Former UN top climate official Christiana Figueres just told the world we only have “three years” to save the planet … and all it will cost is $1.5 trillion per year.
Gee, guess we should hurry and jump on that deal … not.
Call us suspicious, but this is the same Figueres who infamously in 2015 announced the UN’s intention to replace free-market capitalism with bureaucratic control saying:
“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”
That Figueres would now make such a doomsday prediction and then ask for such large sums of money, especially in light of her ambitious stated goal to control and direct the economic path of the whole earth, should be enough to make anyone roll their eyes.
But not so with Fake News media. They eat this all up.
If they bothered to look, they’d see there’s a long history of these so-called climate “tipping points” made by alarmists – all of which harmlessly passed without incident.
For those of us old enough to remember, the UN announced a 10-year tipping point way back in 1982, and then did so again in 1989. In both cases, these dates passed without any of the predicted doom-and-gloom taking place.
In 2006 Al Gore told us in An Inconvenient Truth the Arctic would be ice-free by 2014. He gave the planet only 10 years to escape before what, as Jim Morrison of TheDoorsmight say, would be “The End.”
In 2008, ABC’s Bob Woodruff hosted a program where scientists told us that agriculture would collapse by “2015,” that a carton of milk would be $12.99, a gallon of gas $9 and large portions of NYC would be underwater.
And in 2009, Prince Charles declared we only had 96 months to save the Earth. That same year NASA’s James Hansen said we only had until the end of President Obama’s first term, though U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown said we only had 50 days until the global warming apocalypse took place.
It goes on and on.
You’d think the embarrassment of potentially being labeled “false prophets” would make them, well, shut up. But no, the soothsaying doesn’t stop. It just gets more insane.
Marc Morano does a great job of keeping track of all the climate tipping points that came and went at CFACT’s Climate Depot.
Our advice: If warming campaigners want to keep doing this Nostradamus gig, perhaps they should at least wait until they get one of their prophecies right before demanding a $1.5 trillion ransom.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/We-Have-Only-Three-Years-To-Save-The-Earth.png360640Committee For A Constructive Tomorrowhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngCommittee For A Constructive Tomorrow2017-08-09 16:21:462017-08-16 18:26:30Three years to save the Earth? [This time]
President Donald Trump withdrew from Obama’s anti-American Paris Climate Agreement saying, “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.”
The Paris Accord was one of many anti-American agreements made by the most lawless anti-American president ever to hold office.
Obama is a Globalist whose “hope and change” for America was/is the destruction of American democracy and sovereignty in favor of socialism and internationalism.
Oama’s anti-American Paris agreement was another attempt to internalize laws in preparation for an internationalized world and imposition of one-world government ruled by the globalist elite. Obama joined the Paris Agreement in 2016 without Senate approval, pledging to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.
“The Agreement endangers America’s capacity for self-government. . .It empowers one administration to make legislative commitments for decades to come, without congressional authorization, and regardless of the outcome of future elections.”
Of course it does. That was Obama’s purpose and was his intention for his globalist legacy Hillary Clinton. The unexpected defeat of Hillary Clinton threw Obama’s eight year Globalist march into disarray. No matter. True to his radical Leftist training, Obama followed mentor Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and reconstituted himself as the leader of the “resistance” movement to overthrow our Constitutionally elected President Donald Trump.
President Donald Trump is an unapologetic America-first nationalist and the single greatest obstacle to one-world government in the world today. In spite of intense lobbying efforts from globalist corporations, globalist green lobbyists, globalist U.N. bureaucrats, infamous globalists like Al Gore, and even some family members, Trump recognized the Paris Accord as a very bad deal for American sovereignty and jobs and he kept his campaign promise to withdraw.
Staying in a bad deal for “diplomatic” reasons is absurd. Donald Trump was elected precisely because he does not play diplomatic political games. Trump is an anomaly in politics because he actually means and does what he says.
Surrendering control of the Internet to the United Nations was another one of Obama’s anti-American effort to internalize laws in preparation for an internationalized world and imposition of one-world government ruled by the globalist elite.
The Obama administration surrendered American control of the internet to Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) without getting Congress approval, another example of Obama executive overreach. Assigned names and numbers refers to the Domain Name System (DNS) on the Internet which is how a specific web address, the Uniform Resource Locator (URL), connects to the correct server and opens a specific website. All of the information including names, numbers, and any other data that DNS needs to do get to the specific website is stored in one central file known an the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).
Before the surrender ICANN’s function was to oversee how web addresses on the Internet were passed out and to regulate the IANA. Now, ICANN formally owns the IANA. It is not difficult to see how internationalizing the operation of the Internet could be used to help the globalist elites impose one-world government by manipulating information or access to information worldwide.
Obama surrendered United States technical management of the Internet to ICANN which is a global organization of governments around the world. ICANN includes a Government Advisory, which has representation from 111 states around the world, including 108 UN members and the Holy See, the Cook Islands and Taiwan. Many of these governments are anti-American and pro-globalism.
In the sixties Americans openly criticized Communist countries for propagandizing their citizens with exclusively government controlled information – we prided ourselves on our freedom of speech and open access to information. In the 21st century after 9/11 Americans openly criticized Islamic countries for propagandizing their citizens with exclusively government controlled information – we prided ourselves on our freedom of speech and open access to information. Obama’s surrender of Internet control to ICANN makes it possible for the United States to lose our freedom of speech on the Internet – Obama sacrificed American interests to the international community he supports.
Ted Cruz has argued that online freedom is now in jeopardy and that authoritarian governments who are members of ICANN can inhibit freedom of speech on the Internet. Cruz observes, “foreign governments and global corporations will have an increased voice within ICANN moving forward,” which can allow them to censor speech.
It is no surprise that the giant globalized technology companies like Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, Cloudflare and Yahoo all support a more globally controlled Internet – of course they do. These giant corporations are run by Globalists whose businesses are global and whose self-interest is in internationalizing the world for greater profits and marketshare. They are using a business profit prism not a human rights prism for policy decisions even though their owners talk of humanitarianism, altruism, social justice, and income equality.
There must be no confusion between global trade and Globalism. Global trade is simply the sale of goods around the world between nations. Global trade can be fair or unfair among nations. If the New World Order of one-world government is imposed then global trade will be a meaningless concept because there will be only one nation, one marketplace, and one government.
Globalism and the New World Order has been romanticized and dishonestly marketed as the international system that will provide the world with income equality and social justice. Songs have been written about Globalism. John Lennon’s “Imagine” is the globalist anthem. Consider its lyrics:
Imagine there’s no heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people living for today
Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace, you
You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope some day you’ll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people sharing all the world, you
You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope some day you’ll join us
And the world will be as one
Lennon’s lyrics clearly describe a Utopian New World Order of peace and harmony. So far so good. The problem with Lennon’s dreamscape as the anthem for Globalism is that it has no relationship to objective reality. The essential quality of dreams is that they are not encumbered by time, space, gravity, people, or any other consideration in objective reality. Dreams are the epitome of subjective reality.
In objective reality all groups large and small have some organizing principle. Families, communities, states, countries – the larger the group the more important the organizing principle becomes.
Lennon’s dreamscape is not encumbered by an organizing principle even though the world is the largest conceivable group. The New World Order most definitely has an organizing principle even if John Lennon does not sing about it. The left-wing liberals singing John Lennon’s song are imagining their own personal dreams of one internationalized world at peace in harmony with all people of the world equal in every way. The problem is their imagined universe has nothing whatsoever to do with the reality of one-world government imagined and described in unapologetic chilling detail by elitist aristocrat Lord Bertrand Russell in his 1952 book The Impact of Science on Society.
Russell’s one-world government is a binary socio-political system of the ruling few and the enslaved population whop serve them. The left-wing liberals, progressives, and anarchists lobbying for Globalism are the useful idiots unwittingly advocating for the regressive return to a master/slave society of tyranny.
Globalism is a very old song being sung anew by the naive Left and the laughing globalist elite who have successfully duped them.
Americans who wish to preserve their national sovereignty and individual freedoms understand Pittsburgh is the priority not Paris – and that’s the way we like it!
EDITORS NOTE: Here is KC & The Sunshine Band singing their 1975 hit single That’s The Way (I Like It):
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Pittsburgh-Pennsylvania.jpg371638Linda Goudsmithttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngLinda Goudsmit2017-06-17 17:34:552017-06-26 06:21:25Pittsburgh Not Paris: And That’s The Way We Like It
Paul Krugman, writing in the New York Times, suggests that Americans should pick a president who favors a carbon tax. But not even Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have proposed a carbon tax as part of their tax plans. All candidates have put forward detailed tax plans, and a carbon tax is not included in any of these plans.
What is a carbon tax? Why do so many academics and columnists love it? And why will Congress be unable to enact such a tax effectively?
No matter that only 16 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions are caused by America, and that by many measures global temperatures have not increased over the past decade. No matter than unless China and India reduce their carbon emissions, U.S. unilateral efforts will have no practical effect on global temperature. China has stated that it will reduce emissions in 2030, but has not made any definite commitment.
The carbon tax is a favorite of many academic economists for restructuring the tax system. Proponents include a bipartisan group of professors such as Tuft University’s Gilbert Metcalf, now Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy at the Department of the Treasury; Harvard University’s Martin Feldstein, Edward Glaeser, and Gregory Mankiw; and Columbia University’s Joseph Stiglitz.
However, as tax practitioners know, a carbon tax is complex to set up. It requires adjustments to make sure that the tax is not unduly regressive and does not encourage consumption of imports relative to domestic production.
But, as we saw from the passage of many tax and budget bills over the years, Congress does not think deeply before it passes major tax bills.
Rather, political expediency always triumphs over academic elegance. Congress is incapable of thoughtful tax solutions, no matter how many are offered by well-intentioned professors. Despite years of notice that the Bush tax rates were due to expire, Congress passed permanent tax laws at the last moment, without reading the bill.
Many academics see a carbon tax as an alternative to an individual income tax, a corporate income tax, or a European-style cap-and-trade system. But a quickly-passed carbon tax in the hands of Congress would be just another add-on levy, with exemptions for friends and punishments for enemies.
A carbon tax raises the price of energy and so discourages consumption without regulation. Carbon tax rates could be calibrated to be revenue neutral or to yield a net rise in federal tax receipts, with the increment possibly dedicated to reducing deficits.
What are the problems with a carbon tax?
Everyone would want to spend the revenue. Some people would want to use it to reduce the deficit. Others would want to use carbon tax revenues to lower other taxes, such as income taxes. And since high income tax rates reduce incentives to work, this could conceivably add to economic efficiency.
Carbon taxes are regressive. Since low-income people use more energy as a percent of their income than high-income people, a switch to a carbon tax would have to be accompanied by transfers to low-income groups.
Some academics suggest that offsets be returned to taxpayers through lower income taxes, perhaps with the proceeds going chiefly to low-income households (individuals and families), which are disproportionately hurt by what is in essence an energy consumption tax.
This could theoretically be done by adjustments to the income tax. However, low-income earners are not required to file returns, and they would have to do so in order to be identified and compensated. That means extra work for them, and for the Internal Revenue Service — which will already be overworked calculating and collecting penalties from Obamacare violators.
Energy-intensive sectors lose under a carbon tax. The prices of energy-intensive goods in America would increase relative to imports from countries without carbon taxes. So Americans will prefer to buy imports, and American firms will lose business. Proponents of the tax suggest putting tariffs on imports in proportion to their carbon content so that American companies will not be at a disadvantage. But the precise quantities are complex to calculate, and tariffs might be illegal under World Trade Organization regulations.
The shale oil and gas that are attracting energy-intensive manufacturing back to America would be taxed, to the detriment of these new industries — and their employees. Some industries, such as coal, would be big losers. Politicians from coal-producing regions are influential in Congress, and they would demand a share of revenues.
So for a carbon tax to make our tax system more efficient, its revenues would have to be used to offset other taxes in the economy. Its negative effects on low-income Americans and on energy-intensive regions would have to be ameliorated. Some border adjustments would have to be made so that domestic goods were not disfavored.
But our disfunctional Congress is incapable of crafting a carbon tax with these attributes. Any tax on carbon would be an additional tax, without the offsets that make it so attractive to university professors. It would hurt the poor and raise domestic prices relative to prices of imports.
None of the front-running presidential candidates have proposed a carbon tax as part of their tax plans, because they know it is unpopular and will not pass Congress. To lower global emissions, the large emitters of carbon such as China and India need to move to nuclear power or natural gas. That would indeed make a difference.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/carbon-tax-e1459246132935.jpg406640Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2016-03-29 06:09:182016-03-30 15:40:25A ‘Carbon Tax’ Is a Utopian Fix that Can’t Survive Contact with Political Reality by Diana Furchtgott-Roth
History proves that President Obama’s plan to slap a ten-dollar tax on every barrel of oil imported into America or developed here to use the money for transformation is both is both fool-hearty and wasteful. Once again, one of the big chiefs of overbearing nanny goat government is threatening to use unconstitutional bullying to dictate the activities of “We the People.” This time seeking to increase the tax burden upon business activity and consumption. The president stated, “I will take advantage of low gas prices to accelerate a transition to a clean energy economy.” “We’re going to impose a tax on a barrel of oil imported, exported, so that some of the revenue can be used for the investments in basic research and technology that’s going to be needed for the energy sources of the future.”
Oil industry officials, who are always accused by progressive government types like Obama and their cohorts in the dragon media of being greedy, stated that Obama’s proposed $10.00 per barrel tax on crude oil would harm consumers. “The Obama administration believes that we the American people are not paying enough for gasoline.” That is why he wants to dictate a higher price for us to pay more for gasoline. The proposed tax could increase the cost of gasoline by at least 25 cents per gallon. That development could harm consumers who have ale=ready been hurt by the president’s efforts to “fundamentally change America.”
In addition, more American jobs could be wiped out. Also our republic’s emergence as a global energy leader could be brought to a halt, according to the American Petroleum Institute. Actually, that is a goal of the Alinsky inspired Obama administration.
Now that I think about it, no one is more to blame than the bloated federal government for any problems our republic is facing in regards to energy production or transportation. If you research the mid nineteenth until the early twentieth century, the private sector was providing a vastly superior system of transportation over what has emerged as government transit systems throughout America. For example, Both Cleveland and Detroit had rail transportation throughout both cities and surrounding areas.
All major thoroughfares and many minor streets had streetcar or rail transport that ran often and almost always on time, baring any natural disaster. The service was provided by mostly private companies who competed for customers. The various transportation systems did not overlap and even the quality and cleanliness of the streetcars, or trolleys were well maintained.
In Detroit, among the private companies providing transportation service were the Fort Street and Elmwood Avenue Railway Company, Detroit Railway Company and several others. Streetcar or rail service for public transport began during the 1860s in both Cleveland and Detroit as horse drawn trolleys. By 1895 all were converted to electric power.
The nature of government is to progressively either take over or dismantle and then dominate private entities. That was the case in both Cleveland and Detroit. In Detroit, during the early 20th century, the transit companies raised their adult ridership price by one nickel to a “whopping” ten cents. Soon after, the populist city government bullies who desired to take over the transit business publically railed against the nickel increase and duped Detroit voters into approving the city government takeover of transportation services. City misleaders had convinced city dwellers that they could provide better transportation services at a lower price by using tax dollars to subsidize the trolley services. That false scenario was played out in other cities as well including New York City.
In fact, the original private based companies that oversaw the building of the earlier subway tunnels in the Big Apple constructed them at a much quicker pace than the tax payer funded union trolls who built subway tunnels in the following decades.
What does the story about past government takeovers of private transportation services have to do with Obama’s call for increasing crude oil taxes today? It is simple, if government had not gotten involved and taken over viable private run transportation companies, I believe that cities like Detroit would have maintained great transportation systems it their customers desired to continue utilizing transportation systems.
The problem is big government getting involved, thus killing innovation and in most cases quality of service. How much further ahead regarding energy independence would America be, if only the United States had not been prevented from increasing oil and gas exploration and production by the Obama administration? Before the curse and onslaught of the Obamacare being thrust upon our republic “We the People” were blessed with the best medical care on earth, but now it is in steady decline.
If Obama wants improved transportation options for America, the government tax regulations and tax burdens must be lessened and certain taxes such as on production should be eliminated as soon as possible, which should be now. As a result there would come about increased economic activity would fuel incentives for needed changes that the American people desire, not wasteful unwanted government mandates that only bring about destructive and unnecessary declines in the quality of life and related hardships.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/obama-evil1-e1455282294163.jpg400640Ron Edwardshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRon Edwards2016-02-12 08:05:212016-02-12 08:08:41Obama Seeks To Harm America, Again
Despite the several thousands who will participate in a Climate March and the world leaders who will do so in a UN Climate Summit this week, is there anyone who seriously believes that humans have any impact or control over the climate? Or even the weather? The answer, unfortunately, is yes.
In utter contempt for the intelligence of people here in the United States and around the world, a Climate Change Summit will be held on Tuesday, September 23rd, by the United Nations, the source of decades of lies about “global warming” and—since the Earth has not warmed in the past 19 years—the new name “climate change.”
To advance this greatest of lies, the lead-up to the event will be a massive march in New York on Sunday, Sept. 21st. The purpose, as David Rothbard of the think tank, the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) says, is an avalanche of “Scary doomsday ‘science’ and the need for ‘urgent international action’ backed by a ‘People’s March’ of thousands of radical Green activists in the streets.
CFACT has released “Climate Hype Exposed”, a report that exposes the global warming campaign’s junk science, wasteful policies, and the threat to freedom and prosperity it represents. You can download it
What the mainstream media have largely failed to report were the nine international conferences on climate change sponsored by The Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based think tank. The most recent in July featured 64 speakers from 12 countries, all providing science-based lectures that disputed global warming. Heartland’s “Climate Change Reconsidered” reports are filled with the science that debunks the doomsday scenarios.
Numerous Green groups have been making plans to be in New York for the march. More than 750 organizations are sponsoring the People’s Climate March to coincide with the UN summit. Reportedly it will involve 950 organizations. There will be 63 other events in North America, six in South America, 54 in Europe, 10 in South Asia, and 32 in Australia.
They include, of course, the likes of Friends of the Earth, the Sierra Club, and lesser known groups like the Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network that will be there with the message that “industrialization, fossil fuel combustion, land use change and social and ecological exploitation have compromised the planet’s equilibrium in notable and dire ways.”
This is totally absurd, a matrix of lies that ignores the role that industrialization, the jobs and products it produces; and fossil fuel use, the essential element that provides energy in the form of petroleum to power cars, trucks, and other vehicles, as well, of course, coal that provided half the electricity on which our entire way of life depends until the Obama administration unleashed a “war” on it. The other verbiage about “ecological exploitation” is aimed at all forms of development that contribute to the economy, including the building of homes for a growing population.
The UN Summit is, we’re told, “intended to mobilize international political will needed to achieve an ambitious climate change agreement” at the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP-21) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change which is scheduled to meet in Paris in December 2015.
The week ahead will be filled with many events; some will be sponsored by major corporations such as Lockheed Martin and Hewlett Packard. Even so, it is the corporations that are a target of the climate change proposals to reduce energy use and the alleged pollution it is said to generate.
A number of major nations will not be represented by their leaders. Chinese President Xi Jinping and India’s Prime Minister, Narenda Modi” will not attend. Both nations have been engaged in building a vast network of coal-fired plants to generate the electricity they need for development. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper will not be attending, nor will Germany’s Angela Markel.
President Obama has been trying to convince Americans that climate change is a greater threat to the world than the emergence of the radical Islamic State (ISIS) that has seized a vast swath of land in Syria and Iraq. His response has been tepid, consisting of a few “targeted” air strikes and “no boots on the ground.” It is doubtful most Americans think the ordinary climate phenomena that have been a part of the Earth’s existence for 4.5 billion years pose a greater threat than the barbaric agenda of ISIS.
As the media report the march and other events, along with the UN Summit, it is essential to keep in mind that it is all lies. There is no basis in science to support the claims Greens have made for decades, all coordinated out of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Primary among those lies is the assertion that carbon dioxide is responsible for global warming when, of course, there is NO global warming.
Tom Harris, the executive director of the International Climate Science Coalition, along with Bob Carter, the head of the School of Earth Sciences at James Cook University in Australia, in a recent New York Post commentary flatly stated that “There is essentially zero evidence that carbon dioxide from human activities is causing catastrophic climate change.”
They noted that the Earth’s sea level is not rising in any significant fashion, “averaging about 1 millimeter per year” and that “satellites also show that a greater area of Antarctic ice exists now than any time since space-based measurements began in 1979. In other words, the ice caps aren’t melting.”
As reported by The New York Times, “The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress.” Fuel emissions are not warming the planet. The U.S. Constitution requires that any such treaty would be legally binding only if is approved by two-thirds of the majority of the Senate.”
“To sidestep that requirement,” the Times noted, “President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a ‘politically binding’ deal that would ‘name and shame’ countries into cutting their emissions.”
Ignoring the science and ignoring the Constitution go together for this President, but it will be hard for Americans to ignore the deluge of global warming/climate change lies with which they will be assailed over the weekend and into the week ahead. The mainstream media will see to that.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Report-climate-hype-exposed-628x353.jpg353628Alan Carubahttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAlan Caruba2014-09-21 09:02:502014-09-21 10:55:46Prepare for a Deluge of Climate Change Hype
Sorry Al, but this pictures says it all, well, most of it… anyway.
The U.S. Historical Climate Network, administered by NOAA, produced the below chart. You no doubt recognize there’s been a downward trend in hot days (90 degrees F or more) since the 1930’s.
For a larger view click on the chart.
And, that previous smaller percentage of 90 degree days in the early 1990’s – that was the aftermath of Mt. Pinatubo’s eruption. Volcanic sulfate crystals in the stratosphere reduce incoming sunlight. Wish Mr. Obama would do something to stop those volcanic eruptions.
You’ll also notice the decline in hot days from 1940 through the late 1970’s. Remember the 1974 magazine articles (Newsweek, TIME) about the coming Ice Age?
I realize I’ve shot myself in the foot here. What can I offer in the next column that’s any more convincing? More words?
Dr. Swier does a lot to turn my stuff into something readable. I thought I’d help the poor guy out by offering a column that’s mostly a picture. After all, since a picture is worth a thousand words, there’s less work to clean up Savage’s stuff.
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of Mashable.com.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Captain-Planet-Al-Gore-Unedited-e1410282460939.jpg414640Richard C. Savage, Ph.D.http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRichard C. Savage, Ph.D.2014-09-09 13:07:532014-09-13 10:54:45This Picture Says It All — Hey Al Gore you can take your Hockey and Stick-it
In a desperate effort to keep the global warming hoax alive even though it is now called “climate change”, the meteorologically challenged print and broadcast media is now declaring all weather “extreme” these days.
The Media Research Institute recently analyzed broadcast network transcripts between July 1, 2004 and July 1, 2005, along with those between July 1, 2013 and July 1, 2014. What it discovered was the network coverage of “extreme weather” had increased nearly one thousand percent!
As Sean Long reported, “during that time, extreme weather was frequently used by the networks to describe heat waves, droughts, tornadoes, hurricanes, and winter storms, and they often included the phrase in onscreen graphics or chyrons during weather stories.”
Thanks to Al Gore who continues to lie about global warming despite the fact that the Earth has been in a cooling cycle for seventeen years, the news media, print and broadcast, now substitutes its latest reincarnation, “climate change”, when reporting the weather. It’s worth noting that the weather is what is outside right now wherever you are and climate is something that is measured in decades and centuries.
The one thing you need to keep in mind is that every form of weather has been around for much of the Earth’s 4.5 billion years. Long before humans were blamed for causing it, they developed ways to adapt and survive, but tornadoes, hurricanes and floods, among other events, still kill humans with the same indifference to them that Mother Nature has always demonstrated.
Gore became a multi-millionaire based on the global warming scam and, along the way; the U.S. wasted an estimated $50 billion on alleged “research” whose sole purpose was to give credence to it. Too many scientists lined their pockets with taxpayer dollars and many government agencies increased their budgets while falsifying their findings.
The entertainment media got into the act by producing films such as Showtime’s “documentary series” called “Years of Living Dangerously.” It has received two nominations for “Outstanding Documentary or Nonfiction Series and Outstanding Writing for Nonfiction Programming.” Its executive producer, Joel Bach, said “Every day, more Americans are experiencing the devastating impacts of a warming world and we had to tell their story.” Except that the world is NOT warming.
The Showtime series featured those noted climatologists and meteorologists, Harrison Ford, Jessica Alba, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Matt Damon among others. The final episode featured President Obama whose climate lies rival Al Gore’s. “Science is science”, said the President. “And there is no doubt that if we burned all the fossil fuel that’s in the ground right now, that the planet’s going to get too hot and the consequences could be dire.”
The real dire consequences people around the world are encountering include frostbite and freezing to death.
In a June article in Forbes magazine, James Taylor, editor of The Heartland Institute’s Environmental & Climate News, noted that “The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s most accurate, up-to-date temperature data confirm the United States has been cooling for at least a decade. The NOAA temperature data are driving a stake through the heart of alarmists claiming accelerating global warming.” The latest data support the longer cooling cycle that began around 1997.
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) recently announced that “The growing consequences of climate change are putting many of the country’s most iconic and historic sites at risk”, citing Ellis Island, the Everglades, Cape Canaveral and California’s Cesar Chavez National Monument. The UCS said that “we must work to minimize these risks in the future by reducing the carbon emissions that are causing climate change…” This is utter rubbish.
Called a “pollutant” by the Environmental Protection Agency, carbon dioxide is, along with oxygen, a natural gas that is vital to all life on Earth as the “food” on which all vegetation depends.
William Happer, the Cyrus Fogg Bracket Professor of Physics at Princeton University, told the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee that “Our exhaled breath contains about 4% CO2. That is 40,000 parts per million or about 100 times the current atmospheric concentration. Our own primate ancestors evolved when the levels of atmospheric CO2 were about 1000 parts per million, a level that we will probably not reach by burning fossil fuels, and far above our current level of about 380 parts per million.”
The Earth would benefit from more, not less, CO2.
How concerned is the public? Not very. In May, a Gallup poll noted that Americans consider unemployment/jobs, government corruption, and the economy as the three “most important” problems facing the nation. “Just 3% of those surveyed listed the environment/pollution as America’s most important problem. From a list of thirteen problems, it was number twelve.
The news media will continue to misrepresent the weather and/or climate and those determined to keep us from accessing and using the USA’s vast reserves of coal, oil and natural gas will continue to lie about it. The good news is that a growing portion of the public no longer believes the three decades of lies.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Thunderstorms.jpg396640Alan Carubahttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAlan Caruba2014-08-05 21:08:092014-08-05 21:09:43The News Media Now Reports All Weather as “Extreme”
Dr. Ball has been a climatologist for more than forty years and was one of the earliest critics of the global warming hoax that was initiated by the United Nations environmental program that was established in 1972 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) established in 1988.
Several UN conferences set in motion the hoax that is based on the assertion that carbon dioxide (CO2) was causing a dramatic surge in heating the Earth. IPCC reports have continued to spread this lie through their summaries for policy makers that influenced policies that have caused nations worldwide to spend billions to reduce and restrict CO2 emissions. Manmade climate change—called anthropogenic global warming—continues to be the message though mankind plays no role whatever
There is no scientific support for the UN theory.
CO2, despite being a minor element of the Earth’s atmosphere, is essential for all life on Earth because it is the food that nourishes all vegetation. The Earth has passed through many periods of high levels of CO2 and many cycles of warming and cooling that are part of the life of the planet.
“Science works by creating theories based on assumptions,” Dr. Ball notes, “then other scientists—performing their skeptical role—test them. The structure and mandate of the IPCC was in direct contradiction of this scientific method. They set out to prove the theory rather than disprove it.”
“The atmosphere,” Dr. Ball notes, “is three-dimensional and dynamic, so building a computer model that even approximates reality requires far more data than exists and much greater understanding of an extremely turbulent and complex system.” No computer model put forth by the IPCC in support of global warming has been accurate, nor ever could be.
Most of the reports were created by a small group of men working within the Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia and all were members of the IPCC. The result was “a totally false picture supposedly based on science.”
The revelations of emails between the members of the CRU were made available in 2009 by an unknown source. Dr. Ball quotes Phil Jones, the Director of the CRU at the time of the leaks, and Tom Wigley, a former director addressing other CRU members admiting that “Many of the uncertainties surrounding the cause of climate change will never be resolved because the necessary data are lacking.”
The IPCC depended upon the public’s lack of knowledge regarding the science involved and the global warming hoax was greatly aided because the “mainstream media bought into and promoted the unproven theory. Scientists who challenged were denied funding and marginalized. National environmental policies were introduced based on the misleading information” of the IPCC summaries of their reports.
“By the time of the 2001 IPCC Third Assessment Report, the politics and hysteria about climate change had risen to a level that demanded clear evidence of a human signal,” notes Dr. Ball. “An entire industry had developed around massive funding from government. A large number of academic, political, and bureaucratic careers had evolved and depended on expansion of the evidence. Environmentalists were increasing pressure on the public and thereby politicians.”
The growing problem for the CRU and the entire global warming hoax was that no clear evidence existed to blame mankind for changes in the climate and still largely unknown to the public was the fact that the Earth has passed through many natural cycles of warmth and cooling. If humans were responsible, how could the CRU explain a succession of ice ages over millions of years?
The CRU emails revealed their growing concerns regarding a cooling cycle that had begun in the late 1990s and now, some seventeen years later, the Earth is in a widely recognized cooling cycle.
Moreover, the hoax was aimed at vast reductions in the use of coal, oil, and natural gas, as well as nuclear power to produce the electricity on which all modern life depends. There was advocacy of solar and wind power to replace them and nations undertook costly programs to bring about the reduction of the CO2 “fossil fuels” produced and spent billions on the “green” energy. That program is being abandoned.
At the heart of the hoax is a contempt for mankind and a belief that population worldwide should be reduced. The science advisor to President Obama, John Holdren, has advocated forced abortions, sterilization by introducing infertility drugs into the nation’s drinking water and food, and other totalitarian measures. “Overpopulation is still central to the use of climate change as a political vehicle,” warns Dr. Ball.
Given that the environmental movement has been around since the 1960s, it has taken decades for the public to grasp its intent and the torrents of lies that have been used to advance it. “More people,” notes Dr. Ball, “are starting to understand that what they’re told about climate change by academia, the mass media, and the government is wrong, especially the propaganda coming from the UN and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”
“Ridiculous claims—like the science is settled or the debate is over—triggered a growing realization that something was wrong.” When the global warming advocates began to tell people that cooling is caused by warming, the public has realized how absurd the entire UN climate change argument has been.
Worse, however, has been “the deliberate deceptions, misinformation, manipulation of records and misapplying scientific method and research” to pursue a political objective. Much of this is clearly unlawful, but it is unlikely that any of those who perpetrated the hoax will ever be punished and, in the case of Al Gore and the IPCC, they shared a Nobel Peace Prize!
We are all in debt to Dr. Ball and a score of his fellow scientists who exposed the lies and debunked the hoax; their numbers are growing with thousands of scientists signing petitions and participating in international conferences to expose this massive global deception.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/AA-Global-Warming-Wasted-US-Dollars.jpg333500Alan Carubahttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAlan Caruba2014-03-28 06:22:562014-03-28 06:23:42A History of the Disastrous Global Warming Hoax
David Caton is soft spoken and looks like Clark Kent but to many he is Superman when it comes to taking on the Goliaths and winning. Caton is the Executive Director of the Florida Family Association (FFA).
David Caton is one man in Florida who has been single handedly waging a war against Al Jazeera.
Procter & Gamble products.
CurrentTV officially became Al Jazeera America and started airing Al Jazeera content on August 20, 2013. Because of the efforts of FFA all major companies except Procter & Gamble stopped advertising on CurrentTV before its official name change to Al Jazeera America. One hundred eighteen (118) companies stop advertising.
According to Caton, “Florida Family Association tapes ten hours of programing on Al Jazeera America every day. The Florida Family Association office communicates with each advertiser no less than once per week. This monitoring effort and contact with companies influenced 105 companies to stop advertising on Al Jazeera America.”
“Companies that continue to advertise after receiving emails from the Florida Family Association office are categorized as a major corporation, smaller company or non-profit organization (free) and rated from most frequent to least frequent. Florida Family Association features the top advertisers in email campaigns and web articles. Major companies were targeted one at a time because there were so few of them. Some smaller companies, even with frequent ads, may never be targeted with a campaign because of their inferior reputation,” states Caton.
The Florida Family Association launched twelve email campaigns that were all successful in influencing the thirteen companies to stop advertising on Al Jazeera America thanks to thousands of emails sent by FFA supporters. All of the following companies, targeted in an email campaign, stopped advertising: ADT, Allstate, Chrysler Group (Dodge Dart, Fiat) E-Trade, Foster Grant, Hershey, KIA, Nestle (Gerber Life Insur. Co.), Pfizer, Reckitt Benckiser plc, Red Lobster and Reputation.com.
The power of the internet is not unlike Superman’s super powers.
Caton states, “Regardless of how much oil money Al Jazeera spends to keep their American channel alive corporate America must be vigorously challenged not to support the channel.”
ABOUT THE FLORIDA FAMILY ASSOCIATION:
The Florida Family Association is a national organization that is made up of thousands of supporters across America who share in the same goal of defending American values and improving America’s moral environment. These supporters send more than one million emails every month to Corporate America officials associated with issues posted on this web site. Florida Family Association’s accomplishments are a direct result of the dedicated people across the country who support the efforts of this organization.
The following one hundred eighteen (118) companies stopped advertising on Al Jazeera America:
21st Century Insur. Co.
ABC network promotions
Acorn Stairlifts, Inc. ADT
Allstar Products (Buyperfectpancake.com,Getforevercomfy.com, Sidesocket.com) Allstate
American International Group (AIG Direct)
AmeriStar Tax Center
Anthony Huffman (Approvedcolleges.com)
Beachbody, LLC (P90X, Rockinbody.com, Try10now.com)
Binder and Binder Law Firm
Blue Buffalo (True Blue Test)
Cancer Treatment Centers of America
Certified Financial Planner Board
(Letsmakeaplan.com) Chrysler Corporation (Dodge Dart, Fiat)
Consumer Cellular (Exclusively at AARP)
Craftmatic Adjustable Beds
Custom Ink (Trycustomink.com) Darden Restaurants (Red Lobster)
Dollar Shave Club
Dr. Pepper (A&W Rootbeer, Dr. Pepper)
DreamBrands MDrive E*Trade
Earth School Educational Foundation(Carbonnationamovie.com)
EncoreDental (Ageon USA, Inc.)
Exceptional Products, Inc. (Getcellens.com)
Fast Auto Loans, Inc.
Fernando Becattini (Getneaterneeder.com)
Floororthopedic.com Foster Grant
General Mills (Cheerios, Cinnamon Toast Crunch, Cocoa Puffs, Fiber One, Green Giant Valley Fresh Steamed Vegetables, Honey Nut Cheerios, Lucky Charms, Nature Valley Crunchy Granola, Pillsbury Cinnamon Rolls, Pillsbury Crescent Rolls, Pillsbury Grand Biscuits, Pillsbury Toaster Strudel, Progresso Soup, Totino’s Pizza, Trix, Yoplait)
Global Wireless Entertainment (Skinit.com)
Greenlight Financial Services
Harvest Direct (Buycuttingedge.com, Go Go Pillow)
Hoffman-LaRoche, Inc. (AccuCheck)
Home Box Office (Strikeback on Cinemax)
Home Delivery Incontinent Supplies Company (HDIS.COM)
Honda North America
Hubbard Media Group (Reelz.com)
Ideastream Consumer Products
IdeaVillage Products (Microtouchmax.com)
Ilva Saronna SPA (Disaronno)nvent Help
James C. Ferrell, PC
Jay Mebane (Getthunderleash.com)
Johnson & Johnson (Rogaine, Skinid)
JP Morgan Chase (Chase Ink) KIA
Lesson Nine GmbH (Babbel.com)
Liberator Medical Holdings (cath.com)
Marvel Enterprises, Inc. (X-Men Destiny)
National Collector’s Mint
NBC network promotion Nestle (Gerber Life Insur. Company)
News Corp. (The Following)
Oasis Legal Finance LLC Pfizer
Pulaski and Middleman, LLC (PMMESO.com)
Q.E.P., Inc. (Getinstagrip.com)
Range Rover Reckitt Benckiser, plc (Airwick, Cepacol, Clearasil, Delsym, Finish, Finish Power Up, Lime Away, Lysol, Mucinex, Resolve Bright and White, Resolve Easy Clean, Rid X, Scalpicin and Woolite), Reputation.com
Samsung Electronics (Galaxy Note 10.1, Galaxy Camera)
Senior Life Insur. Company
Shakespeare Co. LLC (Pivotrim.com)
Simplex Healthcare (Diabetescareclub.com)
St. Jude Children’s Hospital
Steve Tolman (Buyeazycovers.com)
The Weather Channel Reel Rivals promotion
Turner Broadcasting (CNN promos)
United Benefits Direct
United Stated Department of
United States Marine Corps
Viacom (Centric network, Star Trek into Darkness, WWZ)
Wounded Warrior Project
Advertising time as of August 20, 2013 was used for the following:
Network and cable company promotions
Free ads for non-profits
Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation
Fannie Mae (Makinghomeaffordable.com)
Habitat for Humanity
Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America IAVA
Volunteers of America (Actionteam.org)
Total free ads
A Place for Mom
CashAmerica International, Inc. (Cashnetusa.com)
Connect America (Medical Alert)
Consolidated Credit Counseling Services
E. Kenneth Wall & Associates
Guthy-Renker Corporation (Proactive and Mycleanpc.com)
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2013-09-11 06:00:042013-12-12 07:31:29One Florida man’s successful war against Al Jazeera