Ok, I've debated the topic of climate change with myself for quite a while. Despite the prevailing "wisdom" I have yet to be convinced that the current changes in climate we are experiencing are man made. Yes, the climate is changing, yes it's bad to pollute, yes it's good to use clean technology and keep the environment as pristine as possible. Agreed on all bases.
There are several reasons why I don't believe climate change to be entirely man made.
-First, the climate of earth is constantly changing and has been for the last four billion years; link.
-Second, other planets in our solar system are experiencing changes in their climate; link.
-Third, solar activity is closely linked with earth temperatures; link.
-Fourth, the earth's rotational axis changes cyclically, completing a cycle every 25,765 years. This means the part of earth closest to the sun is always changing. This is called the precession of the equinoxes; [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precession_(astronomy)]link[/url].
-Fifth, for at least forty years there have been think tanks attempting to unite the world using fear, with a world government as the ultimate goal. A prominent one, called The Club of Rome, has stated, in a publication called The First Global Revolution, that climate change would be a perfect excuse, even in the absence of evidence. They felt, probably rightly so, that the world would not unite unless it had a common enemy. Well, climate change is indeed a convenient enemy. This is a broad topic, a great resource on the Club of Rome is The Green Agenda. I recommend reading all the articles on that site, each one is fascinating and somewhat disturbing.
I'll leave it up to you to do further research, I've done it and it's far too much to post here. My hypothesis is this; in the ancient world priests used their knowledge of astronomy and astrology (not horoscopes and tarot cards, but planetary movements through space), knowledge kept secret from common people, to manipulate populations. Since this knowledge was not widely held, it was easy. For example, if the priests wanted to show great mystic power, they would tell the people they could blot out the sun, knowing full well an eclipse was on the way. When it happened, the people believed and did what they were told.
Well, is it possible that something similar is happening today? I think it's not only possible, but probable.
Quote:
"In 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."
- Club of Rome,
The First Global Revolution
But I'm nuts.
Just for kicks, here's some quotes from the CoR and members:
Some members of the Club of Rome:
Al Gore - former US VP
Mikhail Gorbachev - former Russian leader
Bill Clinton - former US president
Jimmy Carter - former US president
Bill Gates - billionaire, founder of Microsoft
Javier Solana – Secretary General of the Council of the European Union, High Representative for EU Foreign Policy.
Maurice Strong – former Head of the UN Environment Programme, Chief Policy Advisor to Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the Rio Earth Summit, co-author (with Gorbachev) of the Earth Charter, co-author of the Kyoto Protocol, founder of the Earth Council, devout Baha’i.
Diego Hidalgo – CoR executive member, co-founder (with Gorbachev) of the Club of Madrid, founder and President of the European Council on Foreign Relations.
Ervin Laszlo – founding member of the CoR, founder and President of the Club of Budapest, founder and Chairman of the World Wisdom Council.
Hassan bin Talal – President of the CoR, President of the Arab Thought Forum, founder of the World Future Council, recently named as the United Nations 'Champion of the Earth'.
Sir Crispin Tickell – former British Permanent Representative to the United Nations and Permanent Representative on the Security Council, Chairman of the ‘Gaia Society’, Chairman of the Board of the Climate Institute, leading British climate change campaigner.
Kofi Annan – former Secretary General of the United Nations. Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
Javier Perez de Cuellar – former Secretary General of the United Nations. .
Robert Muller – former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations, founder and Chancellor of the UN University of Peace.
David Rockefeller – CoR executive member, former Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, founder of the Trilateral Commission, executive member of the World Economic Forum, donated land on which the United Nations stands.
Ted Turner – American media mogul, philanthropist, founder of CNN
George Soros – multibillionare, major donor to the UN
Tony Blair – former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
Deepak Chopra – New Age Guru
Desmond Tutu – South African Bishop and activist, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
Timothy Wirth – President of the United Nations Foundation
Henry Kissinger – former US Secretary of State
Barbara Marx Hubbard – President of the Foundation for Conscious Evolution
Betty Williams – Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
Marianne Williamson – New Age 'Spiritual Activist'
Robert Thurman – assistant to the Dalai Lama
Jane Goodall – Primatologist and Evolutionary Biologist
Juan Carlos I – King of Spain
Prince Philippe of Belgium
Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands
Dona Sophia – Queen of Spain
Karan Singh – Chairman of the Temple of Understanding
Daisaku Ikeda – founder of the Soka Gakkai cult
Eduard Shevardnadze – former Soviet foreign minister and President of Georgia
Richard von Weizsacker – former President of Germany
Martin Lees – CoR Secretary General, Rector of the UN University of Peace
Ernesto Zedillo – Director of The Yale Center for the Study of Globalization
Frithjof Finkbeiner – Coordinator of the Global Marshall Plan
Vaclav Havel – former President of the Czech Republic
Hans Kung – Founder of the Global Ethic Foundation
Ruud Lubbers – United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
Mary Robinson – United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Jerome Binde – Director of Foresight, UNESCO
Federico Mayor – Director General of UNESCO
Tapio Kanninen – Director of Policy and Planning, United Nations
Konrad Osterwalder – Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations
Peter Johnston – Director General of European Commission
Thomas Homer-Dixon – Director of Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Toronto
Emeka Anyaoku – former Commonwealth Secretary General, current President of the WWF
Wangari Maathai – Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, founder of the Green Belt Movement
Quote:
“If the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years. The most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.”
“It is possible to alter these growth trends and to establish a condition of ecological and economic stability that is sustainable far into the future. The state of global equilibrium could be designed so that the basic material needs of each person on earth are satisfied and each person has an equal opportunity to realize his individual human potential.”
“The overwhelming growth in world population caused by the positive birth-rate loop is a recent phenomenon, a result of mankind's very successful reduction of worldwide mortality. The controlling negative feedback loop has been weakened, allowing the positive loop to operate virtually without constraint. There are only two ways to restore the resulting imbalance. Either the birth rate must be brought down to equal the new, lower death rate, or the death rate must rise again.”
“The result of stopping population growth in 1975 and industrial capital growth in 1985 with no other changes is that population and capital reach constant values at a relatively high level of food, industrial output and services per person. Eventually, however, resource shortages reduce industrial output and the temporarily stable state degenerates.”
“Man possesses, for a small moment in his history, the most powerful combination of knowledge, tools, and resources the world has ever known. He has all that is physically necessary to create a totally new form of human society - one that would be built to last for generations. The two missing ingredients are a realistic, long-term goal that can guide mankind to the equilibrium society and the Human Will to achieve that goal.”
“Without such a goal and a commitment to it, short-term concerns will generate the exponential growth that drives the world system toward the limits of the earth and ultimate collapse. With that goal and that commitment, mankind would be ready now to begin a controlled, orderly transition from growth to global equilibrium.”
Quote:
“This is the way we are setting the scene for mankind’s encounter with the planet. The opposition between the two ideologies that have dominated the 20th century has collapsed, forming their own vacuum and leaving nothing but crass materialism.
It is a law of Nature that any vacuum will be filled and therefore eliminated unless this is physically prevented. “Nature,” as the saying goes, “abhors a vacuum.” And people, as children of Nature, can only feel uncomfortable, even though they may not recognize that they are living in a vacuum. How then is the vacuum to be eliminated?
It would seem that humans need a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in the vacuum; such a motivation must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.
New enemies therefore have to be identified.
New strategies imagined, new weapons devised.
The common enemy of humanity is man.
In 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. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.
The old democracies have functioned reasonably well over the last 200 years, but they appear now to be in a phase of complacent stagnation with little evidence of real leadership and innovation
Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time.”
Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:24 am
Sponsor
madthumbs
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 8249 Location: Fingerlakes - NY usa
I think we're already under a World Government, and it's just the fear created by religion that they are playing on.
This is the Australian Broadcasting Corporations presentation and debate of Martin Durkins documentary, The Great Global Warming Swindle. I believe this aired July 2007. Interesting points from both sides, so I thought you guys would find this of interest. (seperated into 9 parts.):
I think both sides of this issue bring up some good points. The problem is that bureaucrats want to call the shots on how to handle this manner and not the market. Oil men (this includes coal, natural gas and big agricompanies as well) are in bed with the politicians which is why "cleaner" energy technology is suppressed and the prices for the ones on the market are astronomical in many cases.
I think both sides of this issue bring up some good points. The problem is that bureaucrats want to call the shots on how to handle this manner and not the market. Oil men (this includes coal, natural gas and big agricompanies as well) are in bed with the politicians which is why "cleaner" energy technology is suppressed and the prices for the ones on the market are astronomical in many cases.
The video above has some moments where the speaker discusses the different data of satellite vs balloon vs inner city temperature readings over time and how they do not agree, but the damn camera doesn't pan over to show the data. It would be nice to find this data.
The link below is a good discussion with video and slide show synched to the lecture. Very provocative.
A basic look at how climate scientists infer that man-made carbon gases are changing the climate, and how this view is contradicted by other climate scientists who are skeptics.
I am a former science correspondent with an interest in reporting the facts, not the media hype. My thanks to 9thgate for checking my script for errors.
"Over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe challenged man-made global
warming claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) and former Vice President Al Gore. This new 231-page U.S. Senate Minority
Report report -- updated from 2007’s groundbreaking report of over 400 scientists who
voiced skepticism about the so-called global warming “consensus” -- features the
skeptical voices of over 650 prominent international scientists, including many current
and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN IPCC. This
updated report includes an additional 250 (and growing) scientists and climate
researchers since the initial release in December 2007. The over 650 dissenting scientists
are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media-hyped
IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers."
Quote:
“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”
Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.
“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico
“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.
“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.
“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.
“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.
“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.
“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.
“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.
“CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.
“The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.” - Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata. # #
This video, the second in the series, looks at alternative hypotheses explaining global warming. I am only looking at alternative hypotheses put forward by real, professional climate researchers, and the findings of real, professional climate researchers who disagree with them. Yes, I've left a lot of the detail out. This is a 10-minute video summarizing the arguments and counter-arguments, not a PhD thesis. The comments forum will be free and open, as always, but if you disagree with what real, professional climate scientists say, please take it up with them and dont expect me to defend their point of view. If you have a stunning piece of scientific evidence that disproves one side or the other, dont waste time on my channel, write a paper, and get it peer-reviewed and published in a reputable journal.
