finaly, the fan and excrement meet......

[Stretch]

[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]THE CLIMATE ‘CONSENSUS’… [/FONT]

[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]… THE NEW INQUISITION[/FONT]​

[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]The David Icke Newsletter Goes Out On Sunday[/FONT]

​

Much of the mainstream media has looked the other way since the ‘climategate’ scandal broke. The widespread censorship was revealed by the respected British TV news anchor, Peter Sissons, who left the BBC over the way its ‘news’ operation was being run.

Sissons said that he was one of only a tiny number of BBC interviewers who had so much as raised the possibility that there was another side to the debate on climate change. He said the BBC’s most famous ‘interrogators’ invariably begin by accepting ‘the science is settled’ when, as he points out, there are countless reputable scientists that say it isn’t. He wrote in the London Mail on Sunday:

‘… it is effectively BBC policy, enthusiastically carried out by the BBC environment correspondents, that those views should not be heard – witness the BBC statement last year that “BBC News currently takes the view that their reporting needs to be calibrated to take into account the scientific consensus that global warming is man-made”.’

There is no scientific consensus, only the manufactured appearance of one thanks to the disgraceful excuses-for-journalists at the BBC and across the global media who refuse to give voice to the tens of thousands of scientists who say the official story is a scientific absurdity.

Sissons recalls an extraordinary interview that he conducted with the leader of the UK Green Party, Caroline Lucas, a woman with serious ‘climate change’ myopia and a religious zealotry to make everyone conform to her misguided views.

Sissons said he pointed out to Lucas that the climate did not seem to be ‘playing ball’ with her claims about rising temperatures caused by carbon dioxide. He put to her that there had been no warming for ten years, contradicting all the alarming computer predictions.

Lucas was outraged, he said, and told him it was disgraceful that the BBC should be giving any kind of publicity to ‘those sorts of views’. This is a lady who heads a party that claims to stand for freedom of speech and information, but the mind-made advocates of the Climate Cult are like the most extreme of religious fanatics who say it is blasphemy to challenge their religion in any way.
​

​

[SIZE=+0][SIZE=+0][SIZE=+0][SIZE=+0][SIZE=+0][SIZE=+0][SIZE=+0][SIZE=+0]TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE DAVID ICKE NEWSLETTER, GET IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO HIS FANTASTIC NEWSLETTER LIBRARY ON A HOST OF SUBJECTS GOING BACK TO 2005, AND SEE HOURS OF VIDEO FOOTAGE OF DAVID'S INFORMATION, PLEASE CLICK HERE ...[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE] [/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]​

 

[Stretch]

Take back Al Gore's Oscar, 2 Academy members demand in light of Climategate
Tags: ENTERTAINMENT
No, it wouldn't do anything for the environment.
But two Hollywood conservatives (yes, there are some) have called upon the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to rescind the prestigious, profitable gold Oscar statuette that it gave ex-Vice President Al Gore et al two years ago for the environmental movie "An Inconvenient Truth."
Roger L. Simon and Lionel Chetwynd, both Academy members, are among a small, meandering pack of known political conservatives still believed to be on the loose in the liberal bastion of movie-making.

Webmaster's Commentary:
"Oh no, they aren't after Al Gore'e Oscar because his film was full of lies; they only want his statue returned because they are (shudder) conservatives!!!!!!!!!"
Take back Al Gore's Oscar, 2 Academy members demand in light of Climategate | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times

 

[Stretch]

Flashback: From Their Own Mouths: Global Warming is a Fraud

By: malterwitty
Tags:COVER-UP/DECEPTIONS/PROPAGANDA SCIENCE/HEALTH/CLIMATE/NATURE

"We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public's imagination... So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts... Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest." - Stephen Schneider, Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports
"Unless we announce disasters no one will listen." - Sir John Houghton, first chairman of IPCC

informationliberation - From Their Own Mouths: Global Warming is a Fraud

 

[AnnaG]

How people get "fraud" out of "exaggeration" is beyond me.

 

[Dixie Cup]

I was watching a newscast the other day and they stated that there was no evidence of "hacking" and that it seems that these e-mails were "leaked". Anyone else hear anything more?

 

[Stretch]

How people get "fraud" out of "exaggeration" is beyond me.

if one makes a cent from an exaggeration....wouldnt that be classed as fraud?

 

[cdn_reality]

I was watching a newscast the other day and they stated that there was no evidence of "hacking" and that it seems that these e-mails were "leaked". Anyone else hear anything more?

Yes it is being considered that these are leaked emails from within, someone or a group must have gotten tired of being ignored by the media about what was going on.

 

[cdn_reality]

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
- Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme

“A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States. De-development means bringing our
economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation.”
- Paul Ehrlich, Professor of Population Studies

“The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.”
- Michael Oppenheimer, Environmental Defense Fund

“Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.”
- Professor Maurice King

 

[AnnaG]

if one makes a cent from an exaggeration....wouldnt that be classed as fraud?

It depends upon whether the exaggeration was known or not. CRU is not the only source for climate data and the data from those other sources pretty much supports the data from the CRU, so it looks to me like the denier hackers have disinformed the public about what is actually in the emails and taken a few comments out of context. There's not much newsworthy here except the big flap itself.

 

[darkbeaver]

Saturday, December 5, 2009

Proof the Copenhagen Climate Conference is a Fraud ... Hemp is 'off the table'

​

No matter where you stand on the issue of 'climate change,' a sure sign that the Copenhagen conference is not really interested in solutions but only in the extortion of money and global control is that hemp is not 'on the table.'

Ever hear Al Gore say a word on the benefit of planting massive amounts of hemp as a carbon capture plant and its many uses that could replace thousands of polluting products and create hundreds of thousands of 'green' jobs.

Nope, you haven't and you never will. It would make too much sense. The frauds want a centralized mechanism where only a few benefit and the rest of the world would be under their thumb.

We should say no to false science, CO2 demonetization, cap and trade, carbon credits, the UN, bankers, big oil and corporate thieves and yes to hemp, small farmers and the new entrepreneurs who actually have some answers for a better world. Easier said than done but we can get there.



Silence at Copenhagen ...

Hemp Global Solutions

Our basic premise is that hemp is far more productive than typical agro-forestry projects, producing annual, versatile biomass alongside more rapid CO2 uptake. It can produce a vast range of sustainable raw materials with an overall low environmental impact, as well as improving soil structure, using low fertiliser and no other chemical inputs (i.e. reduced agrochemical residues).

Hemp can be grown on existing agricultural land (unlike most forestry projects), and can be included as part of a farm's crop rotation with positive effects on overall yields of follow on crops. This, along with super versatility in diverse soil conditions and climates, makes hemp cultivation a viable and genuine potential.

The vast quantities of hemp derived products and raw materials created by large scale cultivation could replace many oil-based unsustainable products and materials, particularly in construction, locking in captured CO2 and creating secondary benefits to the global environment. In particular, hemp could be used to replace significant quantities of tree-derived products, allowing reduced use of existing tree populations, thus maintaining their CO2 uptake.

Hemp also produces much higher quantities of stronger and more versatile fibre than cotton, and many other fibre crops, which often have very high chemical residue and water footprints. Extra processing required by hemp is also at least partially offset by its recycling potential. {more}
​

Jack Herer has a $100,000 Challenge to Prove Us Wrong!

If all fossil fuels and their derivatives, as well as trees for paper and construction, were banned in order to save the planet, reverse the Greenhouse Effect and stop deforestation;

then there is only one known annually renewable natural resource that is capable of providing the overall majority of the world's paper and textiles; meet all of the world's transportation, industrial and home energy needs, while simultaneously reducing pollution, rebuilding the soil and cleaning the atmosphere all at the same time...​

and that substance is the same one that has done it before . . .

CANNABIS HEMP!

​

Houses made of hemp coud help combat climate change!

Hemp and Lots of It, Could Be One Climate Solution

Hemp Is Not Pot: It's the Economic Stimulus and Green Jobs Solution We Need

Hemp: A New Crop with New Uses for North America


While on the subject, let's just legalize marijuana in every form. It's time for the 'war on drugs' scam to end.

Posted by kenny's sideshow at 4:07 PM https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3918678440524150306&postID=4448956052364836409&isPopup=true

 

[darkbeaver]

It depends upon whether the exaggeration was known or not. CRU is not the only source for climate data and the data from those other sources pretty much supports the data from the CRU, so it looks to me like the denier hackers have disinformed the public about what is actually in the emails and taken a few comments out of context. There's not much newsworthy here except the big flap itself.

Denier? Like a heretic eh Anna G. Lets get our religion and our science straight. The vast majority of monkey men don't know climate change from cheezeburgers but a human solution to the natural crisis offers bountiful affordable market bourne hope for those who lean on faith in Mammon I guess. Why not just pump up their meds?:lol: How's the global market going to adjust the sun? bring on the beer and joints

 

[AnnaG]

Saturday, December 5, 2009

Proof the Copenhagen Climate Conference is a Fraud ... Hemp is 'off the table'

​

No matter where you stand on the issue of 'climate change,' a sure sign that the Copenhagen conference is not really interested in solutions but only in the extortion of money and global control is that hemp is not 'on the table.'

Ever hear Al Gore say a word on the benefit of planting massive amounts of hemp as a carbon capture plant and its many uses that could replace thousands of polluting products and create hundreds of thousands of 'green' jobs.

roflmao So your criteria for whether something is a fraud or not is whether it supports growing pot or not? aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhahahahhahahahhahahhahahahahhahhahahh

 

[AnnaG]

Denier? Like a heretic eh Anna G.

Sorry, but no. The globe is warming. Get used to it. If people deny it, they are either ignorant of the data, ignoring the data because of their personal opinion, or both.

Lets get our religion and our science straight.

You go ahead. I'll stick with the data and you can have your religion.

The vast majority of monkey men don't know climate change from cheezeburgers

Yourself included?

but a human solution to the natural crisis offers bountiful affordable market bourne hope for those who lean on faith in Mammon I guess. Why not just pump up their meds?:lol: How's the global market going to adjust the sun? bring on the beer and joints

*shrugs* I look at it this way, people are prone to leave things at status quo. Learning to be responsible for what we do to the planet is pretty cool. If some people make a profit from people being cleaner, I don't care. It's better than people making a profit from being dirty. Stay away from my property, Beav.

 

[darkbeaver]

Sorry, but no. The globe is warming. Get used to it. If people deny it, they are either ignorant of the data, ignoring the data because of their personal opinion, or both.You go ahead. I'll stick with the data and you can have your religion. Yourself included?*shrugs* I look at it this way, people are prone to leave things at status quo. Learning to be responsible for what we do to the planet is pretty cool. If some people make a profit from people being cleaner, I don't care. It's better than people making a profit from being dirty. Stay away from my property, Beav.

Your faith in the data is the innocence of a lamb of god itself. No doubt you read the scripture of St Gore and St Suzuki before praying every night that the great warm god keeps the good stewards of the IPCC safe and sound so that we might direct great wealth toward saving the old ball. We can only be saved if we can be saved at all by the titanic purging of our useless upper crust and the wannabe legions of the dense middle class pretenders. The planet dosen't give a **** eh. You don't have any property, you just occupy some space till you don't.:lol:

 

[AnnaG]

Your faith in the data is the innocence of a lamb of god itself.

Sorry, faith has nothing to do with it.

No doubt you read the scripture of St Gore and St Suzuki before praying every night that the great warm god keeps the good stewards of the IPCC safe and sound so that we might direct great wealth toward saving the old ball.

Well, your doubts are misplaced. I don't even watch The Nature Of Things and I haven't watched Gore's movie. I have a decided lack of interest in them.

We can only be saved if we can be saved at all by the titanic purging of our useless upper crust and the wannabe legions of the dense middle class pretenders. The planet dosen't give a **** eh. You don't have any property, you just occupy some space till you don't.:lol:

lolTrue, but you can dirty up your own neck of the woods, not the space I'm occupying.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
- Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme

So sayeth the former president of Power Corporation of Canada, (founded by king/PM maker and father-in-law of Jean Chretien's daughter, France, Paul Desmarias). Mr Strong, who helped orchestrate Paul Martin's leveraged buy out of Canda Steamship Lines. Don't worry, he's still orchestrating ways to make himself and his buddies even richer and more poweful, at anyone else's expense. The UN is chock full of despots and tyrants who use religious adherance to the most popular "ism" at the time to enrich and empower themselves, and environmentalism is just another one.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Sorry, but no. The globe is warming. Get used to it. If people deny it, they are either ignorant of the data, ignoring the data because of their personal opinion, or both.

Well, there is data that suggests otherwise, it is also being ignored. Once science, or any type investigative process becomes tainted with with advocacy or emotion, it is time to become skeptical. That is expecially true when it is defended with religious ferver and anyone espousing a opposing view, or even healthy skepticism, is branded a heretic.

 

[TenPenny]

Sorry, but no. The globe is warming. Get used to it. If people deny it, they are either ignorant of the data, ignoring the data because of their personal opinion, or both.

The data isn't as conclusive as you seem to think. But you go ahead.

Me, personally, I think that there is no way that we are not affecting the climate with our activity. But I think too many of the projections (and they are projections) of future global warming are based on data massaged to achieve the projections that the author wants. It's very much an inexact science, and anyone who disputes anything is immediate branded as a heretic, which makes me even more suspicious.

Real scientists expect proper debate, challenges, and scientific arguments.

 

[AnnaG]

Well, there is data that suggests otherwise, it is also being ignored.

Is it? There are only a few sources for climactic data. Which ones produce conflicting data?

Once science, or any type investigative process becomes tainted with with advocacy or emotion, it is time to become skeptical. That is expecially true when it is defended with religious ferver and anyone espousing a opposing view, or even healthy skepticism, is branded a heretic.

Sure. But when people become sceptics just because they are too lazy or indifferent to change their habits, it's ridiculous.
The data says what the data says. Earth is warming. Show me data that shows otherwise.

 

[AnnaG]

The data isn't as conclusive as you seem to think. But you go ahead.

Temperatures fluctuate. ALL the data I have seen so far indicates a general rise in temperature both at the surface and below. Show me some that doesn't indicate this trend, please.

Me, personally, I think that there is no way that we are not affecting the climate with our activity.

Me, too. Because we already changed the ozone layer and it does have something to do with climate.

But I think too many of the projections (and they are projections) of future global warming are based on data massaged to achieve the projections that the author wants.

The CRU seems to be the only one that's done any "massaging". There are other sources around.

It's very much an inexact science,

I like to think we are getting better at this inexact new science, though.

and anyone who disputes anything is immediate branded as a heretic, which makes me even more suspicious.

That happens on both sides, and sometimes for good reason.

Real scientists expect proper debate, challenges, and scientific arguments.

I think most scientists tend to research stuff and report findings, and occasionally pop up with hypotheses that either flop or fallow through. Debating is for politicians. Scientists produce data and reports to do their talking for them. Sometimes they let loose an opinion or two.