Tag: climategate

According to raw temperature data, there have been NO extreme temperature changes in the U.S. over the past century

The United States Historical Climatology Record provides raw data on the mean temperature in the U.S. from 1895 to 2023. Over the past 128 years, the average temperature reading has fluctuated up and down slightly, but there haven’t been any significant warming trends over that time, and the fluctuations have not been extreme at all.

The warming effects of carbon dioxide may be demonstrated on a small scale, but these small-scale experiments are just a speck in the grand scheme of things and cannot be extrapolated at scale, especially when the resiliency and adaptability of the planet is capable of absorbing minuscule human effects. Sometimes a recipe cannot be scaled linearly.

The raw data confirm that man made activities haven’t had an impact on average temperatures across a century or so. To make matters worse, modern day climatologists are toggling the data to account for alleged biases that they believed occurred during the collection of temperature data many decades ago. The real biases in temperature reporting are occurring today, as climatologists try to affirm what they want to see.

Keep reading

*Another summer with nearly normal temperatures in the Arctic region continues a long-term trend during their melting season…Arctic sea ice showing resiliency*

The summer is more than half over up in the Arctic region and overall temperatures this season are repeating a pattern that began many years ago in that they are running at nearly normal levels which happens to be quite close to the freezing mark. The cold season in the Arctic has featured above-normal temperatures in the Arctic region in a pattern that has also been very consistent in recent years. It is the temperatures in the summer months of June, July, and August, however, which are the most important when it comes to Arctic sea ice extent as this is the melting season up in that part of the world. As long as temperatures remain nearly normal during the summer (melting) season, the chance for any additional significant drop off in sea ice will be limited. Indeed, given this consistent summertime temperature trend in recent years, Arctic sea ice has shown resiliency both in terms extent and in volume. One possible explanation of this persistent temperature pattern across the Arctic region with nearly normal summertime conditions and warmer-than-normal in the other nine months of the year (i.e., the cold season) is increased levels of water vapor in the atmosphere.

Keep reading

The UN’s Green Agenda Will Spark Famine

“We The Peoples of the United Nations determined…to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,” — United Nations Charter Preamble (1945)

This is the second part in a series looking at the plans of the United Nations (UN) and its agencies designing and implementing the agenda of the Summit of the Future in New York on 22-23 September 2024, and its implications for global health, economic development, and human rights. Previously the impact on health policy of the climate agenda was analyzed.

The right to food once drove UN policy towards reducing hunger with a clear focus on low- and middle-income countries. Like the right to health, food has increasingly become a tool of cultural colonialism – the imposition of a narrow ideology of a certain Western mindset over the customs and rights of the ‘peoples’ that the UN represents. This article discusses how it happened and the dogmas on which it relies.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the farming equivalent of the World Health Organization (WHO), was founded in 1945 as a specialized United Nations (UN) agency with a mission to “achieve food security for all.” Its motto “Fiat panis” (Let there be bread) reflects that mission. Headquartered in Rome, Italy, it counts 195 Member States, including the European Union. The FAO relies on more than 11,000 staff, with 30% being based in Rome.

Of its US$3.25 billion biennial 2022-23 budget, 31% comes from assessed contributions paid by Members, with the remainder being voluntary. A large share of voluntary contributions come from Western governments (US, EU, Germany, Norway), development banks (e.g. World Bank Group), and other lesser-known publicly- and privately-funded entities set up for assisting environmental conventions and projects (including the Global Environment Facility, Green Climate Fund and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation). Thus, like the WHO, most of its work now consists of implementing the dictates of its donors.

The FAO was instrumental in implementing the 1960s and 1970s Green Revolution, associated with a doubling in world food production that lifted many Asian and Latin American populations out of food insecurity. The use of fertilizers, pesticides, controlled irrigation, and hybridized seeds was considered a major achievement for hunger eradication, despite resulting pollution to soil, air, and water systems and facilitation of the emergence of new resistant strains of pests. The FAO was supported by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) founded in 1971 – a publicly funded group with the mission to conserve and improve seed varieties and their genetic pools. Private philanthropies, including the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, also played supportive roles.

Successive World Food Summits held in 1971, 1996, 2002, 2009, and 2021 have punctuated the FAO’s history. At the second summit, world leaders committed themselves to “achieving food security for all and to an ongoing effort to eradicate hunger in all countries” and declared “the right of everyone to adequate food and the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger” (Rome Declaration on World Food Security).

Keep reading

Kamala, Heir to the Neoliberal Throne, Promotes Depopulation for Climate Change™

As far as I am concerned, there are two options here, each of which is equally plausible:

  • The Karamel-uh entity overheard the true impetus of the Climate Change™ hoax at some point and didn’t realize or forgot that she’s not supposed to say the quiet part out loud
  • The social engineers are simply getting more brazen in their declaration of intentions, and so these comments were intentionally inserted into the Karamel-uh entity’s speech — later to dismiss it as a “gaffe” — to move the Overton window in the direction of global genocide

Either way, these words escaping the lips of a possible future president (and maybe sooner that we realize if the MIA Brandon entity never resurfaces and is declared dead from COVID or domestic terrorism or whatever) should be front page news everywhere.

What explanation I don’t buy is the framing by the White House, relayed via the New York Post uncritically, that this was a “gaffe.”

Via New York Post (emphasis added)

“Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday called on the US to ‘reduce population’ in an effort to combat climate change, but she meant to say ‘reduce pollution,’ according to the White House.

The shocking gaffe happened as the 58-year-old vice president delivered remarks at Coppin State University in Baltimore, Md., on the need to build a ‘clean energy economy.’

‘When we invest in clean energy and electric vehicles and reduce population, more of our children can breathe clean air and drink clean water,’ Harris said, eliciting applause from the audience.

The official White House transcript of her speech acknowledges and corrects Harris’ disquieting error.*

In the transcript, ‘population’ is crossed out and ‘pollution’ is added in brackets to denote what the VP intended to say.”

*This is gaslighting nonsense; shame on the New York Post for printing it. Transcripts are supposed to reflect what was actually said, not edited later on to say whatever the governing authorities would like them to say.

Keep reading

“CopenPay” – Europe’s First Climate-Centric Social Credit Scheme

The world’s first climate-related social rewards scheme came into being two weeks ago, when the city of Copenhagen officially launched it’s new “CopenPay” system.

Through the CopenPay scheme, tourists visiting the city will be rewarded for “green actions” – such as using public transportation or cycling – with access to “cultural experiences”, free meals, etc.

WonderfulCopenhagen.com adds:

There is a need to change the mindset of tourists and encourage green choices […]Through CopenPay we therefore aim to incentivize tourists’ sustainable behaviour while enriching their cultural experience of our destination. It is an experimental and a small step towards creating a new mindset […] The hope is not only to continue the pilot project, but also to inspire other cities around the world to introduce similar initiatives.

Now, complimentary organic meals and free windsurfing lessons might seem benign enough, but any talk of “changing mindset” and/or “encouraging behaviour” makes my brain itch.

It’s pretty easy to see through the happy-clappy tone of the promotion to the heart of the issue, it’s right there in their own words: Transforming green actions into currency.

This is climate-change-based behavioral modification. This is a social credit system. Small scale and optional, sure, but there’s no denying that’s what it is.

For now it’s optional and only for tourists. They are testing the waters. Barring a catastrophic failure it won’t stay that way for long. They likely won’t ever make it mandatory to take part, rather – like bank accounts and cellphones – opting out will simply be too difficult for most people to bother with.

Eventually “rewarding green actions” will segue into “punishing non-green actions”. The currency of “cultural experiences” replaced with actual currency.

Keep reading

Misrepresentation of Critical Satellite Data by IPCC

The 6th Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC AR6) concluded “It is very likely that well-mixed GHGs [greenhouse gases] were the main driver of tropospheric warming since 1979” (IPCC, 2021; p.5). This statement implies that all known climate forcings have properly been evaluated using the available data, and GHGs have been found to exert a disproportionally large radiative effect on the Global Surface Air Temperature (GSAT) over the past 45 years. However, a close examination of Chapter 7 of the Working Group I (WG1) Contribution to the IPCC AR6 (Forster et al. 2021), which discusses the Earth’s energy budget, climate feedbacks and climate sensitivity, reveals that the observed decrease of Earth’s albedo and the corresponding increase of absorbed shortwave radiation by the Planet for the past 20 years have not been taken into account as contributors to the recent warming. Section 7.2.2 of Chapter 7 entitled “Changes in Earth’s Energy Budget” acknowledges that there have been multidecadal periods of significant decreasing and increasing trends in surface solar radiation (SSR) called “global dimming” (i.e. from 1950s to 1980s) and “global brightening” (after 1980s), respectively. The report states: “There is high confidence that these [SSR] trends are widespread, and not localized phenomena or measurement artefacts.” Indeed, the existence of such dimming and brightening multidecadal periods has been acknowledged by science for more than 10 years (Stanhill et al. 2014; Yuan et al. 2021), but the IPCC AR6 provides no global estimate of the observed positive trend in SSR since 1980s and its impact on GSAT. Instead, the Report simply states “The origin of these trends is not fully understood”.

Keep reading

Kamala, Heir to the Neoliberal Throne, Promotes Depopulation for Climate Change™

As far as I am concerned, there are two options here, each of which is equally plausible:

  • The Karamel-uh entity overheard the true impetus of the Climate Change™ hoax at some point and didn’t realize or forgot that she’s not supposed to say the quiet part out loud
  • The social engineers are simply getting more brazen in their declaration of intentions, and so these comments were intentionally inserted into the Karamel-uh entity’s speech — later to dismiss it as a “gaffe” — to move the Overton window in the direction of global genocide

Either way, these words escaping the lips of a possible future president (and maybe sooner that we realize if the MIA Brandon entity never resurfaces and is declared dead from COVID or domestic terrorism or whatever) should be front page news everywhere.

What explanation I don’t buy is the framing by the White House, relayed via the New York Post uncritically, that this was a “gaffe.”

Via New York Post (emphasis added)

“Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday called on the US to ‘reduce population’ in an effort to combat climate change, but she meant to say ‘reduce pollution,’ according to the White House.

The shocking gaffe happened as the 58-year-old vice president delivered remarks at Coppin State University in Baltimore, Md., on the need to build a ‘clean energy economy.’

‘When we invest in clean energy and electric vehicles and reduce population, more of our children can breathe clean air and drink clean water,’ Harris said, eliciting applause from the audience.

The official White House transcript of her speech acknowledges and corrects Harris’ disquieting error.*

In the transcript, ‘population’ is crossed out and ‘pollution’ is added in brackets to denote what the VP intended to say.”

*This is gaslighting nonsense; shame on the New York Post for printing it. Transcripts are supposed to reflect what was actually said, not edited later on to say whatever the governing authorities would like them to say.

Keep reading

Maine Dem congresswoman rails against climate change… despite making VERY hypocritical choices in her private life

A Maine congresswoman has shared a video of herself railing against climate change, despite enjoying luxurious, carbon-spewing flights on a private jet. 

Chellie Pingree, 69, shared a video of herself addressing the House of Representatives during a talk on climate change earlier this week. 

In it, the Democrat Maine representative speaks of her worries of what the world will be like for her children and seven grandchildren. 

But after sharing the video to her social media on Wednesday afternoon, Pingree was labelled a ‘hypocrite’ after having previously traveled on a private jet. 

Pingree was caught on camera disembarking the jet of her then husband and hedge fund manager S. Donald Sussman in 2010. 

The Maine Wire replied to Pingree sharing her views on battling climate change with the video, saying: ‘A private jet can emit more CO2 in one hour than the average Mainer’s annual output.’

In her video, Pingree said: ‘I don’t know if you have children or grandchildren, but I worry about what the future will be for my children and my seven grandchildren. 

‘I don’t want them to come to me someday and say, ‘Hey Grandma, what were you doing when we needed to do something about this?.

‘What were you doing when we needed to prevent the climate change that is upon us today? 

‘Were you just sitting there with you eyes closed and pretending it didn’t exist using a bunch of jargon, quoting social media and some memes you saw somewhere. 

‘Or were you talking about scientific fact, and really doing things to invest in our children and grandchildren’s future.’

According to The Washington Examiner, Pingree was caught disembarking the corporate charter jet by the conservative website Maine Watchdog. 

In the footage, Pingree disembarked from the airplane onto a red carpet after the plane touched down at Portland airport in Maine. 

At the time of the incident, Pingree said that criticism of her use of the corporate jet was politically motivated.

Keep reading

The Climate Change Agenda and Rockefellers’ Frontmen

In the climate change arena, the Rockefellers call the shots. The whole thing was their idea, they took a silly but interesting theory and amped it up with hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars. They founded institutions and linked the survival of those institutions to promoting climate change and population reduction. They adopted one likely politician after another.

The Rockefellers have created 990 Climate Change activist organizations. They give them directions, and financing, and launch them into the world. The Green Movement was started, financed, organized, and militarized by the Rockefellers. By the late 40’s the family was all in, on the same page. In the 50s they began to stand up countless institutions, committees, university departments, university institutes, foundations, and policy shops gathered around this one idea, as below.

Keep reading

The earliest mention of man-made global warming is in US government documents relating to weather modification

Peter Kirby is the author of the book ‘Chemtrails Exposed: A New Manhattan Project’.   The book is essentially a compilation of the articles he had been posting on the independent media outlet Activist Post for the previous five or six years. He also has a website which you can find HERE.

In 2016 he joined James Corbett to tackle the two questions most frequently asked by chemtrail sceptics: Would the government do something like this and could they do something like this?

They also discussed CIA Director John Brennan’s 2016 speech at the Council on Foreign Relations calling for stratospheric aerosol injection (“SAI”) and a 2016 study on the health effects of stratospheric aerosols.

The most significant pieces of evidence regarding the question “Would they do something like this” are two books.  “One was written by Dr. Leonard A. Cole called ‘Clouds of Secrecy’ and the other one was written by someone named Andrew Goliszek and that’s called ‘In the Name of Science’,” Kirby said.  “These two books outline hundreds of open-air testing experiments done covertly against the American people over the last 70 years.”

“There’s other evidence of us being sprayed openly and covertly.  As far as ‘would they do it’?  The evidence shows that yeah, they would and they have and they are,” he said.

You can read a synopsis of Cole’s book HERE and a synopsis of Goliszek’s book HERE.

The Manhattan Project, a research and development program undertaken during World War II to produce the first nuclear weapons, gave rise to the New Manhattan Project, which includes using chemicals to electrify our atmosphere.

“The people who put together the first atomic bomb were physicists,” Kirby explained.  “There’s a certain group of scientists who were the most prominent scientists of their time and they developed the original Manhattan Project, they developed the first atomic bombs.  And on into the radiation laboratory at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, they developed also a lot of technology that went into this New Manhattan Project specifically … the electromagnetic aspects of the New Manhattan Project.”

The New Manhattan Project employs electromagnetic energy to manipulate the dispersed particles that are sprayed out of aeroplanes.  In this respect, it differs from conventional weather modification or geoengineering, such as cloud seeding. 

Another distinction between the New Manhattan Project and conventional geoengineering is that conventional weather modification efforts are conducted on a regional basis while the New Manhattan Project is global.  To get a fuller understanding of what the New Manhattan Project is, you can read the history of the New Manhattan Project which Kirby wrote the year before his interview with Corbett HERE.

Kirby said the US Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”) appear to be deeply involved in the New Manhattan Project.  He found a 1965 document from the office of the executive branch under President Lyndon B. Johnson titled ‘Restoring the Quality of Our Environment’.

Keep reading