar-like clumps that will not break down naturally. The chemical is itself highly toxic to all marine life and all investigations since have demonstrated excessive Corexit spraying (1.8 million+ gallons) damaged Louisiana’s shell-fish industry more than crude alone would ever have done. During 2013, 4.6 million pounds of oily material was removed from Louisiana beaches during 2013: over double the amount collected in 2012.
¶-5 The Deepwater Horizon incident spawned a series of cover-ups, and at least one murder (assassination) of an expert witness. Cleanup crews were prevented from wearing the “personal protective equipment” necessary to guard them against against the chronic effects of Corexit ingestion. For example, when they asked for respirators, BP officials threatened termination, saying “it would be bad publicity to suggest the spill was toxic”. In the aftermath of the spill, Carol Martha Browner falsely claimed that 75 percent of the spill was “now completely gone from the system”. She then falsely claimed the administration’s August report on the disaster had been “peer-reviewed.”
¶-6 The incompetent female shown admonishing from her pulpit in the Tweet just above this text, should have been thrown in jail at least 2 years ago. Now instead, we have to tolerate her pathetic sermons on the dangers of carbon dioxide (a natural atmospheric gas) and the virtues of constructing yet more, and larger nuclear reactors. You may wonder why she is still in the public eye, “doing the rounds”. The reason is simple. She is a board member of several environmental organizations, and an active member of the Albright-Stonebridge Group: an International Strategic Consulting firm based in Washington DC. Prominent chairpersons for this group include former Clinton U.S. Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright; and former National Security Advisor, Samuel (Sandy) Berger. Essentially a political-huckster consulting outfit, the Albright-Stonebridge Group maintains a strategic partnership with both Joschka Fischer & Company (Berlin, Germany) and Bespoke Approach (Adelaide, Australia).
¶-7 Much of the over-emotional dross and insanity currently swirling around and around our world today, like some persistent toxic cloud, has been pumped out through the over-emotional (and typically rude) mouths of arrogant American females. The only sure way to counter this corrosive influence is to get back to basics. Western Man must reassert his traditional role as the primary arbiter of moral and ethical authority. It has already become obvious to many that high political office is no place for any woman of menstruating age. Period! Yes, that was funny, but it was recognized long ago the extent to which women wear the trousers in a “typically American” family. America’s favourite female archetype is discussed in this offsite article.
¶-8 You do not need to be a “rocket scientist” to connect dots; even those that span across decades and geographic borders. In less than 5 days spent researching online, anyone with an average (or higher) IQ could confirm the existence of a causal relationship between Communism/Bolshevism » the 1943-46 annihilation of Germany » the establishment of the United Nations » the Bretton-Woods Agreement » the fiat Petro-Dollar system » the rise of Radical Feminism as a political movement » Agenda-21 » Global Warming » Climate Change » the CO2 scare hoax » Globalization » One-World Governance » and the sudden elevation and promotion of nuclear power reactors.
¶-9 Some have described Carol Browner as the darling of left-wing billionaire George Soros’ environmental justice circles. If that is true, then you can be sure that also means she has been acting on behalf of the Rothschild clan. Why? Because George Soros was ‘made’ by the Rothschilds: they provided the original seed money for Soros’ Quantum Fund. George Soros is unquestionably a senior Rothschild ‘Fixer’ … it is my understanding Soros is also on the “wanted list” of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), and possibly also Russia’s External Intelligence Agency (SVR).
¶-10 The ideology-driven “War on Fossil Fuels” seems to have been conjured up with Browner’s close involvement. Halfway down her massive and fawning Wikipedia® page you will find the confirmation that: [she] also began efforts to deal with global warming, giving the EPA authority to regulate carbon emissions causing climate change. But the EPA’s remit did not include activities to proactively affect climate control per se. Instead, this was an ideological (Communist) inclusion driven by the goals of Agenda-21. This is what happens when political extremists are promoted over those whose educational background and career more accurately reflect the actual responsibilities they are assuming.
¶-11 It is important we also note Carol Browner qualifications. She possesses no technical qualifications whatsoever – majoring only in English – receiving her B.A. degree from the University of Florida in 1977. She then graduated with a law-school degree – Juris Doctor (J.D.) – from the University of Florida College of Law in 1979. A J.D. is nothing but a licence to practice law. Understand also that a Lawyer learns nothing except how to follow procedure(s). So ask yourself. How does anyone with those minor qualifications get to be responsible for administering all the many environmental technicalities of a huge and complex landmass like the United States … complete with two long oceanic coastlines, a huge region in the Arctic, and a bunch of islands in the middle of the Pacific?? The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency position should have gone to a male with a degree in Physics, or Chemistry, or to one with a degree and background in Engineering.
¶-12 While supposedly serving Bill Clinton, Browner was actually advocating most of Al Gore’s far more extreme and alarmist environmental hectorings. She wasted little time staffing her EPA with environmental group operatives: at least seven have been identified. A website dedicated to critically researching the various Czars appointed by recent US Presidents can be found here, from which I paraphrase the following: When POTUS Obama appointed Carol Browner he signaled support for a radical socialist agenda for environmental policy. Just as healthcare “reform” is not about healthcare, environmental policies are not about protecting the environment – they are about the expansion (centralization) of ever more government power alongside the concomitant limitation of individual freedoms.
Blog Post: G7 leaders call for decarbonization of global economy http://t.co/kU47birXZj
— NuclearStreet.com (@NuclearStreet) June 10, 2015
Tweet observation: The G-7 (Group of Seven) was established in 1975 as the G-6 when Valéry Giscard d’Estaing invited ‘leaders’ of France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the U.S. and U.K. to a meeting near Paris to discuss “the most pressing issues of the time”. Canada joined in 1976. But G-7 leaders? There are no G-7 leaders. France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the U.S., Canada, and U.K. don’t have leaders! Just look at them! Examine their body language and study their true character.
Each prospective candidate and each ‘elected’ leader of every G7 country is obliged to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the West Wall of the alleged Jewish ‘Temple’. Like little boys and girls, they travel to Jerusalem whereupon they are accompanied at all times by one or two Senior Rabbis. Essentially, their unreported visits are a requirement: their presence amounts to an application for a licence to trade in high-level politics. Once they have been photographed and filmed paying homage to that fake Wall, the Ashkenazi-Jewish criminal cabal will then happily grant that licence. Canada’s own PM, Stephen Harper, provides us with just one representative illustration (proof) of this serial obeisance:
— Nuclear for climate (@Nuclear4Climate) August 3, 2015
Tweet observation: When a U.N. and US-EPA (Federal) program, with global dimensions, gets wrapped with infantilism then those of us with a still-functioning brain (those who are not Sheep) are morally obliged to ask searching questions. How many questions? Well, because both the behaviour and true origins of this emotion-laden bandwagon are rather more than odd, I will have to assume there must be many.
First and foremost, we surely need to ask: “Who exactly is funding this global jamboree that has (what seems like) 20,000+ active agents pumping out CO2 is bad / nuclear power is green propaganda on a round-the-clock basis?” They must have very deep pockets! Since early 2014, this intense propagandizing has become ubiquitous throughout all English speaking countries, and evident in most others.
The second question might be best directed at the collective conscience of the so-called Millennials (Generation-Y). It is made up of three parts or three sub-questions, as follows: (a) “Why are you so very susceptible to ‘Group Think?'” (b) “Do you recognize and value any kind of individualism and personal autonomy that is not celebrity based?” And (c) “Why is your average attention span so stunted?”
— Nuclear Matters (@Nuclear_Matters) July 29, 2015
Tweet observation: What was that? America’s nuclear energy fleet? Odd vernacular! This terminology kind-of relabels nuclear power plants (NPPs) as extensions of the US Navy’s already over-sized armada. Those NPPs dotted around the USA are in fact privately owned. There is no monopoly. Several companies are involved. They do not belong to any Federal Agency that I know of. Yes, there is a single licencing authority but there is nothing unusual about that. Energy fleet? Sounds a bit war-like, which is surely the default American mindset: paranoid with fear of “the big bad world” outside its own borders. A world full of peoples it does not understand, and due to its own (misplaced) sense of ‘exceptionalism’ … probably never will understand.
Always Follow The Money
Inevitably, the “CO2 = evil” hype + |
Global Warming| “Climate Change” bandwagon has a very large financial angle to it. Indeed, financial chicanery is the primary reason for the existence of this bandwagon. Although of course you could add-in other factors, such as the corruption that has long since infected all corridors of power in Washington DC especially … but also that of most other national parliaments.
This next Tweet makes out The New Yorker has something important to say. So I checked. And yes, for a mainstream media piece it is a well-written article. This Tweet also serves as a useful marker for a short discussion of “Climate Change” as it links (inevitably) to the profit motive.
— CDP (@CDP) August 3, 2015
Tweet observation: The linked article discusses a financial report published by the international consulting firm Mercer, with a target audience comprising “superfiduciaries”: namely sovereign wealth and pension funds, foundations, and endowments.
¶-2 Titled “Investing in a Time of Climate Change” this apocalyptic publication discusses future (hypothetical) temperature scenarios—no doubt predicated on the flawed IPCC computer model—in order to arrive at the earth shattering and highly ‘original’ conclusion: “climate change poses portfolio risks”. You don’t say? Well, waddya-know?
The New Yorker™ reminds us; this is not the first report of its kind. At least 3 others are already in circulation, including one by Deutsche Bank.
¶-3 I get the distinct impression we have a battalion of under-employed, technically ill-educated scribes who know enough about wordcraft to be able to fashion a problem even when none exists. I mean, can we not just start adapting as humans always have, and as grown-ups are supposed to do; naturally and in synch with whatever changes actually do occur? Instead of the current policy of tying major policy to what amounts to tea-leaf reading?
¶-4 This Mercer Report breaks what has come to be known (in new industry jargon) as “climate-risk management” into four elements: technology, resource availability, impact, and policy. Its authors advise long-term investors to “hedge and weight changes” and to “focus on risks and opportunities across and within asset classes.” So the clear implication here is that market mechanisms will be instituted to offer hedging (i.e., betting) against climate change. But the word “change” has similar attributes to “good” or the “war on terrorism”. It is very elastic and highly subjective. Will their “changing climate” go up, down, or sideways? And which direction do they think holds the worst-case scenario?
¶-5 They (these hyper-wise young consultants) call this practise, “risk mitigation”. Why so? Well because whole sectors of our economic system are already so fragile they (the players) live in morbid fear of seeing it finally kicked over by a mere 0.5 deg C rise in average temperature over Warsaw, Washington State, Wellington, or Woomera. I don’t know how many consultants it takes to change a light bulb these days, but we sure do have a surfeit of them. And many are clearly talking paranoid nonsense. As quoted by The New Yorker article, Chris Davis, the senior program director at the sustainability consultancy Ceres, has actually said: “If climate trashes the economy, they’re not going to be able to meet their pension-fund obligations.” Watched too many horror movies lately?
¶-6 Does anyone in their right mind really believe “the climate” is about to trash the economy? If truth be told, we would need to accept our fiat economy was already reeking of trash long before mini-skirts became popular as far north as Reykjavík, Iceland. Well yes, I do concede it is likely many otherwise sober people really have been persuaded by the cavalcade of hype pouring out of the Western media for several years now … a stream of hysteria reminiscent of sausage machine goo heading for the banger (weeny) market. Imagine an age shaped by an unholy alliance of collectivists (social justice warriors) who have massively skewed the environmental debate in accord with the imaginings of fanatics. Pseudoscience now rules, even inside the faculties of well-funded universities.
¶-7 Katy Lederer, the hardworking author of the said article, points out the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) works with thirty-four of the world’s economies to promote shared goals. Bill Gates loves to share also, right? Primary institutional investors within the OECD umbrella held $92.6 trillion in [price inflated] assets in 2013. That kind of ownership will buy you a lot of influence, even when it is usually expressed passively. Most people see the global financial system comprising investment banks, the hedge funds, and the distressed-asset investment firms. These are the aggressive, headline grabbing, psychopathic market-makers in the tradition of Goldman
Sucks Sachs. Such market sharks are designed to profit from uncertainty and panic; therefore they want more of those two things. In contrast, it is Pension Funds who are the krill- or plankton-sucking whales gliding gracefully through the investment ocean. This makes them the natural ally of those who obsess over this thing called “climate change” and endless prophecies of doom due to 0.10° C average temperature rises. “Climate Change” fanatics have indeed recognized the financial power of these Pension Funds and have been correspondingly busy trying to solicit at least their moral if not financial support for their “One World Government” project.
¶-8 A flock of consultancies charging exorbitant fees for average thinking appear to be getting rich just from warning major investing houses and institutions to consider reallocating their total portfolio if we (i.e., earth’s atmosphere) begin to approach a 2° C rise over pre-industrial times. But as I expand in a bullet-point under the next sub-heading, since the early 1800s we’ve been recovering from a mini ice-age. It is that which accounts for most of the rise. We also have to superimpose the Sun’s 11 year “Sunspot Cycle”; one that also influences earth’s average atmospheric temperature. So in reality, and despite all the hype, very little of this U.N. mandated “climate emergency” has anything to do with our industrial activities down here on terra firma. What you are actually witnessing is large groups of people becoming irrational and even mildly insane. In which case, your precious time would be far better spent studying the implications of “herd mentality” upon our economic and political systems.
¶-9 Clearly, this entire debate is also being distorted and sustained by those who are simply looking to make a fast buck out of an artificially induced energy and climate panic. In this respect one can simply say it is just the same-old-story repackaged with new jargon. If the Second World War had never happened, or if the dominance of the United States had been properly challenged long ago, or if the US Dollar (actually they are Federal Reserve Notes) had never become the world’s reserve currency, then I warrant we would never have heard of “Global Warming” or “Climate Change”.
It is on the back of the rationale being outlined here that nuclear reactor technology is now being exported to nations all over the globe; including to those who already have an abysmal track record in mitigating oil spills, processing industrial waste, and disposing of household refuse. It would appear the $$$-obsessed inmates have taken over the asylum.
¶-10 Knowledge is indeed power, but unfortunately we are joining this debate rather late in the day! Why? Because the genie is already out of the bottle due to something called fiduciary duty. Lederer’s informative The New Yorker article tells of a phenomenon that I personally find quite shocking even though it is entirely in-tune with the Statist mindset that now rules America’s institutions: the definition of fiduciary duty is being changed by the unremitting dogma. It will of course continue to regulate traditional and largely passive investment policy. But is currently being expanded to include … now get this … active stewardship of global average temperature by financiers! Truly, this constitutes one of the most extraordinary paradigm shifts in the history of institutional investing.
¶-11 During 2014, a coalition of fund managers—BlackRock, CalPERS, PensionDanmark, and Cathay Financial Holdings, among others … who together represent US$ twenty-four trillion or so worth of assets—issued a statement calling on government leaders to provide “stable, reliable and economically meaningful carbon pricing that helps redirect investment commensurate with the scale of the climate change challenge,” as well as develop a plan “to phase out subsidies for fossil fuels.”
We Must Practice Coherent Thinking
A logical fallacy is a fallacy in logical argumentation or of reasoning. While remembering that “to reason” is “to think coherently” … then a fallacy is a false belief, or misconception resulting from incorrect reasoning – from the absence of coherent thinking.
The premise being pushed (rhetorically) into the public domain by these Tweets and through many other media channels is truly bizarre. What they are essentially claiming is that CO2 is so potentially harmful to the future of planet earth, more nuclear reactors must be constructed (and soon!) to drastically reduce future CO2 ’emissions’.
Be very wary of emotion-laden rhetoric; especially when delivered by garrulous |
American| women occupying positions of political power they usually are ill-equipped to occupy! Feminism is a cancer that has been eating the very marrow of Western Culture ever since the 1970s.
It would not take the average person long (perhaps 4 to 6 hours of structured research & study) to see right through this kind of nonsensical, irresponsible, and immature argument. But typically, the average person is preoccupied with too many other tasks and priorities. So allow me to beam a little CO2 reality onto your hi-definition pixel display:
- The term “Global Warming” proved too easy for the skeptics to pull apart and ridicule. So after the charlatan Al Gore had been humiliated and driven out of public view, those financing this climate scam had to think of a new label and mantra. As we know, the new term they came up with was “Climate Change”. This was well chosen because it cannot be refuted. Obviously, our climate does change. It is in fact cyclical: it has to be because our Sun is subject to its own fairly regular cycles.
- Until recently we were still on a long warming trend as our mean temperatures recovered from the mini ice-age: a cold trend that struck the northern hemisphere during the middle of the 15th century (c. 1450) and then lasted 400 years. 18th century London was well used to the River Thames freezing over. Several famous paintings depict Arctic scenes on or near that river. Some are on display with the National Trust;
- CO2 is an essential component of plant photosynthesis (aka the water cycle). Without ‘normal’ levels of CO2 natural vegetation would die, and crop yields would collapse;
- Large leafy plants and trees (e.g, lush tropical forests) regard CO2 as their primary food. Do not be duped. Nothing so natural could ever be considered ‘dangerous’! Such simple realities expose the degree of immature ignorance displayed by those speakers featured in the Tweets displayed above;
- You, me, and all warm-blooded creatures must exhale CO2 else we soon turn a funny color;
- The ‘fizz’ in fizzy drinks is produced by injecting CO2 into the edible liquid under pressure. Everyone enjoys the taste of a refreshing CO2 laden drink, don’t they?
- The current (average) concentration of CO2 in the global atmosphere lies somewhere between 260 ppm and 320 ppm. This value is not uniform wherever on earth you care to measure. Near to, or downwind of heavy industrial centres/centers the concentration will be higher;
- Both Methane (CH4)—the main component of natural gas—and common-o-garden water vapour/vapor possess far stronger “greenhouse gas” characteristics than CO2. But the financiers, international bankers, and corporations—those who most strongly desire controls on CO2 emissions—know they cannot demand reductions in the number of times people fart;
- Thousands of years ago, average global atmospheric CO2 concentrations were much higher. Perhaps above 400 or 500 ppm. It was then that giant trees and giant ferns covered the landscape. Indeed, when atmospheric CO2 was more prevalent the forest line also extended further north than it does now, while the Sahara Desert was green and verdant;
- If we allow these Communist / One World Troglodytes to have their political/economic way then they would soon be on course to enforce Carbon Dioxide reduction policies that could, conceivably reduce CO2 levels below 25o ppm. Such an historically low concentration would actually invite mass starvation – on an unprecedented scale;
- Compared to what Mother Nature can produce—decaying plants, dying trees, dead leaves, and ocean temperature flux all result in significant and natural CO2 emissions—the amount of “man-made” CO2 emitted from industrial processes is minuscule. At huge cost to society, we could perhaps get close to eliminating artificial CO2 emissions, only to see the next volcanic eruption wipe out all those (politically correct) savings within a few days!
— Toxic Trinity (@Toxic_Trinity) July 23, 2015
CLARIFICATION for Toxic Trinity Tweet: If you perform a world-wide-web search using the search strings “global engineering” and “Dane Wigington” you will quickly locate this well constructed and data-packed website: geoengineeringwatch.org. I cannot easily convey the urgency of the challenges now heading our way caused by the insane and psychotic meddling in our global climate, by a handful of irresponsible scientists. Most of these “Climate Dr. Strangeloves” are (surprise, surprise) active within the USA. Perhaps you should appraise yourself of this?
Geoengineering Is ‘Scrambling’ Our Climate – Not Carbon Dioxide!
Alongside the dire state of the global economy, geoengineering is another scary reality being kept out of the public eye, by the corporate-owned mainstream media (MSM). Constitutional Lawyers will know best, but any large-scale and unaccountable (i.e., shadow-government) geoengineering activity would appear to be a candidate for the crime of treason. Understand that treason would normally attract the death penalty if properly enforced.
Do you really want to swallow the Red Pill? If yes, then you really must be prepared to explore other burrows of the huge “Rabbit Hole” that together contains all those freaks (male and female) who are driving our economies, social structures, and ecologies to breakdown and ruin. To gain insight into the scale of this problem, please make sure you follow this link to read a “State Of The Nation” blog post entitled: Whistleblower Activist Exposes Covert Agenda Behind Geoengineered Global Climate Change.
What those who presently control all our globalizing institutions are doing, is fobbing us off about “climate change”, and hyping the non-existent dangers of carbon dioxide (CO2), while at the same time practicing evil behind the scenes. And that “evil” is this: other mysterious or ‘dark’ agencies (possibly with United Nations approval) are quietly but busily spraying metals (e.g. aluminium, barium) in nano-particle form, into the upper atmosphere.
Apart from a still limited number of laboratory analyses (of groundwater samples) the most visible and obvious evidence of this spraying is referred to as chemtrails. The spraying is done in a highly coordinated way such that they leave lingering and unnatural criss-cross patterns in the sky.
How can you view some of the available evidence? Terrabytes of photographic and video evidence have already been uploaded to various websites, to YouTube, to other hosting services, and printed in investigative magazines. This publishing has been performed by numerous independent, and sober members of the public as well as dedicated researchers. Heroes, all of them.
Why is this spraying being done? We still do not know exactly why. Much of the activity has been carried out covertly: unmarked planes, official denial, and a wall of silence. No government body has yet been linked, directly. The online community has had to infer the most likely reasons by researching past academic papers, patent office applications, and the minutes of various climate conferences.
The link to the United Nations is presently a de facto one. This rogue, unaccounted for, nano-particle spraying can be attributed to one, two, or each of the following:-
(a) premeditated weather modification with the aim of influencing global financial markets;
(b) the use of weather control as a military weapon;
(c) the desperate acts of mad men and women (academics, scientists, ideologues etc.) who now believe they are equipped to replace Mother Nature as the primary determinant of regional-sized weather patterns … leaving them free to “save the planet” from “global warming”.
This blog post is PART-1 of a 3-Part set. To access the other two parts, click on Collections in the Top Menu then select "CO2 + Radionuclides" from the drop-down list.
|Revision №||Date||Summary Of Changes|
|Rev. 1.0.0||29-Jul-15||Initial release|
|Rev. 1.1.0||09-Aug-15||Minor edits of several paragraphs situated below ¶-10 under sub-heading: Always Remember To Follow The Money. Edits end at Wigington video.|
|Rev. 1.2.0||03-Dec-15||Added: Feature Image + feature image attributions + this tabulated Revision List + Part-1 ToC tabulation + Colorizing of Part-2 ToC List.|
|Rev. 2.0.0||06-Dec-15||A new “Part-3” added to this blog post + Part-2 ToC converted to a HTML table.|
|Rev. 2.1.0||07-Dec-15||Two additional videos added: David Icke Weekly Videocast + “Blue Beats Green” trailer.|
|Rev. 3.0.0||20-May-16||Split off Parts 2 and 3 to create two new Blog Posts linked to this one via Category “CO2 + Radionuclides” (see Collections in Top Menu)|