English vineyards report ‘catastrophic’ damage 04/05/17
English wine crop ruined,” reads headline. Late frosts have caused devastation at British vineyards, warn wine producers.
Temperatures dropped to -6C (21F) over the past week or so, killing off the delicate buds.
As much as 90 percent losses
As a result, makers of fine English sparkling wines fear crop yields will collapse by as much as 80 per cent.
Chris White, the chief executive of Denbies Wine Estate in Surrey, said up to 75% of its crop was damaged by last week’s sub-zero temperatures.
“From what I hear the majority of English vineyards have been affected to some degree,” said White.
Chris Foss, head of the wine department at Plumpton College in East Sussex, said while some crops were unscathed others had been “decimated” with 90% of buds destroyed.
“I’ve been in English wine for 30 years and never seen anything like it,” said Foss. “It looks like there will be a 50% drop in this year’s expected yield – if not higher.”
Nick Wenman, owner of the Albury organic vineyard in Surrey, said the devastating freeze had damaged 80% of its vines. This despite lighting 500 candles and burners to warm the air,
Some of France’s most famous winemaking regions, including Champagne, Bordeaux and Burgundy, were also affected by last week’s severe frosts.
Thanks to Sonya Porter and JH Walker for these links
“Even the UK bastion of Green Socalism, the print cheer leader after the BBC for AGW and human induced Climate Change, the Guardian, reported on this,” says J.H.
Massive Cover-up Exposed: 285 Papers From
1960s-’80s Reveal Robust Global Cooling Scientific
By Kenneth Richard on 13. September 2016
Beginning in 2003, software engineer William Connolley quietly removed the highly inconvenient references to the global cooling scare of the 1970s from Wikipedia, the world’s most influential and accessed informational source.
It had to be done. Too many skeptics were (correctly) pointing out that the scientific “consensus” during the 1960s and 1970s was that the Earth had been cooling for decades, and that nascent theorizing regarding the potential for a CO2-induced global warming were still questionable and uncertain.
Not only did Connolley — a co-founder (along with Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt) of the realclimate.com blog — successfully remove (or rewrite) the history of the 1970s global cooling scare from the Wikipedia record, he also erased (or rewrote) references to the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age so as to help create the impression that the paleoclimate is shaped like Mann’s hockey stick graph, with unprecedented and dangerous 20th/21st century warmth.
A 2009 investigative report from UK’s Telegraph detailed the extent of dictatorial-like powers Connolley possessed at Wikipedia, allowing him to remove inconvenient scientific information that didn’t conform to his point of view.
“All told, Connolley created or rewrote 5,428 unique Wikipedia articles.
His control over Wikipedia was greater still, however, through the role he obtained at Wikipedia as a website administrator, which allowed him to act with virtual impunity. When Connolley didn’t like the subject of a certain article, he removed it — more than 500 articles of various descriptions disappeared at his hand. When he disapproved of the arguments that others were making, he often had them barred — over 2,000 Wikipedia contributors who ran afoul of him found themselves blocked from making further contributions.
Acolytes whose writing conformed to Connolley’s global warming views, in contrast, were rewarded with Wikipedia’s blessings.
In these ways, Connolley turned Wikipedia into the missionary wing of the global warming movement.“
After eviscerating references to 1970s global cooling scare and the warmer-than-now Medieval Warm Period from Wikipedia, and after personally rewriting the Wikipedia commentaries on the greenhouse effect to impute a central, dominant role for CO2, Connolley went on to team up with two other authors to publish a “consensus” manifesto in 2008 that claimed to expose the 1970s global cooling scare as a myth, as something that never really happened.
Peterson, Connolley, and Fleck (2008, hereafter PCF08) published “The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus” in Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, hoping to quash once and for all the perception that there were scientists in the 1960s and 1970s who agreed the Earth was cooling (and may continue to do so), or that CO2 did not play a dominant role in climate change.
The Concoction Of ‘Consensus’ Achieved Via Exclusion
The primary theme of PCF08 can be summarized in 4 succinctly quoted sentences from the paper:
“[T]he following pervasive myth arose [among skeptics]: there was a consensus among climate scientists of the 1970s that either global cooling or a full-fledged ice age was imminent. A review of the climate science literature from 1965 to 1979 shows this myth to be false. … During the period from 1965 through 1979, our literature survey found 7 cooling, 20 neutral, and 44 warming papers. … There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age. Indeed, the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature even then.”
William Connolley and colleagues claimed that the determination of scientific “consensus” regarding global cooling and the influence of CO2 on climate during the 1970s could be divined by counting scientific publications that fell into arbitrarily-defined categories which allowed them to intentionally exclude hundreds of papers that would undermine the alleged myth-slaying purpose of the paper.
The PCF08 authors decided that when “quantifying the consensus” (by counting publications), a scientific paper could only be classified as a “cooling” paper if it projected that future temperatures would (continue to) decline, or that a “full-fledged ice age was imminent.” Papers published during the arbitrarily chosen 1965-’79 era that affirmed the climate had already been cooling for decades, that this cooling wasn’t a positive development, and/or that the effects of CO2 on climate were questionable or superseded by other more influential climate change mechanisms … were not considered worthy of classification as a “cooling” paper, or as a paper that disagreed with the claimed “consensus” that said the current (1960s-’70s) global cooling will someday be replaced by CO2-induced global warming.
Of course, the global cooling scare during the 1970s was not narrowly or exclusively focused upon what the temperatures might look like in the future, or whether or not an ice age was “imminent”. It was primarily about the ongoing cooling that had been taking place for decades, the negative impacts this cooling had already exerted (on extreme weather patterns, on food production, etc.), and uncertainties associated with the causes of climatic changes.
By tendentiously excluding 1960s and 1970s publications that documented global cooling had been ongoing and a concern, as well as purposely excluding papers that suggested the climate’s sensitivity to CO2 forcing is weak or questionable relative to other mechanisms, the authors could brazenly claim that there were only 7 papers published in the scientific literature between 1965 and 1979 that disagreed with the “consensus” opinion that global warming would occur at some point in the future (due to CO2 increases). According to PCF08, there were 44 papers that fell into the latter warming-is-imminent-due-to-CO2 category from 1965-’79, ostensibly entitling them to claim that dangerous anthropogenic global warming projections “dominated” the scientific literature even then.
An 83% Global Cooling/Weak CO2 Influence Scientific ‘Consensus’ During 1960s, ’70s
As will be shown here, the claim that there were only 7 publications from that era disagreeing with the presupposed CO2-warming “consensus” is preposterous. Because when including the papers from the 1960s and 1970s that indicated the globe had cooled (by -0.3° C between the 1940s and ’70s), that this cooling was concerning (leading to extreme weather, drought, depressed crop yields, etc.), and/or that CO2’s climate influence was questionable to negligible, a conservative estimate for the number of scientific publications that did not agree with the alleged CO2-warming “consensus” was 220 papers for the 1965-’79 period, not 7. If including papers published between 1960 and 1989, the “non-consensus” or “cooling” papers reaches 285.
Again, these estimates should be viewed as conservative. There are likely many dozen more scientific papers from the 1960s-’70s cooling scare era that would probably fall into the category of a “cooling” paper, but have not yet been made available to view in full online.
But let us say that the PCF08 claim is true, and that there were indeed only 44 papers published between 1965-’79 that endorsed the position that the Earth’s climate is predominately shaped by CO2 concentrations, and thus the Earth would someday start warming as the models had suggested. Interestingly, if we were to employ the hopelessly flawed methodology of divining the relative degree of scientific “consensus” by counting the number of papers that agree with one position or another (just as blogger John Cook and colleagues did with their 2013 paper “Quantifying the Consensus…” that yielded a predetermined result of 97% via categorical manipulation), the 220 “cooling” papers published between 1965-’79 could represent an 83.3% global cooling consensus for the era (220/264 papers), versus only a 16.7% consensus for anthropogenic global warming (44/264 papers).
The 1970s Global Cooling Scare Was Not Mythological
In reviewing the available scientific literature from the 1960s-’80s, it is plainly evident that there was a great deal of concern about the ongoing global cooling, which had amounted to -0.5°C in the Northern Hemisphere and -0.3°C globally between the 1940s and 1970s.
Of course, this inconvenient global-scale cooling of -0.3°C between the 1940s and 1970s has necessarily been almost completely removed from the instrumental record by NASA (GISS) and the MetOffice (HadCRUT). After all, the observations (of cooling) conflicted with climate modeling. Overseers of the surface temperature datasets (such as the MetOffice’s Phil Jones or NASA’s Gavin Schmidt) have recently adjusted the -0.3°C of cooling down to just hundredths of a degree of cooling. NASA GISS, for example, has reduced (via “adjustments”) the global cooling down to about -0.01°C between the 1940s and 1970s, as shown below. It is likely that, during the next few years of adjustments to past data, the mid-20th century global cooling period will disappear altogether and mutate into a warming period.
For those who actually experienced the non-mythological cooling scare during the 1960s and 1970s (that has since been made to disappear from graphs), the consequences of the -0.5° Northern Hemispheric cooling (especially) were frequently discussed in scientific publications. There were geoengineering strategies proposed by scientists to melt Arctic sea ice. Droughts and floods and extreme weather anomalies/variability were blamed on the ongoing global cooling. Glaciers were advancing, even surging at accelerated rates during this period. Sea ice growth and severe Arctic cooling meant that the oceans were much less navigable. Crop growth and food production slowed as the Earth cooled, which was of great concern to world governments. Severe winters in the 1960s and 1970s led many climatologists to assume that the Earth was returning to an 1800s-like Little Ice Age climate. Observations of mammals migrating to warmer climates during the 1960s and 1970s due to the colder temperatures were reported in scientific papers.
Synonyms for the 1960s-’70s climate cooling conditions commonly used in the literature were words such as deterioration, recession, detrimental, and severe. In contrast, warming periods such as during the warmer Medieval times or the warm-up during the first half of the 20th century were referred to positively, or as optimum (i.e., the Medieval Warm Period was referred to as the “Little Optimum”).
According to Stewart and Glantz (1985), in the early 1970s it was the “prevailing view” among scientists that the Earth was headed into another ice age. It wasn’t until the late ’70s that scientists changed their minds and the “prevailing view” began shifting to warming. This is in direct contradiction to the claims of PCF08, who allege warming was the prevailing view among scientists in the 1960s and early 1970s too. Furthermore, as recently as 1985, it was still acknowledged that “the causes of global climate change remain in dispute.”
“The conclusions of the NDU study might have been predicted from a knowledge of the prevailing ‘spirit of the times’ (i.e., the prevailing mood in the science community) when the first part was conducted. This was an interesting time in recent history of climate studies. One could effectively argue that in the early 1970s the prevailing view was that the earth was moving toward a new ice age. Many articles appeared in the scientific literature as well as in the popular press speculating about the impact on agriculture of a 1-2°C cooling. By the late 1970s that prevailing view had seemingly shifted 180 degrees to the belief that the earth’s atmosphere was being warmed as a result of an increasing CO2 loading of the atmosphere. … The causes of global climate change remain in dispute. Existing theories of climate, atmospheric models, and actuarial experience are inadequate to meet the needs of policymakers for information about future climate.”
According to scientists reporting to the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (1974), 22 of 27 forecasting methods predicted a cooling trend for the next 25 years, and “meteorological experts” were thinking an 1800s climate was around the corner, with the concomitant return to monsoon failures, shorter growing seasons, and “violent weather”.
Potential Implications of Trends in World Population, Food Production, and Climate
“According to Dr. Hubert Lamb–an outstanding British climatologist–22 out of 27 forecasting methods he examined predicted a cooling trend through the remainder of this century. A change of 2°-3° F. in average temperature would have an enormous impact. … A number of meteorological experts are thinking in terms of a return to a climate like that of the 19th century. This would mean that within a relatively few years (probably less than two decades, assuming the cooling trend began in the 1960’s) there would be brought belts of excess and deficit rainfall in the middle-latitudes; more frequent failure of the monsoons that dominate the Indian sub-continent, south China and western Africa; shorter growing seasons for Canada, northern Russia and north China. Europe could expect to be cooler and wetter. … [I]n periods when climate change [cooling] is underway, violent weather — unseasonal frosts, warm spells, large storms, floods, etc.–is thought to be more common.”
The Selective Emphasis On Particular Scientific ‘Facts’ To Advance An Agenda
It is rather ironic that the below quote impugning the motives of “skeptics” by Connolley and his co-authors (PCF08) appeared in a paper that insisted the 1970s concerns about global cooling never really happened from a scientific standpoint, and their “proof” that it never really happened is that they could only manage to locate 7 scientific papers (via selection bias) that supported this “contrarian” view:
“Underlying the selective quotation of the past literature is an example of what political scientist Daniel Sarewitz calls ‘scientization’ of political debate: the selective emphasis on particular scientific ‘facts’ to advance a particular set of political values. In this case, the primary use of the myth is in the context of attempting to undermine public belief in and support for the contemporary scientific consensus about anthropogenic climate change by appeal to a past “consensus” on a closely related topic that is alleged to have been wrong.”
William Connolley may have successfully erased the Medieval Warm Period and 1970s cooling concerns from the pages of Wikipedia. He may have successfully written over 5,400 original Wikipedia articles in an attempt to persuade the public to believe in a dominant role for humans and CO2 in causing climate changes. But the internet has a long and expansive memory, and it is unforgiving when opportunists and activists attempt to dupe the public by concocting false narratives and employing the very same practice of “scientization” they hypocritically claim to deride.
285 Scientific Publications Affirming A Global Cooling/Weak CO2 Influence ‘Consensus’
Again, there were at least 285 scientific publications that did not agree with the alleged CO2-warming “consensus” opinion during the 1960s to 1980s. The list is divided into several sub-sections:
Cooling Since 1940, Forecasts for Continued Cooling/Ice Age (156 papers)
Dubious Human Influence on Climate, Low CO2 Climate Sensitivity (44 papers)
Rising CO2 Leads to Cooling (7)
Uncertainties, Lack of Climate Understanding, Climate Modeling Problems (30)
Miscellaneous Questionable Human, CO2 Influence on Climate (12)
Non-CO2 Climate Change Mechanisms (26)
Warmer past despite lower CO2 (10)
The complete list of 285 Global Cooling/Weak CO2 Influence papers from the 1960s to 1980s can be found using the below links:
For those who may lack the time (or interest) to view the full list of 285, a summarized version of 35 sample papers are listed below. Keep in mind that these 35 sample publications represent less than 1/8th of the total volume of papers published during that era, affirming the position that concerns about global cooling were quite real, widespread, and scientifically-supported.
35 Sample Global Cooling/Low CO2 Climate Influence Papers
“Between 1880 and 1940 a net [global] warming of about 0.6°C occurred, and from 1940 to the present our globe experienced a net cooling of 0.3°C. … [I]t has since been found that the rate of temperature increase decreases with increasing CO2 and increases with increasing particulates. Therefore, global particulate loading is of foremost concern. … [A]n increase in man-made global particulates by a factor of 4.0 will initiate an ice-age. In order that we safeguard ourselves and future generations from a self-imposed ice-age it is necessary that we effectively monitor global concentrations of particulate matter.”
“[T]he 1976 surface temperature equated the global record for the lowest temperature set in 1964; but even so the trend in global temperature since 1965 has been small compared to the 0.5°C decrease during 1960–65.”
“The nine-banded armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus) have been moving northward in the Great Plains region from the late 1800s to the 1950s but now seem to be retreating from their lately acquired northern range. The armadillos have a nontypical homoiothermic blood system which makes them fairly vulnerable to cold climates.”
“The cooling from about 1950 to 1974 is ~0.3°C (Brinkmann, 1976). Moran (1975) suggests that the recent drought of peninsular Florida is largely due to decreased frequencies of tropical storms, associated with the general atmospheric and oceanic cooling since about 1940 (Wahl and Bryson, 1975).”
“Concern about climatic change and its effects on man has been increasing. Climatic changes affect the production of food and the allocation of energy resources. … Even with the temperature corrections included, Indiana June, July and August mean temperatures showed a decrease of approximately 3°F [-1.7°C] from 1930 to 1976.”
“According to the academy report on climate, we may be approaching the end of a major interglacial cycle, with the approach of a full-blown 10,000-year ice age a real possibility.”
“Increased atmospheric carbon dioxide content was concluded to have had an ambiguous climatic influence and may be less important than sometimes considered. Several studies have suggested increased turbidity has produced a recent global cooling trend.”
“[T]he author is convinced that recent increases of atmospheric carbon dioxide have contributed much less than 5% of the recent changes of atmospheric temperature, and will contribute no more than that in the foreseeable future.”
“The 1968 AAAS Symposium on Global Effects of Environmental Pollution initiated a flood of papers supporting monotonically if not exponentially increasing pollution. The particulate increases were usually cited as at least contributing to the post 1940 cooling and possibly capable of bringing on another ice age.”
Introduction: “In the last century it is possible to document an increase of about 0.6°C in the mean global temperature between 1880 and 1940 and a subsequent fall of temperature by about 0.3°C since 1940. In the polar regions north of 70° latitude the decrease in temperature in the past decade alone has been about 1°C, several times larger than the global average decrease. Up till now, past climatic changes (except possibly those of the last few decades [of cooling temperatures]) could hardly have been caused by man’s activities.”
“It is not clear how such favorable and relatively consistent conditions are related to the higher temperatures in this century or the peaking of temperatures around 1940. The reversal of this warming trend, however, could mark the beginning of a new ice age as some climatologists have indicated. It should be noted, though, that even if we are in fact heading for another ice age, many years or decades will elapse before this will become apparent”
“Unlike some other pollutants introduced into the atmosphere by Man, carbon dioxide is naturally occurring and non-toxic. The direct effect of increased concentrations may be beneficial notably because it will tend to increase the rate of photosynthesis in plants. On the other hand, there may be deleterious effects through its influence on climate but this is still unproven and we cannot be certain whether, on a global scale, it will on the whole be harmful or beneficial. … The problem of determining the effect of increased carbon dioxide on climate is difficult, the more so because there are some essential aspects of the physical basis of climate that are not well understood”
“Recent anomalous weather conditions of the 1970s have revealed the possibility that significant aberrations in global climate have and are occurring with serious consequences. The 1970s have seen a generally overall greater variability and instability of global weather. Regions in Asia, Central America, and Africa have witnessed a higher frequency of monsoon failure which has led to a prevalence of severe drought conditions and an extension of desert boundaries. Whereas in other parts of the globe, severe flooding has been recorded. … Records of past climates have indicated that a greater variability of climate is generally synonymous with a major cooling trend in temperatures.”
Conclusions: “The scenario of a CO2-warming globe contains many uncertainties. The warming of the atmosphere is not an established fact, and even if it was there may be no need to invoke increased atmospheric CO2 or other ‘greenhouse’ gases as the cause when such warmings have been a part of our temperature time series historically.”
“Since about 1968/69 the glacier fronts have advanced by up to 158 m following a marked climatic recession [cooling] during the 1960s and early 1970s.”
“A new glacial insolation regime, expected to last 8000 years, began just recently. Mean global temperatures may eventually drop about 1oC in the next hundred years.”
“Between 1000 and 1300 average summer [Arctic] temperatures were about 1°C higher than today, with the mean annual temperature higher by perhaps 4°C in a largely ice-free Arctic. … [B]etween 1900 and 1940, the most striking temperature gains occurring in the Arctic winter… an average rise of more than 8°C keeping her seas ice-free for seven months of the year instead of barely three months less than a century before. … Since about 1958 the reduced heat transport via the warm air sectors of the depressions has permitted an increase in pack-ice off northern and eastern Iceland to a condition comparable with the 1880s, and Polar Bears Thalarctos maritimus have been able to cross from Greenland for the first time for half a century (Marshall 1968). This relapse from warmth continued into the 1970s with one winter, 1962/63, as devastating over the English Midlands and south as anything experienced since 1740 (Manley n.d., Lamb 1966, Booth 1968). People asked, are we on the threshold of another long climatic recession?”
“Instrumental surface temperature records have been compiled for large portions of the globe for about the past 100 years (Mitchell, 1961; Budyko, 1969). They show that the Northern Hemisphere annual mean temperature has risen about 1°C from 1880 to about 1940 and has fallen about 0.5 °C since then … Climate change may be a natural internal feature of the land-oceanic-atmosphere (climate) system. … Three runs were made testing anthropogenic effects of CO2, aerosols and heat. … One could sum the anthropogenic effects for each region, which would show almost no effect in the NH and warming in the SH. … Because the magnitudes of the effects are small, and may cancel, it cannot be concluded that these high correlations show that man has produced climate change.”
“An appreciable number of nonurban stations in the United States and Canada have been identified with statistically significant (at the 90% level) decreasing trends in the monthly mean diurnal temperature range between 1941–80.”
“At the present the imbalance is thought to correspond to a natural cooling of the ocean, which will lead to the next Ice Age.”
“In particular, detection of an anthropogenic influence through statistical analysis alone requires a long run of data of good quality and careful attention to measures of significance. It is most important to avoid the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy that a trend of a few years’ duration or less, following some change in human activities, can be attributed to that change even when no sound physical causal relationship is evident.”
Changes in the amount of multi‐year ice in arctic seas during the current cooling trend
“[T]he southern boundary of old ice was up to 100 miles farther south to the west of the divide, and up to 100 miles farther north to the east. The significance of these changes with regard to navigation conditions is self‐evident.”
“Concern over the vulnerability of a heavily populated world to climatic fluctuations affecting harvests and world food supply has emerged only recently. This concern has been stimulated by anomalous weather patterns beginning with the colder winters in Europe and North America in the 1960s, the Indian monsoon failures and droughts in the Soviet and Chinese grainlands in that decade and since, and the drought which continued for many years in Africa and brought chaos to the Sahel and Ethiopia. But, despite the computer revolution in meteorology, no generally accepted theory of climatic change to inform the future exists at this time.”
“[T]he measured increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, according to the most recent computations, would not be enough to have any measurable climatic effect.”
SPECIFIC SCHEMES FOR CLIMATE MODIFICATION
Ice Free Arctic Ocean The largest scale enterprise that has been discussed is that of transforming the Arctic into an ice free ocean.
Bering Strait Dam The basic idea is to increase the inflow of warm Atlantic water by stopping or oven reversing the present northward flow of colder water through Bering Strait.
Deflecting the Kuroshio Current It has been proposed that the narrow mouth of Tatarsk Strait be blocked by a giant “water valve” to increase the warm inflow to the Sea of Okhotsk and reduce the winter ice there.
“Evidence derived from the carefully screened temperature record at Eau Claire, Mich., and from radiosonde data at [A] return to the temperature and circulation features of the early and mid-19th century in the eastern United States may be underway. … All 3 mo[nths] show temperature declines since the height of the recent climatic optimum during the 1930s. July temperatures have decreased about 3.5°F since the decades beginning with the early 1930s, and August temperatures have decreased about 3°F since the decades beginning with the late 1930s and early 1940s.”
Global Ecology: Readings toward a rational strategy for man [pgs. 76,77]
“A final push in the cooling direction comes from man-made changes in the direct reflectivity of the earth’s surface (albedo) through urbanization, deforestation, and the enlargement of deserts. The effects of a new ice age on agriculture and the supportability of large human populations scarcely need elaboration here. Even more dramatic results are possible, however; for instance, a sudden outward slumping in the Antarctic ice cap, induced by added weight, could generate a tidal wave of proportions unprecedented in recorded history.”
“The large-scale circulation of the atmosphere during the current decade has produced patterns that had never been seen earlier in this century, but which seem to represent a recurrence of a regime that prevailed over long periods before 1895. … On this evidence, something like the climatic regime of the years since 1960 should probably be expected to persist till the end of the century or beyond”
“Estimates of the atmospheric temperature changes due to a doubling of CO2 concentration have be with a standard radiative flux model. They yield temperature changes of >0.25 K. It appears that the much larger changes predicted by other models arise from additional water vapor evaporated into the atmosphere and not from the CO2 itself. … It is important to stress…that CO2 is not the main constituent involved in infrared transfer. Water vapor plays the major role and ozone is also of importance.”
“In the period from 1880 to 1940, the mean temperature of the earth increased about 0.6°C; from 1940 to 1970, it decreased by 0.3-0.4°C. Locally, temperature changes as large as 3-4°C per decade have been recorded, especially in sub-polar regions. … The drop in the earth’s temperature since 1940 has been paralleled by a substantial increase in natural volcanism. The effect of such volcanic activity is probably greater than the effect of manmade pollutants.”
“In 1970, Mitchell stated that by the late 1960s global temperatures had fallen 0.3°C from the peak in the 1940s, approximately one-half of the prior rise. … Summaries by Schneider and Dickenson, Kalnicky, Robuck, Roberts, and Agee all report Northern Hemisphere temperatures declines by at least 0.5°C since the 1940s. In summary, Gribbin states ‘In worldwide terms, we are in a situation where the earth is cooling more quickly than it warmed up earlier this century.’ From the above it is clear that the general consensus in the recent literature is that there has been a cooling in the Northern Hemisphere since the early 1940s.”
On the question of carbon dioxide heat radiation in the atmosphere
“The dependence of atmospheric heat radiation on CO2 and H2O contents and also on temperature vertical distribution is investigated with the help of the radiation chart. It is shown that the heat radiation of the atmosphere almost doesn’t depend on variations of carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere.”
“The climatic ‘improvement’ of the late 1930’s had, as was expected, given way to a colder trend in the 1950’s and 1960’s … Dunbar (1976, p. 190) writes that he finds it “difficult to believe that either Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, water vapour, freon, or any other substance produced by man’s efforts is going to compete seriously with Nature in changing our climate”. … Heino’s diagrams illustrate the exceptional nature of the climatic improvement experienced in the 1930’s, but they also show clearly the slow deterioration which set in in the 1950’s. The 1960’s constituted climatically a rather unfavourable decade from man’s point of view”
“Lamb (1966) had already suggested that it appears likely that we have passed the height of the warming episode in the first half of this century and are now reverting to a pattern characterized by lower zonal flow and intensification of the trough/ridge systems, essentially a reestablishment of the climatic character of the last century.”
FIFTY ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS OF TIMELY IMPORTANCE
WEATHER MODIFICATION BY CHANGING CO2 CONTENT OF ATMOSPHERE [p. 48]
Item: American Scientist, January-February 1970, p. 18, “‘Though dire effects on climate of an increase in CO2 have been predicted, they are far from being established. The cycle is not really understood; carbon dioxide may well prove to be the least objectionable or the only beneficial addition to the atmosphere from industrial sources'”
Global warming is cyclical, and the government KNOWS it
Any claims to the contrary are just BS
By Ray Kraft
Whatever the cause(s), if you Google “EPA Causes of Climate Change” you will find a good chart illustrating 11 larger and smaller cycles of global warming and cooling over the last 800,000 years.
Yes, that’s EPA as in Environmental Protection Agency, United States Government.
Any claim by any government agency that the government doesn’t know that the climate has been cyclically warming and cooling for hundreds of thousands, or tens of millions, of years, is just BS.
Note: I did as Mr Kraft suggested and Googled “EPA Causes of Climate Change.” I found an article on the EPA website with that title here.
And here’s the graph showing the 11 cycles that Kraft refers to:
Notice that one of those cyclic events (the Eemian Period) was even warmer than today .
The Eemian Period began around 128,000 years ago, lasted about as long as our present interglacial, and then ended – abruptly – as our planet descended into an ice age.
I fear that the same scenario – a rapid descent into an ice age – is about to repeat itself.
EVERYTHING IS RIGGED
After witnessing how Reuters just blatantly cooked the presidential election polls this week to favor Clinton and how the mainstream media is so terrifyingly biased in favor of Clinton that the very foundation of democracy is now in crisis, it’s time to tell you something that perhaps a lot more people are finally ready to hear:
Every institution in America is sold out, corrupted and politically rigged to favor Big Government and Big Business. “America is a lost country,” explains Paul Craig Roberts.
"The total corruption of every public and the private institution is complete. Nothing remains but tyranny. And lies. Endless lies.”
CNN, Reuters and the Associated Press are all now shameless promoters of every big lie across every sector of society, from vaccines and GMOs to elections and politics.
The federal government itself is incapable of doing anything other than lying, and it has totally corrupted the entire realm of science by pulling the strings of funding via the National Institutes of Health and the NSF.
The FDA is entirely corrupt, as is the USDA. Both function now as little more than marketing propaganda pushers for Big Pharma and Big Biotech. Similarly, Google, Facebook and Twitter are all rigged, too, censoring the voices they don’t want anyone to hear while highlighting the establishment lies they wish to promote.
Here’s what “rigged” really means… the tools of tyranny
When I say “everything is rigged,” what does that mean, exactly?
• All “official sources” are ordered to constantly lie about everything, weaving illusions to push a chosen narrative rooted in fiction (from “there are no Islamic terrorists” to “carbon dioxide is poison to the planet”).
• All voices of reason and sanity are silenced. Only the most insane, irrational voices are allowed to be magnified through any media (including social media). This is also true across the sciences, where real science has been all but snuffed out by political agendas (biosludge, GMOs, glyphosate, mercury in dentistry, etc.).
• All facts are obliterated by propaganda. Facts have no place in any debate, and those who invoke facts are shamed and silenced (or even fired from their jobs, expelled from their schools or bullied into a state of suicide on social media). Anyone who invokes facts on things like the actual statistics of police shootings is told they are “part of the problem” because they have the “wrong attitude” about social justice.
• Every branch of government is weaponized against the people and used as an assault tool against political enemies who threaten the status quo. (IRS, FDA, FTC, DEA, EPA, USDA, etc.)
• All science is distorted into absurd, politically-motivated conclusions about everything the government wants to use to control the masses: Vaccines, climate change, GMOs, fluoride, flu shots, chemical agriculture, carbon dioxide and so on.
• Every branch of medicine is hijacked by globalist agendas to make sure medicine never makes anyone healthier, more alert or more cognitively capable of thinking for themselves.
• Every “news item” that’s reported from any official source is deliberately distorted to the point of insanity, turning many facts on their heads while attacking anyone who might offer something truly constructive to the world. (Such as reporting that Clinton was “cleared” by the FBI when, in fact, she was indicted by the very facts the FBI presented!)
• All voices of truth are silenced, then replaced by meaningless, distracting babble (Kardashians) or meaningless, tribal sports competitions (the Rio Olympics). The point is to dumb down the entire population to the point of cultural lunacy.
• Any true reports that contradict any official narrative are immediately censored. For example, radio host Michael Savage just got blocked by Facebook for posting a true story about an illegal alien who committed murder in America.
• Emotions are used as weapons to manipulate the masses. For example, when the mom of a Benghazi victim shares her grief with the world, she is ridiculed and shamed. But when a radical Muslim father who’s trying to bring Sharia Law to America attacks Trump by expressing his loss of his soldier son, the media turns him into an instant celebrity, praising his “courageous voice” for daring to speak out. The media hypocrisy is enough to make you vomit…
What exactly is rigged?
• The entire mainstream media
• Google search engine and Google News
• Facebook and Twitter
• The DNC and the RNC (both 100% rigged by globalists)
• Every federal agency (EPA, FDA, etc.)
• The entire justice system (makes a total farce of real justice)
• Interest rates and the value of the money supply (central banksters)
• Academia (all public universities)
• EPA’s “safe” limits on pesticides (all rigged by Big Biotech)
• Food and food labeling (all run by corrupt food companies)
• Public education (rigged into Common Core anti-knowledge idiocy)
• Banking and finance (all controlled by globalists)
• Government economics figures and statistics
• Medicine and pharmaceuticals (rigged to maximize profits)
• Big Science (totally rigged by government agenda pushers)
• The music industry (most top singers can’t sing at all)
• Weapons manufacturers and war corporations
• The illegal drug trade (it’s run by the government)
• Political elections (all 100% rigged at the federal level)
• Political polls (now rigged by Reuters, too)
• The health insurance industry (rigged by Obamacare)
• College admissions (legally discriminates against Whites and Asians)
• 9/11 and domestic terrorism (all rigged “official stories”)
• Oil and energy industries
• The rule of law (rigged in favor of the rich and powerful)
• Infectious disease and the CDC (a constant stream of lies)
• Hollywood (all run by globalists)
• Climate change science (all a grand science hoax)
• Press release services (they only allow official narratives)
• History (what you are taught is mostly a lie)
• Government grants (only given out to those who further the agenda)
• Government bids (only awarded to those who kick back funds to corrupt officials)
• Consciousness and free will (we are all taught consciousness doesn’t exist)
• Ethnobotany (medicinal and spiritual use of healing plants)
• Life on other planets (the obvious truth is kept from us all)
• The origin of the universe (the official narrative is a laughable fairy tale)
As a fantastic example of how everything is rigged, consider these paragraphs from this Breitbart.com news story published today:
Over the weekend and for the past few days since Khan spoke alongside his wife Ghazala Khan about their son, U.S. Army Captain Humayun Khan, who was killed in Iraq in 2004, media-wide reporters, editors, producers, and anchors have tried to lay criticism on Trump over the matter. They thought they had a good one, a specific line of attack that pitted Trump against the military—and supposedly showed him as a big meanie racist in the process.
But, as Breitbart News showed on Monday midday, that clearly was not the case. Khizr Khan has all sorts of financial, legal, and political connections to the Clintons through his old law firm, the mega-D.C. firm Hogan Lovells LLP. That firm did Hillary Clinton’s taxes for years, starting when Khan still worked there involved in, according to his own website, matters “firm wide”—back in 2004. It also has represented, for years, the government of Saudi Arabia in the United States. Saudi Arabia, of course, is a Clinton Foundation donor which—along with the mega-bundlers of thousands upon thousands in political donations to both of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2016—plays right into the “Clinton Cash” narrative.
America’s transformation into Communist China is nearly complete
If you’re pondering where all this is headed, look no further than Communist China, where all independent news has been outlawed by the state. Political prisoners across China have their organs harvested to enrich black market organ traders, and nearly one out of every three urban citizens is a secret spy who snitches on friends for the totalitarian communist government.
Hillary Clinton is the embodiment of Communist Chinese totalitarianism. She’s such a perfect fit for their disastrous model of human rights abuses, government corruption and systemic criminality that I’m surprised she doesn’t live in Beijing. If Clinton gets elected, America is gone forever, replaced by a criminal regime of totalitarians who violate the RICO Act as a matter of policy.
If this entire rigged system of biased media, Facebook censorship, Google search result manipulations and twisted science ends up putting America’s most terrifying political criminal into the White House, it’s lights out for the American we once knew. Almost immediately, the nation fractures into near Civil War, with calls for secession growing unstoppable as state after state seeks to escape the political wrath of an insane regime of D.C. criminals and tyrants. #TEXIT
We now live in two Americas: Half the country is tired of everything being rigged, and the other half can’t wait to be exploited by yet another crooked leftist LIAR who rigs everything
America is now essentially two nations. On one hand, we have the pro-Trump America, filled with people who are tired of being cheated, censored, punished, stolen from and lied to about everything under the sun. Donald Trump supporters are people who realize everything is rigged… and they’re demanding an end to the corruption and criminality of the fascist system under which we all suffer today.
Hillary Clinton supporters are people who are too busy chasing political rainbows to realize everything is rigged. They still believe the lies and the propaganda (the “hope and change” that never came, but is still promised by empty politicians). They’re living in fairy tale delusional worlds that have been woven into their gullible minds by the skillful social engineers of the radical left. These people still think the government cares about them… or that CNN only reports truthful news. They can’t wait to see another globalist in the White House because they are pathetic, weak-minded empty shells of non-consciousness who are wholly incapable of thinking for themselves.
These two camps of Americans can no longer coexist. They have almost nothing in common when it comes to knowledge, wisdom, ethics, morals or philosophy. One camp believes in the rule of law (Trump); the other camp believes that people in power should be above the law (Clinton). One camp believes in states’ rights and individual liberty (Trump) while the other camp believes in the consolidation of totalitarian power in the hands of a centralized, domineering government (Clinton). One camp believes in a level playing field, free market competition and rewarding innovation and hard work (Trump), while the other camp believes in free handouts, government “equality” mandates, and the ludicrous idea that “there should be no winners or losers in society.” (Clinton)
In other to try to win this election, the Clinton camp has already rigged EVERYTHING from the very start, including the coronation of Hillary, the scheduling of televised debates to minimize their viewership, the surrender of Bernie Sanders to the DNC machine, the mass organization of illegal voting schemes to make sure illegal aliens vote in November, and so much more. No doubt they’re also working extremely hard to rig the black box voting machines all across the country.
If you’re tired of everything being rigged, this November vote against the rigged system by voting for Donald Trump. This is truly your last chance to save America from being overthrown by a totalitarian regime of criminals who will crush every last iota of freedom and liberty in America.
The Stench of Raw Propaganda
By Paul Craig Roberts
The Stench of Raw Propaganda
Paul Craig Roberts
I just heard the rawest kind of propaganda from former presstitute David Satter, who hangs out at the right-wing Hudson Institute and pretends to be an expert on Russia and Putin. On August 10 Satter told NPR’s audience that Washington’s hope to bring peace to Syria would fail unless Washington understood that the Russian government had no humanitarian feelings and did not care about the loss of human life. What Washington needs to do, said Satter, was to make sure that Putin and his henchmen understood that they would be held accountable as war criminals.
I should be hardened by now, but it never fails to astonish me that agents for the elite are willing to tell the most blatant and transparant lies. Perhaps this is because they know that the media and their fellow bought-and-paid-for “experts” will not challenge them on their statements. In fact, this is the way explanations are controlled and history rewritten.
Perhaps everyone has already forgotten that when Washington’s plan to invade Syria was blocked by the UK Parliament and Russian diplomacy, Washington sent the forces used against Gaddafi in Libya to overthrow Assad in Syria where they emerged as ISIS and commit extraordinary atrocities.
As ISIS was serving Washington’s purpose, Washington took no action against them. After a couple of years of death and destruction suffered by Syrians, the Russian government lost its patience and backed the Syrian Army with air power. Soon ISIS was defeated and on the run.
Washington was caught in a bind. In Iraq Washington was fighting ISIS, because ISIS was overthrowing Washington’s puppet in Iraq. However, in Syria Washington was supporting ISIS, often characterizing ISIS as “moderates” fighting to bring democracy to Syria. Now that ISIS is on the verge of total defeat in Syria, Washington’s whores among the “experts” want Russia punished for blocking Washington’s overthrow of Syria.
In the 21st century the numerous war crimes are all accounted for by the US and Israel. These crimes were enabled by the EU which provided cover for the official lies, such as Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and Iranian nukes, that were used by Washington for its unprovoked aggressions that have destroyed in whole or part seven countries.
Real experts have integrity, and these experts want the Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes tried for their war crimes. I think David Satter should be in the dock with them.
It doesn't matter what your persuasion, where you get your information, the left or the right, the east or the west, which only places the blame. The current state of world affairs is unsustainable and the President of Russia has decided to take action and do something about it. This is no conspiracy theory - this is reality staring us in the face. The scriptures tell us, we do not need to fear – but we do need to awake from sleep. If you have your head buried in the sands of this world’s pleasures and entertainments or too caught up in the affairs of this life, pursuing a successful career or education it's very likely you're not in touch with reality. Some believe Putin is the Antichrist, I do not. Some believe Obama is the Antichrist, I do not. But it does appear we are about to see what roles these two individuals, and their nations, play in the history of our world.
This video breaks down the latest propaganda and gives you a real look at what's happening between Putin and Obama's fight over Syria.
Vladimir Putin Addresses U.N. General Assembly on Syria
US Senator John McCain: Arm Syrian Rebels to shoot down Russian planes!
McCain reacted to Russia’s announcement that it had begun launching air strikes targeting ISIS militants in Syria by calling on the White House to arm Syrian rebels with weapons to shoot down Russian planes.
Al-Nusra, Syrian branch of Al-Qaeda, became "anti-Assad opposition moderate rebels"
October 2, 2015
By Paul Craig Roberts
Washington's Time is Up: Russia Should Lead the World, Not the US
Having brought chaos, lawlessness and terrorism into Libya and Iraq, the United States is now trying to do the same in Syria. Europe has become fed up with Washington’s wrongdoings and says Russia should become a new world leader, Czech journalist Jiri Vyvadil wrote for newspaper Parlamentnilisty.cz.
The White House wants the Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad gone and will do whatever it takes to achieve its objective — even arm Islamic militants to fight against government troops, creating a civil war that resulted in millions of people fleeing the country to save their lives.
The author argued that Russian President Vladimir Putin, unlike his US colleague, has shown that he cares about problems in the Middle East and most importantly he understands that the refugee crisis in Europe and the rise of ISIL are tightly interconnected, and that's the only way to solve these problems is to support the legitimately elected government of al-Assad and his national army. Putin has also shown that he can talk with Israel and take into account the interests of Iranian and Iraqi leaders.
By Eric Zuesse, October 03 2015
Obama Cannot Defeat Assad without EU’s Help. EU Also Rejects Obama’s TTIP& TISA Demands. Obama’s Presidential ‘Legacy’ Heads to Failure.
The Anti-Russian Lying Machine in Action
By Stephen Lendman, October 02 2015
It never rests, now in high gear following Russia’s announced aerial campaign against ISIS in Syria, beginning on September 30. For the first time since WW II, Russian and US warplanes are bombing the same country – each for entirely different reasons.