{"id":177877,"date":"2018-10-18T11:35:07","date_gmt":"2018-10-18T11:35:07","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=177877"},"modified":"2018-10-20T04:24:24","modified_gmt":"2018-10-20T04:24:24","slug":"the-dark-story-behind-global-warming-aka-climate-change","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=177877","title":{"rendered":"The Dark Story Behind Global Warming aka Climate Change"},"content":{"rendered":"

William Engdahl — New Eastern Outlook Oct 16, 2018<\/strong><\/h1>\n

\"global<\/a><\/p>\n

The recent UN global warming conference under auspices of the deceptively-named International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded its meeting in South Korea discussing how to drastically limit global temperature rise. Mainstream media is predictably retailing various panic scenarios \u201cpredicting\u201d catastrophic climate change because of man-made emissions of Greenhouse Gases, especially CO2, if drastic changes in our lifestyle are not urgently undertaken. There is only one thing wrong with all that. It\u2019s based on fake science and corrupted climate modelers who have reaped by now billions in government research grants to buttress the arguments for radical change in our standard of living. We might casually ask \u201cWhat\u2019s the point?\u201d The answer is not positive.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The South Korea meeting of the UN IPCC discussed measures needed, according to their computer models, to limit global temperature rise <\/span>tobelow \u00a01.5 Centigrade above levels of the pre-industrial era. One of the panel members and authors of the latest IPCC Special Report on Global Warming, Drew Shindell, at Duke University told the press that to meet the arbitrary <\/span>1.5 degree target will require world CO2 emissions to drop by a staggering 40% in the next 12 years. The IPCC calls for a draconian \u201czero net emissions\u201d of CO2 by 2050. That would mean <\/span>complete ban on gas or diesel engines for cars and trucks, no coal power plants, <\/span>transformation of the world agriculture to burning food as biofuels. Shindell modestly put it, \u201cThese are huge, huge shifts<\/a><\/strong><\/span>.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The new IPCC report, SR15, declares that global warming of 1.5\u00b0C will \u201cprobably\u201c bring species extinction, weather extremes and risks to food supply, health and economic growth. To avoid this the IPCC estimates required energy investment<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>alone will be $2.4 trillion per year. Could this explain the interest of major global banks, especially in the City of London in pushing the Global Warming card?<\/span><\/p>\n

This scenario assumes an even more incredible dimension as it is generated by fake science and doctored data by a tight-knit group of climate scientists internationally that have so polarized scientific discourse that they label fellow scientists who try to argue as not mere global warming skeptics, but rather as \u201cClimate Change deniers.\u201d What does that bit of neuro-linguistic programming suggest? Holocaust deniers? Talk about how to kill legitimate scientific debate, the essence of true science. Recently the head of the UN IPCC proclaimed, \u201cThe debate over the science of climate change is well and truly over.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

What the UN panel chose to ignore was the fact the debate was anything but \u201cover.\u201d The Global Warming Petition Project, signed by over 31,000 American scientists states, \u201cThere is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth\u2019s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth\u2019s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth<\/a><\/strong><\/span>.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Chicken Little\u2019<\/strong><\/h2>\n

The most interesting about the dire warnings of global catastrophe if dramatic changes to our living standards are not undertaken urgently, is that the dire warnings are always attempts to frighten based on future prediction. When the \u201ctipping point\u201d of so-called irreversibility is passed with no evident catastrophe, they invent a new future point.<\/span><\/p>\n

In 1982 Mostafa Tolba, executive director of the UN Environment Program (UNEP), warned the \u201cworld faces an ecological disaster as final as nuclear war within a couple of decades unless governments act now.\u201d He predicted lack of action would bring \u201cby the turn of the century, an environmental catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust.\u201dIn 1989 Noel Brown, of the UN Environmental Program (UNEP), said entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. James Hansen, a key figure in the doomsday scenarios declared at that time that 350 ppm of CO2 was the upper limit, \u201cto preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted.\u201d Rajendra Pachauri, then the chief of the UN IPPC, declared that 2012 was the climate deadline by which it was imperative to act: \u201cIf there\u2019s no action before 2012, that\u2019s too late<\/a><\/strong><\/span>.\u201d Today the measured level is 414.<\/span><\/p>\n

As UK scientist Philip Stott notes, \u201cIn essence, the Earth has been given a 10-year survival warning regularly for the last fifty or so years. \u2026Our post-modern period of climate change angst can probably be traced back to the late-1960s\u2026By 1973, and the \u2018global cooling\u2019 scare, it was in full swing, with predictions of the imminent collapse of the world within ten to twenty years\u2026Environmentalists were warning that, by the year 2000, the population of the US would have fallen to only 22 million. In 1987, the scare abruptly changed to \u2018global warming\u2019, and the IPCC (the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) was established<\/a><\/strong><\/span>\u00a0(1988)\u2026\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Flawed Data<\/strong><\/h2>\n

A central flaw to the computer models cited by the IPCC is the fact that they are purely theoretical models and not real. The hypothesis depends entirely on computer models generating scenarios of the future, with no empirical records that can verify either these models or their flawed prediction. As one scientific study concluded, \u201cThe computer climate models upon which \u201chuman-caused global warming\u201d is based have substantial uncertainties\u00a0and are markedly unreliable. This is not surprising since the climate is a coupled, <\/span>non-linear\u00a0 dynamical system. It is very complex<\/a><\/strong><\/span>.\u201d Coupled refers to the phenomenon that the oceans cause changes in the atmosphere and the atmosphere <\/span>in turn affects the oceans. Both are complexly related to solar cycles. No single model predicting global warming or 2030 \u201ctipping points\u201d is able or even tries to integrate the most profound influence on Earth climate and weather, the activity of the sun and solar eruption cycles which determine ocean currents, jet stream activity, El ninos and our daily weather.<\/span><\/p>\n

An Australian IT expert and independent researcher, John McLean, recently did a detailed analysis of the IPCC climate report. He notes that HadCRUT4 is the primary data set used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to make its dramatic claims about \u201cman-made global warming\u201d, to justify its demands for trillions of dollars to be spent on \u201ccombating climate change.\u201d But McLean points to egregious errors in the HadCRUT4 used by IPCC. He notes, \u201cIt\u2019s very careless and amateur. About the standard of a first-year university student.\u201d Among the errors, he cites places where temperature \u201caverages were calculated from next to no information. For two years, the temperatures over land in the Southern Hemisphere were estimated from just one site in Indonesia.\u201d In another place, he found that for the Caribbean island, St Kitts temperature was recorded at 0 degrees C for a whole month, on two occasions. The thehadcrut4 dataset is a joint production of the UK Met Office\u2019s Hadley Centre and the Climatic Research Unit<\/a> <\/strong><\/span>at the University of East Anglia.\u00a0This was the group at East Anglia that was exposed several years ago for the notorious Climategate scandals of faking data and deleting embarrassing emails to hide it. Mainstream media promptly buried the story, turning attention instead on \u201cwho illegally hacked East Anglia emails<\/a><\/strong><\/span>.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Astonishing enough when we do a little basic research, we find that the IPCC never carried out a truly scientific inquiry into the possible causes of change in Earth climate. Manmade sources of change were arbitrarily asserted, and the game was on.<\/span><\/p>\n

Malthusian Maurice Strong<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Few are aware however of the political and even geopolitical origins of Global Warming theories. How did this come about? So-called Climate Change, aka Global Warming, is a neo-Malthusian deindustrialization agenda originally developed by circles around the Rockefeller family in the early 1970\u2019s to prevent the rise of independent industrial rivals, much as Trump\u2019s trade wars today. In my book, Myths, Lies and Oil Wars, I detail how the highly influential Rockefeller group also backed creation of the Club of Rome, Aspen Institute, Worldwatch Institute and MIT Limits to Growth report. A key early organizer of Rockefeller\u2019s \u2018zero growth\u2019 agenda in the early 1970s was David Rockefeller\u2019s longtime friend, a Canadian oilman named Maurice Strong. Strong was one of the early propagators of the scientifically unfounded theory that man-made emissions from transportation vehicles, coal plants and agriculture caused a dramatic and accelerating global temperature rise which threatens civilization, so-called Global Warming.<\/span><\/p>\n

As chairman of the 1972 Earth Day UN Stockholm Conference, Strong promoted an agenda of population reduction and lowering of living standards around the world to \u201csave the environment.\u201d Some years later the same Strong restated his radical ecologist stance: \u201cIsn\u2019t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn\u2019t it our responsibility to bring that about<\/a><\/strong><\/span>?\u201d\u00a0Co-founder of the Rockefeller-tied Club of Rome, Dr Alexander King admitted the fraud in his book, The First Global Revolution. He stated, \u201cIn searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill\u2026 All these dangers are caused by human intervention\u2026The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Please reread that, and let it sink in. Humanity, and not the 147 global banks and multinationals who de facto determine today\u2019s environment, bear the responsibility.<\/span><\/p>\n

Following the Earth Summit, Maurice Strong was named Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations, and Chief Policy Advisor to Kofi Annan. He was the key architect of the 1997-2005 Kyoto Protocol that declared manmade Global Warming, according to \u201cconsensus,\u201d was real and that it was \u201cextremely likely\u201d that man-made CO2 emissions have predominantly caused it. In 1988 Strong was key in the creation of the UN IPCC and later the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change at the Rio Earth Summit which he chaired, and which approved his globalist UN Agenda 21<\/a><\/strong><\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

The UN IPCC and its Global Warming agenda is a political and not a scientific project. Their latest report is, like the previous ones, based on fake science and outright fraud. MIT Professor Richard S Lindzen in a recent speech criticized politicians and activists who claim\u201cthe science is settled,\u201d and demand \u201cunprecedented changes in all aspects of society.\u201d He noted that it was totally implausible for such a complex \u201cmultifactor system\u201d as the climate to be summarized by just one variable, global mean temperature change, and primarily controlled by just a 1-2 per cent variance in the energy budget due to CO2. Lindzen described how \u201can implausible conjecture backed by false evidence, repeated incessantly, has become \u2018knowledge,\u2019 used to promote the overturn of industrial civilization<\/a><\/strong><\/span>.\u201d Our world indeed needs a \u201cstaggering transformation,\u201d but one that promotes health and stability of the human species instead.<\/span><\/p>\n

William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he\u00a0holds\u00a0a degree in politics from Princeton University and\u00a0is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Source\u00a0 <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Signed by over 31,000 U.S. scientists, the petition is categorical when it states that there is “no convincing scientific evidence” for man-made global warming <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":39262,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[72,61],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-177877","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ClimateGate","category-Commentary"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/177877","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/39262"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=177877"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/177877\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":177881,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/177877\/revisions\/177881"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=177877"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=177877"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=177877"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}