By Carter Christopher
What transpired at the BBC on April 4, 2008 is one of the most insane cases of media social engineering you might ever see. After posting an article that cited the Secretary General of the World Meteorological Organization as saying that global warming completely stopped in 1998, and that 2008 would be even cooler than 2007, the BBC was sent an email by a SINGLE environmental activist who demanded they change the story. At first, the BBC was defiant, citing the WMO as the source, and that they would report the news, not engineer the news. The BBC received two more emails from the same person. Neither cited a single scientific study or authority. All evidence presented by the individual was purely anecdotal, and her logic was circular. However, she soon got their attention, not through factual analysis, but by threatening to tell her environmentalist friends that the BBC was going to be reporting the objective facts, rather than churning out environmentalist propaganda. The global warming lobby controls the news, not the media, and she was quick to remind them of that fact. The BBC quickly acquiesced to her tantrum, and drastically revised the story. Not only was the story revised, but the original article was completely removed from the the world wide web; something media outlets rarely, if ever, do.
The BBC, what is generally considered to be a respectable source of information for media consumers the world over, allowed the facts to be warped and distorted because a single environmentalist sociopath threatened them with what is equivalent to public relations terrorism. Of course this kind of media manipulation undoubtedly happens all of the time; this time they just happened to get caught.
What the original article was pointing out is that although human beings around the world are creating 23% more carbon dioxide since 1998, the earth has actually COOLED. So where’s the carbon dioxide/warming temperatures correlation? Correlations are more than a little important in the world of “cause and effect.” Al Gore recently called those of us who believe in such scientific methods “flat earthers” and “moon landing deniers.” No debate is necessary, according to Gore, who has unequivocally refuses to hold a public debate with anyone on the topic of global warming. It’s “convenient” for Gore that both he and the media determined the debate to be over before anyone ever actually, ya know, had a DEBATE. But that’s okay with Gore. He is none too interested in anyone else’s idea of truth, as evidenced by this quote from 2006: “I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are.” Very flattering. Thanks for all the respect, Al.
In scientific reality (which has no place in the news media) scientists are now leaning towards the Sun as the leading cause of global temperature shifts. Really? The 900 trillion gigaton nuclear explosion up in the sky, not to mention the source of all energy in the solar system, hasn’t been considered as a factor up until this point? The fact that the temperature of every planet and celestial body in the solar system has gone up an IDENTICAL amount (2 degrees, Fahrenheit) in the last 40 years would seem to support that theory. THAT would undoubtedly amount to a logical correlation, but the media would never dream reporting the story. Did any in the world population hear about how, for as long as we’ve been keeping records, ocean temperatures have NEVER risen? Of course not, we were too busy listening to Anderson Cooper shed a sanctimonious tear while promulgating the conceit that future generations are going to be terrorized by the possibility of spontaneously bursting into flame.
Speaking of correlations, don’t think that the global warming fear mongers aren’t aware of the “cause and effect” conclusion of a sound correlation. In fact, Gore regularly shows audiences a graph, which was prominently showcased in his movie “An Inconvenient Truth”, which purports to show temperatures going up in a predictable fashion just a few years after carbon dioxide levels rise. Unfortunately for Gore and the global warming fascists, someone decided to investigate the data represented in this graph. As it turns out, the data was horribly flawed, and following a congressional investigation the graph was rejected as proof of anything whatsoever. Laurie David (one of global warming’s chief snake-oil salespersons) imitated Gore’s predilection for lying with the help of graphs when making a case for “cause and effect” in a recent CHILDREN’S BOOK she published where she deliberately switched carbon dioxide and temperature on a historical graph.
The data presented by David shows temperatures rising after carbon dioxide levels rise. The truth was that carbon dioxide levels rose AFTER temperatures rose. The conclusion that the historically valid of the two graphs illustrated, that temperature affects carbon dioxide but carbon dioxide has no effect on temperature, was completely contradictory to the fundamental argument of those who push the global warming scam, so David took a page from Gore’s playbook and shamelessly lied… to children.
Recently, other Nobel Prize winning scientists (Al Gore, I remind everyone, is most definitely NOT a scientist) who have conducted extensive studies to determine temperature and carbon data going back thousands, and possibly millions, of years, sent a letter to the United Nation imploring them to change their policies, which their research exposes as being based on scientific fallacies. Their plea is based on the fact that United Nations policies on carbon dioxide, which were pushed by Gore and the global warming fanatics, is causing famine, death, and social unrest as a result of the pressure that increased bio-fuel demands have placed on products like corn and grain. Their research, which is based on three separate scientific studies, shows that carbon dioxide and temperature or not related in any way whatsoever. A graph of one of their data-sets can be seen below:
The dynamic that these researchers are concerned by, a global famine from pressure on the food market, has already begun. Riots have broken out around the world from a basic food resources. The United Nations that policies inspired by ” global warming” have put over 100 million people in danger of starvation.
In case anyone wonders WHY any “information” outlet would be compelled to shamelessly lie about something like this, you need look no further than the BILLIONS upon BILLIONS of dollars that Al Gore stands to make if the environmental initiatives he is proposing are adopted around the world, as well as the billions of dollars the media enjoys as a result of people tuning in to hear about their impending doom. Something the mainstream media has never bothered telling you is that their partisan prophet and NOBEL PEACE PRIZE laureate Al Gore through a series of trusts and shell corporations, is the owner of an investment banking firm that is heavily invested in the production of “alternative energy technologies.” As of 2008, many of Gore’s global warming speeches (for which he is paid an average of $175,000 per appearance) look very much like investment seminars, with the names of companies which Al Gore admits to “having a stake in” being flashed across the bottom of screens as The Prophet (Gore) makes the case for the products they push. Gore is aware of the fact that people are beginning to notice that his global warming speeches are beginning to look strangely like a sales pitch. In fact, he has recently adopted a policy of completely BANNING all people associated with the media from his speeches, and those that do attend are warned that they are not permitted to write anything about what they see. Clearly, Gore is concerned with being exposed for the charlatan that he is, so freedom of speech be damned.
As a side comment, I would like to mention that you could go to your local kindergarten on any day of the week at around noon, break up a playground fight between 6 year olds, and rightfully claim to have accomplished more for the cause of “world peace” than Al Gore Jr. ever has.
But BILLIONS? Really? Well, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the Lieberman-Warner “Global Warming” bill that was recently proposed will cost the United States alone $2.9 TRILLION in the next 40 years. In a best case scenario this 2.9 trillion dollars would result in a decrease of atmospheric carbon dioxide by 25 parts per million, which is a completely insignificant amount (the current level of atmospheric carbon dioxide is about 500 ppm). So while Al Gore and his ilk are raking in cash and living incredibly extravagant lifestyles, he’s trying to dictate the behavior of us “average” folks. Speaking of extravagance, at the most recent UN Conference on Climate Change there wasn’t even enough room at the local airports in Bali, Indonesia for all of the private jets. Seriously, that’s not a joke. That being said, aren’t we always being told that it’s the big oil companies and Halliburton that are wasting our money on executive largess? Wait… Bali? Tropical paradise? Not bad ‘United Nations Conference on Climate Change’. Not bad at all… Oh, and don’t think that the $300 million advertising campaign that Gore is currently launching is anything but an attempt to guarantee a return on those investments. Call me crazy, but I’m fairly certain that I don’t need an advertisement to tell me that the world is coming to an end. Last I checked, I live in the world, so I think I’d notice if the sky were falling… if it were, in truth, falling.
Let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that the Earth is, in fact, becoming warmer. That wouldn’t be surprising to those who are aware of the fact that we are, at present, in the waning years of an Ice Age that ended just 10,000 years ago. The total amount of global ice has been melting steadily for 10,000 years, and interglacial periods are thought to last at least 25,000-50,000 years. In fact, much if not most of the Earth’s history is characterized by NO ice at either pole, but don’t expect Al Gore to tell you that. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere had nothing to do with the why the earth has experienced dozens of ice ages in the last 3 billion years. So what DID cause these ice ages and subsequent periods of warming? Not surprisingly, the Sun is the most likely culprit. Contrary to popular belief, the sun’s energy output is anything but constant, and the Earth’s orbit around the sun is eccentric. The actual distance between the earth and the sun is constantly fluctuating. This is exacerbated by the fact that the earth’s axis is constantly oscillating, causing temperature variations in the Northern and Southern hemispheres as it shifts. This correlates almost perfectly with the fact that the Arctic ice cap is slowly melting, but the Antarctic ice cap is slowly expanding.
There is the contention among global warming alarmists that an increase in global temperature will somehow increase the number and intensity of hurricanes and other natural disasters. This is patently untrue. In February, 2008, The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration released a comprehensive report of hurricanes that made landfall between 1851-1005 and conclusively found that hurricane intensity had not increased. What the study did find, and what Al Gore Jr. will tell you, is that the damage done by hurricanes HAS increased. However, what the report explains, and what Al Gore fails to mention, is that this is “due to greater population, infrastructure, and wealth on the U.S. coastlines, and not to any spike in the number or intensity of hurricanes.”
The media also fails to report that hurricane predictions over the last few years have become both increasingly urgent and increasingly WRONG. Independent business owners in Florida are strongly considering suing the “Tropical Meteorology Project”, the organization that makes the predictions that insurers and governments depend on. In 2007 the organization predicted that 9 hurricanes would hit Florida. The actual number of hurricanes that hit Florida in 2007; ZERO. Independent insurers have noticed this trend, and in 2008 Lloyd’s of London reported that earnings would decrease because they had to lower insurance premiums, which was a direct result of “a lack of natural disasters.”
Science has also shown that if ocean temperatures actually WERE to rise, that the intensity and number of hurricanes would decrease precipitously. If ocean temperatures rose to the level that the global warmingest-in-Chief Al Gore predicts, the increased temperature would create wind variations at differing altitudes that would break apart hurricanes before they form.
I also hear from our modern day Nostradamus/Chicken Little (a.k.a. Al Gore, God of Thunder) that rising sea levels will destroy coastlines the world over as frozen water melts. This is absurd. Gore will tell you that 75% of fresh water on earth is frozen. That’s true. Unfortunately, as is his M.O., Gore then neglects to mention that ALL frozen water accounts for less than 2% of all water on earth. Of this 2%, much is located underwater in the form of polar ice caps and icebergs. The North Pole (the only one of the two Poles that’s melting at present) actually has no continental land mass, and is composed entirely of ice. For all intents and purposes the North Pole is floating atop the Arctic Ocean, much like an ice cube might float atop a glass of water. Why does this matter? As we all know, water EXPANDS as it freezes, and the amount of space occupied by frozen water is 10% greater than the amount of space occupied by liquid water. A simple experiment would illustrate what this means in terms of the “global warming” debate.
1. Take a glass,
2. Fill it with ice,
3. Fill it with water,
4. Measure the water level,
5. Let sit for 2 hours,
6. Measure water level again.
Contrary to what Gore seems to suggest, the water level in your glass will have remained exactly the same. This same dynamic would occur if the North Pole, icebergs, and the peripheral regions of the South Pole were to melt away. One can only assume that in Gore’s vision of the future, the present day North Pole is suspended on stilts; kind of like one of those huts that you would see at tropical resorts.
Even if we choose to believe that the Earth is warming, and if we, despite all evidence to the contrary, choose to believe that anything but natural forces are driving the change in temperatures, why do we assume this to be a BAD thing? Were the earth to become warmer there would be more habitable portions of the planet, fewer people would freeze to death, and more of the land on earth would be arable (farmable), meaning that there would be less famine. But don’t take my word for it, the co-founder of Greenpeace feels the same way. He recently left Greenpeace, and argues that, along with the benefits listed above, global warming would result in “longer growing seasons, shorter winters, reduced energy requirements, and forests growing in areas that are now just tundra.” This is purely hypothetical, in his opinion, as he believes that there is no conclusive evidence that global warming exists at all. He also recognizes that the debate about global warming is far from over. His thoughts on people like Al Gore? “The people who are saying there is no longer any need for debate are the ones who would stifle debate.”
You would think that we would have learned our lesson after the New York Times went from telling the American public that there would be another Ice Age in the 1890s, to telling us there would be global warming in the 1920s, to again telling us there would be an ice age in the 1970s, then back to global warming in the 1980s, then another possible ice age in the 1990s, and now back to global warming in the 21st century. How do we keep falling for this? Maybe we deserve the abuse.
Bottom Line: You’re being lied to, constantly, by a cartel of self-anointed social “elites” and their obedient media minions that have zero respect for you, and who probably left their final vestiges of self-restraint on behalf of truth in the rubble of the Carter Administration. Truth has become too injurious and inconvenient a burden for these, the agenda driven. In fact, they have become so cavalier in their calculated deceptions, it’s safe to assume that they hold all of us, the average and unenlightened masses, in unmitigated and thinly veiled contempt.
The media, our “fourth branch of government,” is thoroughly broken.
Filed under: Global Warming: Truth Exposed | Tagged: al gore, an inconvenient truth, BBC, carbon dioxide, carbon graph, climate change, co2, facts, global warming, global warming facts, global warming statistics, global warming truth, historic carbon levels, historical carbon levels, history, hurricane, ice caps, is global warming real, laurie david, liberal media, media bias, media lies, myth, ocean temperatures, scam, stats, the truth about global warming | Leave a comment »