Climate change demonstrations

[xmasdale]

8th September is the Global Day of Action for climate change with in the UK demonstrations in London, Glasgow and Belfast. Details are here: http://www.campaigncc.org/

Given that this is a controversial issue among 9/11 Truth campaigners with some accepting the current received wisdom that climate change is happening and is man-made due mainly to the burning of fossil fuels while others maintain it is not man-made (or even that it is not happening) but a scam promoted by the powers that be in order to maintain and advance their own power, I believe individuals should respond to this day of action as they feel fit. At the very least it is an opportunity to talk to the demonstrating crowds about 9/11 and to distribute material.

Those who maintain climate change is a scam have the opportunity to put their arguments on this thread. I personally cannot argue that it is a scam because I have not seen enough evidence to convince me.

If it is a scam:

Is peak oil theory also a part of the same scam?
What is the evidence?
What does the petroleum industry stand to gain from the scam?
What does Al Gore stand to gain from it?
Can anyone produce evidence to prove conclusively that petroleum is not a fossil fuel but is abiotic?

[landless peasant]

What does the petroleum industry stand to gain from the scam?

The price will go up so sell it for more. limit it and sell it for much more and for longer.
we exhale Co2, breathing tax and micro management for tax purposes, eh sorry I mean to save the earth.

GW is total agenda and easy to see that. war on climate change is the next war. well maybe Iran or God knows... wait war on humans.

[landless peasant]

What about the data saying other solar bodies have warmed? how is that humans fault? http://seoblackhat.com/2007/03/04/global-warming-on-mars-pluto-triton- and-jupiter/

Which is it anyway Carbon or Carbon Dioxide the media seems to use both terms, but I thought they were different things. check the periodic table Symbol: C carbon, Symbol: O=C=O Carbon Dioxide

Carbon is the basic for all life on this planet, Co2 is the gas every animal exhales, and every plant breaths. The oxygen - Co2 cycle Thats what i learn at school... am I wrong?

Ban DHMO: Dihydrogen Monoxide. Lots of people have signed up to ban water.

What does Al Gore stand to gain from it? Al is just a grunt

[wepmob2000]

My theory is that GW is being overemphasised, to 'cover' Peak Oil which is the real crisis. Action on GW is pretty much the same as what is needed to stave off the crisis point in oil supplies, i.e; use cars less, use less power, etc. It also prevents any need to admit to the much more (politically) damaging fact that oil production is in rapid decline, at a time when demand is rising.

If we in the West have left it too late to construct a post-oil society (and some believe we have), then Peak Oil presumably marks the beginning of the end of our prosperity. How much more convenient is it for the politicians to try and 'combat' GW which threatens disaster largely in the 3rd World - which, lets be honest, most people couldn't care less about. Thus giving our valiant 'leaders' perhaps a few more years to pretend theres no Peak Oil.....

It may even lead to a revolution, if (and I say if) the population at large ever realises Peak Oil was forewarned in the 1960's, and the PTB chose not to do anything about it, preferring short term profit and political popularity....

The 'War on Terror' is nothing more than an excuse to put into place the kind of security measures needed to control the populace when Peak Oil begins to bite (well thats my theory anyway).

[spiv]

My own opinion is that it is just part of the normal cyclical nature of the World. We had an "Ice Age" in the historic past, hairy mammoths didn't fly their planes to their holiday homes during the time the "Ice Age" was receding. In the Middle Ages it was warmer than it is now, and they got around on trusty steeds, and did not live in centrally heated houses.

I'm not saying we are not contributing to it currently, but our effects are miniscule compared to what is being driven by the sun's activity. I understand that even Mars is warming.

If there is increased averages of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere, then there seems to be a huge drive towards taxing us, yet not a squeak mentioned of the felling of trees in some areas of the world, or the flying of military aircraft and use of military vehicles in illegal wars and occupations, or the flying around the world of scurrilous politicians and other "big wigs"!!

No, I think it's scaremongering designed to make us all willingly pay higher taxes, just as the "war on terror" is a scam designed to make us willingly give up our rights and freedoms.

That said, I don't think we should be foolhardy and just guzzle more gas and oil for the sake of it, just we should not get hysterical as we seem to be these days, driven on by pure propaganda.

[xmasdale]

[spiv]

Xmasdale, I'm far too busy to get involved in any arguments with you over Global Warming. My above comments are my beliefs, and I haven't seen anything to shake those beliefs. Perhaps you dispute my comment that we had an Ice Age back along, and nowadays we don't. So the earth has been getting warmer on average for many many years. Perhaps you dispute my comment that the average temperature of the planet has histrocally been cyclical in nature. Indeed, the eventual demise of the earth will be an incineration as the sun expands into a red giant as its borders gets close, and total annihilation as the border passes over the planet. But hey ho, don't worry, its not predicted to happen for millions of years yet, there is still plenty of fuel left for fusion.

So I'm actually going to reverse the question you pose, you prove to me just why GW is "man made".

But don't worry, I'm not criticising you for your belief in Global Warming, your beliefs are fine by me.

However, what I am critical of is the mass media hysteria driven by political gain and motives (i.e. taxation) with a corresponding blackout in that very same media for anyone who dissents. Sound familiar?? 911?? It is pure propaganda technique.

But the one thing I do agree with you on is using the 'Global Day of Action' event to get 911 information out, very good idea. And no I don't argue with those who use their cars less,or insulate their houses. My wife and I built my own house some 16 years ago, and we packed high quality insulation into every wall, floor, roof space and so on to retain our heat and cut central heating use as much as possible. We were ahead of our times, as there was none of the mass hysteria then that one hears these days.

[uselesseater]

Xmasdale:

You can't prove a negative i.e. We can't prove that CO2 isn't causing climate change.

Sceptics of the AGW theory don't have to offer evidence to disprove it, because it is 'generaly accepted.' This is not how science or logic works, appealing to consensus is unscientific and illogical.

The reason so many people are sceptical of the AGW theory is because the evidence for the theory is sorely lacking.

[landless peasant]

What irrefutable hard evidence is there for GW? And warming that has not occurred on other solar bodies, but just earth. plz don't quote Al Gore, irrefutable hard evidence.

If you think the war of terror is taking freedoms, just wait for the war on climate change. This is this the same agenda from the same people behind the war of terror. Peak oil scam is like the DIAMONDS ARE RARE SCAM ... sell it for more. Just run a web search for peak oil scam. climate change is all our fault. thats very egotistic and human. see below.


A chronology of climate change
During most of the last billion years the Earth did not have permanent ice sheets. Nevertheless, at times large areas of the globe were covered with vast sheets of ice. Such times are known as glaciations. In the past 2 million to 3 million years, the temperature of the Earth has changed (warmed or cooled) at least 17 times, some say 33, with glaciations that last about 100,000 years interrupted by warm periods that last about 10,000 years.

The last glaciation began 70,000 years ago and ended about 10,000 years ago. The Earth was a lot colder than it is now; snow and ice had accumulated on a lot of the land, glaciers existed on large areas and the sea levels were lower.

15,000 years ago: The last glaciation reaches a peak, with continental glaciers that cover a lot of the sub-polar and polar areas of the land areas of Earth. In North America, all of New England and all of the Great Lakes area, most of Ohio, Indiana, Minnesota and the North Dakotas, lie under ice sheets hundreds of meters thick. More than 37 million cubic kilometers of ice was tied up in these global sheets of ice. The average temperature on the surface of the Earth is estimated to have been cooler by approximately 6 degrees Celsius than currently. The sea level was more than 90 meters lower than currently.

15,000 years ago to 6,000 years ago: Global warming begins. The sheets of ice melt, and sea levels rise. Some heat source causes approximately 37 million cubic kilometers of ice to melt in approximately 9,000 years. Around 9,500 years ago, the last of the Northern European sheets of ice leave Scandinavia. Around 7,500 years ago, the last of the American sheets of ice leave Canada. This warming is neither stable nor the same everywhere. There are periods when mountain glaciers advance, and periods when they withdraw. These climatic changes vary extensively from place to place, with some areas affected while others are not. The tendency of warming is global and obvious, but very uneven. The causes of this period of warming are unknown.

8,000 years ago to 4,000 years ago: About 6,000 years ago, temperatures on the surface of Earth are about 3 degrees warmer than currently. The Arctic Ocean is ice-free, and mountain glaciers have disappeared from the mountains of Norway and the Alps in Europe, and from the Rocky Mountains of the United States and Canada. The ocean of the world is some three meters higher than currently. A lot of the present desert of the Sahara has a more humid, savannah-like climate, with giraffes and savannah fauna species.

4,000 years ago to AD 900: Global cooling begins. The Arctic Ocean freezes over, mountain glaciers form once more in the Rocky Mountains, in Norway and in the Alps. The Black Sea freezes over several times, and ice forms on the Nile in Egypt. Northern Europe gets a lot wetter, and the marshes develop again in previously dry areas. The sea level drops to approximately its present level. The temperatures on the surface of the Earth are about 0.5-1 degree cooler than at present. The causes of this period of cooling are unknown.

AD 1000 to 1500: This period has quick, but uneven, warming of the climate of the Northern Hemisphere. The North Atlantic becomes ice-free and Norse exploration as far as North America takes place. The Norse colonies in Greenland even export crop surpluses to Scandinavia. Wine grapes grow in southern Britain. The temperatures are from 3-8 degrees warmer than currently. The period lasts only a brief 500 years. By the year 1500, it has vanished. The Earth experiences as much warming between the 11th and the 13th century as is now predicted by global-warming scientists for the next century. The causes of this period of warming are unknown.

1430 to 1880: This is a period of the fast but uneven cooling of Northern Hemisphere climates. Norwegian glaciers advance to their most distant extension in post-glacial times. The northern forests disappear, to be replaced with tundra. Severe winters characterize a lot of Europe and North America. The channels and rivers get colder, the snows get heavy, and the summers cool and short. The temperatures on the surface of the world are about 0.5-1.5 degrees cooler than present. In the United States, 1816 is known as the "year with no summer". Snow falls in New England in June. The widespread failure of crops and deaths due to hypothermia are common. The causes of this period of cooling are unknown.

1880 to 1940: A period of warming. The mountain glaciers recede and the ice in the Arctic Ocean begins to melt again. The causes of this period of warming are unknown.

1940 to 1977: Cooling period. The temperatures are cooler than currently. Mountain glaciers recede, and some begin to advance. The tabloids inform us of widespread catastrophes due to the "New Glaciation". The causes of this period of cooling are unknown.

1977 to present: Warming period. The summer of 2003 is said to be the warmest one since the Middle Ages. The tabloids notify us of widespread catastrophes due to "global warming". The causes of warming are discovered - humanity and its carbon-dioxide-generating fossil-fuel use and deforestation.

[Mark Gobell]

Why are we still discussing this?

We are under Miliband's Fatwah after all . . .

[landless peasant]

David Miliband wrote:
. . . the debate over the science of climate change is well and truly over.

It's sad that many people can't see the agenda.
When did the debate start? I must have missed it.

From this day on I submit to the Miliband propaganda and stop thinking now, my bad.

[spiv]

My comment above regarding warming Mars, well, you decide:

http://astrobiology.arc.nasa.gov/news/expandnews.cfm?id=1176

I haven't seen this mentioned in any of the scaremongering propaganda, maybe you (or Al Gore) have? Mr Miliband, care to comment...?

And this interesting article, away from the hype and hysteria:

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/jpl/news/airsf-20070725.html

[xmasdale]

[spiv]

[Leiff]

[wepmob2000]

Spiv has raised some excellent points. What is certain is that while there is plenty of irrefutable evidence that GW is happening, there is a dearth of irrefutable evidence as to why.

Very few, if any, of these scientific studies are truly independent, their conclusions tend to reflect the viewpoint of the commissioning body, after all scientists need to secure future funding from somewhere..... A study commissioned by Friends of the Earth will usually draw an entirely different conclusion from one funded by an oil company, both sides undoubtedly have an agenda to push. What are people who are naturally inclined to be sceptical supposed to think?

Many people would tend to be sceptical of the line taken by the Government, a Government that repeatedly has ignored the truth and sold lies to secure what it wants.

Suddenly, and with an evangelical enthusiasm, the Government is pushing the green agenda upon us, denying there is even a debate about its causes. Strangely the Government response to GW is to blame us, and levy taxes on everything it can think of. There is absolutely no evidence that any of these 'green' tax revenues ever fund any green solutions, strangely the Government usually can't afford to fund those? Other Government solutions include yet more attacks on personal liberties (black boxes in cars, reducing mobility, microchipped bins, etc). Is it any wonder the people of this country are at least sceptical?

Strangely, we are expected to agree that Britain needs to set a green example to the world, when everyone knows our example is a mere drop in the ocean, and strangely any future Government response also means more tax and less personal freedoms. And maybe people don't want to set an example, perhaps they want to follow the American or Chinese example, which is to do practically nothing.

What also are people supposed to make of a 'green' government that is hellbent on increasing airport capacity, surely a case study in hypocrisy?

Let us also not forget such arch-hypocrite organisations like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, with their ' do as we say, not as we do' attitude, who come across as a bunch of middle class snobs who want to curb the activities of everyone else....

It is still my personal belief that this is all a cover for the bigger story, that is the imminent oil crisis.

[landless peasant]

Spiv has raised some excellent points. What is certain is that while there is plenty of irrefutable evidence that GW is happening, there is a dearth of irrefutable evidence as to why.

With other solar bodies warming that would point to the sun would it not?
What hard evidence is there for man made GW??? someone plz answer.

To me its a tax and control agenda but as always I'm open to evidence.

Why are so many scientists calling it a scam?
who made Al Gore an expert??
Does it even matter if the planet warms a degree or two? Its happened so many times.
Why should those with a skeptical view point have to prove anything? Surely its up the the GW lobby to prove there case.
There maybe debate on this site but hardly anywhere else in main stream. Why? Remind you of 9/11 or 7/7 or all the others lies.
Why would the Govt not push this? They gonna grab more power and control over our lives, and money.

[uselesseater]

The Club of Rome also admit dreaming the idea up in their publication, 'The first Global Revolution'

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... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.

[TonyGosling]

Moving to the bigger picture as this is clearly not a 911 or false flag focussed event and has evoked controversy

[Mr-Bridger]

Link

[xmasdale]

[landless peasant]

paulsouthend wrote:
Does it even matter if the planet warms a degree or two? Its happened so many times.


It matters to me if the result is a sea level rise resulting in many inhabited areas of the earth becoming flooded with consequent loss of homes, farms, livelihoods and lives.

Yes I understand that, thats the point i was trying to make. The earth is always changing. We are powerless to stop it. Bangladesh, floods every year because of the monsoon. In many ways the people there need the monsoon, the rain brings life as well as death. Please don't think I'm heartless in saying that. Thats life on this planet.

Would a sea level rise of a few inches make such a big deal?

Would a warming of a couple of degrees melt polar ice? Coldest Temp: Antarctica
-129°F (-89°C) on July 21, 1983

[TonyGosling]

Why don't you have a listen to this

AUDIO - Depopulation and Climate Change - Tarpley
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=12336

Depopulation, Global Warming and the British Royal Family
https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/11/386177.html

[img]http://www.deepjournal.com/images/uploaded/16/editorial/id=104.jp g[/img]

[landless peasant]

The floods in Bangladesh wash millions of tonnes of rich soil on too the paddy fields and flood them, allowing farmers to plant up to 4 rice crops per year. Without the monsoon floods millions of people would have little to eat.

[landless peasant]

ty Tony

[karlos]

http://www.reduce.me.uk/graphic.html

basically i agree with everything Paul from Southend has written.
Global Warming is a natural phenomenon and is being used as an excuse to tax us.
Look at the logic.
When we were kids we all used to learn about glaciers and the ice age. We know that the UK was covered in Glaciers at one stage which extended as far south as London.
People used to walk across the channel to Europe.
Gradually the ice sheet contracted and has been contracting ever since.

The government's case is flawed.
Again look at the logic. Carbon is a very tiny percentage of the air. If more carbon goes into the air this provides more food for plants and so stimulates plant growth meaning more food and more oxygen production.

On the other hand METHANE is a far more dangerous gas. More in terms of greenhouse effect. Yet the government is creating MORE methane while attacking (or pretending to attack) carbon. They keep telling us turn your tv off standby and other such petty jestures. But aviation fuel is tax free and aeroplanes, airlines and airports are expanding exponentially.
So they really are not interested in cutting carbon use.
It is simply lip service.
But look at METHANE.
Today the government wants rubbis to be buried in landfills and not to be burnt in incinerators like it used to be. An incinerator produces free electricity and reduces the amount of litter to a tiny amount of ash. After removing steel cans etc for recycling.
On the other hand burying the refuse in landfills produces alot of methane and remins toxic for centuries.
They are telling us to compost household organic matter. Producing more methane and making back gardens no go areas due to the millions of flies composting creates.
Hospitals have falling for this trap as well and people have died because of the flies.
Think i am making this up?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_artic le_id=492470&in_page_id=1770
So composting is dangerous.

Global warming is caused by the sun. Global dimming is caused by pollution and is something we should be tackling because it is more dangerous.

Global warming a scam says weather boss

The founder of the The Weather Channel in the US has described the concept of global warming as "the greatest scam in history" and accused global media of colluding with "environmental extremists" to alarm the public.

"It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM," John Coleman wrote in an article published on ICECAP, the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project, which is known for challenging widely published theories on global warming.
advertisement

The maverick weather forecaster is known for his regular critic of widely accepted global warming theories. The Weather Channel broadcasts weather forecasts and weather-related news in the US 24 hours a day.

His views challenge the consensus of the international science community that it is at least 90 per cent certain that temperatures will continue to rise, with average global surface temperature projected to increase by between 1.4 and 5.8ºC above 1990 levels by 2100.

http://www.ukip.org/ukip/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=322 &Itemid=57

[KennyM]

If you want more information on how we know Global Warming is a scam can I recommend folks to look up UN Agenda 21? This document outlines the plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment. Also known as Sustainable Development, Smart Growth etc etc

http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/Agenda21.pdf

Sustainable Development - it's a very fuzzy warm term isn't it? But do we know what the UN classes as non-sustainable? Under this Agenda you will not be allowed to own/drive a car. Public transport only. They declare Private Property as non-sustainable as well as irrigation. Water and food will be controlled by the UN and it will be up to each region to keep their popluation in check to ensure shortages do not occur. Monotheism is also included in this list. And if you are wondering why this is included it is because the UN wants all of us to worship Mother Ghia.

Please check out the The Ark of Hope www.arkofhope.org for their version of the Ark of the Covenant (which was created on the 9th September 2001 then paraded around New York City 2 days later, after the attacks. the whole story is on the website) The Ark of Hope houses the Earth Charter www.earthcharter.org , the new 16 Commandments, sorry, Principles which every Earth citizen should abide by. Mikhail Gorbachev, Maurice Strong (again) and Dr Steven Rockefeller are behind this charter. Globalists in other words

There are many local councils, if not all, that have adopted this Agenda for the 21st Century but nobody seems to have heard of it, have you?

http://www.london21.org/
http://www.dorsetagenda21.org.uk/
http://www.woking.gov.uk/environment/la21
http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/en/Business/Environment/Sustainabledevelopme nt/
to name but a few. Just type into google


Here's a video from 1992, filmed just after the Rio summit and presented by a man named George Hunt. It's about half an hour long but it's a very good presentation to help you understand a little about the background of Agenda 21. There are some audio clips of the likes of Rockefeller and Maurice Strong (actually, at one point Strong refers to Rothschild as the father of the environmental movement!! Remember that in case some hippy is getting on your case about your Carbon Footprint )

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6642758020554799808


There are also about 5 really good videos on Google Video about Agenda 21 produced by Freedom21 Santa Cruz www.f21sc.net, Radio Liberty http://www.radioliberty.com/ and a guy named Robodoon http://www.robodoon.com

Here is a guide to what Agenda 21 really means
http://www.freedom21santacruz.net/site/downloads/sd-guide-web.pdf



Just remember, years ago Poppy Bush said that the only way for the world to unite is if there's an attack from an external source. I think John Dewey said the pretty much the same. Most people think UFOs or aliens or lizard people are the external threat. They're not. Its the weather and the climate change bs we are hearing incessantly over the media and from politicians (poly = many, tick = blood sucking creature) that will be the external threat. The UN have had the capabilities to control and manipulate the weather since 1976 when all member countries signed a TREATY banning the use of such weapons. I'm sure that this treaty came out before most of the chemical and biological treaties so they must have had the weather weaponry available and perfected to have signed a treaty. It was very clear on the capablilities including the ability to cause earthquakes, tsunamis, floods and droughts. The title of the treaty is 1976 Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD Convention) or something along those lines.

And those who watch the skies can see Global Warming is a big scam. Those who are awake to it will notice that the spraying from the skies, also known as Chemtrails, is on the increase. These mysterious lines in the sky contain very fine metal particles which act like tiny mirrors, trapping the Sun's heat as well as having an adverse effect on people's health. Here's a few more bits of evidence.

Discovery Channel - Owning the Weather http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8262483364410309502

BBC News - Inquiry into spray cancer claims http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/4507036.stm

Porton Down Public Area Biological Warfare Experiments on Norwich
http://www.nr23.net/

The Open Skies Treaty may have something to do with the deployment of these aircraft that spray us

http://www.state.gov/t/ac/rls/fs/2004/33147.htm


Anyway, this has been my first post in ages on this board (taken me about an hour to write!) and hope to contribute more in the future. For those that know me - "Hello" and hope you are all doing well


Peace

Kenny

[TonyGosling]

Do people think this should be moved to 'other controversies'?
Or stay here?

[paul wright]

[spiv]

Tony, I agree with dh here. Indeed, it is a truly interesting thread which is discussing a "controversy" in a responsible way, one which has not descended into an outright slanging match.

Long may this continue.