By James F. Tracy

Today a good deal of what qualifies as propaganda is much more subtle than overt. When an entire civilization or way of life is to be significantly altered the tried-and-true method of “repeating a lie until it becomes truth” needs to be done over a period of many years and in a multitude of varying ways to take hold and change the very assumptions and beliefs of a people.

This process is especially vital for reaching a given society’s more elite demographic—the opinion leaders who perceive themselves as “smarter than the average bear” and thus impervious to simple appeals and indoctrination.

A case in point is the agenda backed by powerful global elites and recognizable under names such as “climate change” and “sustainability.” The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fifth Assessment Report, released on September 27, 2013, came replete with an assemblage of legitimizing features along these lines (“scientific,” “scholarly,” “authoritative,” “peer reviewed,”). Also termed the “Climate Bible,” journalists and policymakers alike regard it as “authoritative” and “the gold standard” of climate science. The public is told that the official body’s findings are now clearer than ever: “human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.”[1]

Among the most vociferous agitators for the IPCC’s climate change orthodoxy are the foundation-funded, tax-exempt, progressive-left media that sit alongside the bevy of similarly tax-exempt, foundation-funded environmental organizations that together uphold and publicize the theory of CO2-based anthropogenic (human-caused) climate change (ACC).[2] Self-professed as “independent,” “investigative,” even “educational,” the so-called “alternative media” turn a blind eye to seriously scrutinizing the highly questionable IPCC’s “scientific” review of the climatological literature and its implications for the array of ambitious programs and policies stealthily introduced throughout the industrialized world, many of which are seldom subject to popular plebiscite. Think “smart grid” and “smart growth.”

Logical questions from such apparently independent organs might include, “How does the IPCC produce its findings?” and “Who benefits?” Instead, there is an almost knee-jerk response on behalf of progressive-left editors and readerships to trust and support the UN group’s purportedly objective and meticulous review of the peer-reviewed climatological literature.

Between August and December 2013 such progressive outlets published dozens of articles and commentaries whole-heartedly touting the IPCC report. For example, posted 25 articles, ran 40, circulated 38, and featured 11.

These were often presented with bleak headlines accenting the urgent appeals found in the IPCC publicity. For example, “International Scientists Warn Climate Deniers Are Enabling Earth’s Suicide” (Truthout, 9/13/13), “6 Scary Conclusions in the UN’s New Climate Report” (Mother Jones, 9/27/13), “Greenhouse Gas in Atmosphere Hits New Record: UN,” (Alternet, 11/1/13), and “’Africa is Being Pushed Closer to the Fire’: Africans Say Continent Can’t Wait for Climate Action” (Democracy Now! 11/22/13).

Uncritical advocacy of the IPCC’s anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming extended beyond headlines to media criticism. In December, for example, the progressive Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) observed that corporate controlled network newscasts routinely failed to link “extreme weather” to “global warming.” “In the first nine months of 2013,” FAIR observes,

there were 450 segments of 200 words or more that covered extreme weather: flooding, forest fires, tornadoes, blizzards, hurricanes and heat waves. But of that total, just a tiny fraction–16 segments, or 4 percent of the total–so much as mentioned the words “climate change,” “global warming” or “greenhouse gases.[3]

What is left unmentioned is that fact that all of these “extreme weather” incidents have one common denominator that FAIR and corporate and progressive media alike consistently overlook: the sun. As University of Winnipeg climatologist Dr. Tim Ball explains (here at 35:00), the IPCC’s “terms of reference” through which the body proceeds to generate its findings exclude the sun and its many demonstrable atmospheric effects as factors in the warming and cooling of the earth’s climate.[4] It is thus no wonder that at best fringe or nonexistent causes of “climate change”–such as minuscule alterations in atmospheric gases–are pointed to with great alarm by the IPCC and its proponents.

Despite far more unambiguous and compelling scientific explanations the notion that “carbon emissions” are the foremost cause of natural climactic events has become something of a religion, and this is especially the case on the progressive-left, where adherents mechanically accept the curious agenda and its ostensibly “scientific” basis while vehemently condemning non-believers as “climate deniers.”

As Canadian journalist Donna LaFramboise has documented in her important 2011 exposé, the IPCC’s scholarly personnel is in fact heavily weighted toward what are often third-or-fourth-rate scientific talent whose eco-political stances are strictly in accord with the IPCC’s “research” agenda pushing anthropogenic climate change. IPCC authors often include climatology graduate students and even environmental activists from organizations such as Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund—indeed, figures with little-if-any scientific training but with clear agendas to promote.

LaFramboise further found that one third of the literature reviewed and cited by the IPCC in its 2007 report was–contrary to IPCC chief publicist Ragendra Pachauri’s pronouncements–not even peer-reviewed, and in many cases included citations of promotional literature devised and distributed by environmental activist organizations.

These unethical and compromising relationships are not difficult to explain if one is to recognize the IPCC for what it in fact is—a powerful political organization with the overarching objective of manufacturing consent and achieving transnational policy harmonization around the largely discursive construct of anthropogenic carbon-centric climate change.

The fact that the IPCC is capable of forthrightly carrying out one of the greatest scientific frauds in human history, setting long range governmental policies while enlisting allegedly intellectual sophisticates and “progressive” news media as its most devoted foot soldiers, is no small-scale feat. It is, rather, an immense achievement in modern propaganda and thought control that only hints at the powerful forces behind a much more far-reaching agenda.


[1] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Human Influence on Climate Clear: IPCC Says,” Geneva Switzerland: World Meteorological Organization. The notion of “a 97% consensus” has itself become a common mantra for climate change fear mongering and grounds for labeling someone a “climate denier.” Yet there is limited evidence of any such consensus concerning ACC among climatologists. The oft-cited 2009 American Geophysical Union survey alleging a 98% consensus among scientists on ACC cannot sustain even modest scrutiny. See Larry Bell, “That Scientific Global Warming Consensus … Not!, July 7, 2012, and “Global Warming Consensus Looking More Like a Myth,” Investors Business Daily, February 15, 2013. Another study held up as “proof” of scientific consensus, “Expert Credibility in Climate Change,” asserts only carefully qualified claims along these lines. “A broad analysis of the climate scientist community itself,” the authors point out, “the distribution of credibility of dissenting researchers relative to agreeing researchers, and the level of agreement among top climate experts has not been conducted and would inform future ACC discussions.” The brief paper assesses “an extensive data set of 1,372 climate researchers” to conclude that the scientific expertise and prominence of those who accept the IPCC’s ACC tenets surpass those who remain “unconvinced.” This begs the question, To what degree are the requisites of foundation funding related to espousing IPCC/ACC opinion? William R. L. Anderegg, James W. Prall, Jacob Harold, and Stephen H. Schneider, “Expert Credibility in Climate Change,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2010.

[2] James F. Tracy, “The Forces Behind Carbon-Centric Environmentalism,” Global Research, November 12, 2013.

[3] “TV News and Extreme Weather: Don’t Mention Climate Change,” Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, December 18, 2013. It might be added that corporate media and progressive-left counterparts uniformly fail to consider other possible causes of such unusual weather events, such as geoengineering and similar “environmental modification techniques” acknowledged by the US military and undertaken in many industrialized countries. See, for example, Michel Chossudovsky, “Climate Change, Geoengineering, and Environmental Modification Techniques,” Global Research, November 24, 2013.

[4] Independent journalist James Corbett has published several insightful interviews with Tim Ball, available for download here.

Republished at on January 31, 2014.

Leave a Reply

132 thought on “The Magnificent Achievements of Eco-Propaganda”
  1. I just listened to an interview with Donna LaFramboise yesterday, very interesting. One thing I heard a few years back is that all the planets in the solar system are undergoing change…the Martian ice cap has been receding for example. If people understood that we can’t be blamed for what is happening on other planets, there must be some other dynamic is at play.

    1. I am often amused but more often terrified as to what qualifies for “news” – a regurgitation of some report or what have you. Investigative journalism is rare these days…especially what qualifies as “independent” investigative journalism. Those of us who are “awake” in the Matrix are few and we know we are all in very big trouble…

      1. Beth, it’s a coincidence that this morning before reading this post I had been thinking about investigative journalism and that we are very fortunate that we had not chosen that as our occupation. We wouldn’t do too well in today’s job market.

        1. ‘Tis true, Violata. If we did, we’d probably be on a missing persons’ list somewhere. Seems like a very, very dangerous occupation these days.

        2. Agree Violeta, I would be sacked within a short time for not towing the line, an investigative journalist should be just that.. what kind of a job is it that stops you investigating the real deal. Todays news on TV was extreme weather in the south west of England… We used to get snowed in have extreme weather every winter in the North.. but not a mention of it years ago.. we just got on with it.. it was Winter, it was natural, Not any more. if we get snow now.. Councils run out of grit for the roads, closed railways and roads, Airports come to a standstill.. everything is so dramatic.. its just over reaction – They seem to want people to be in a panic.

        3. Agree! And the naming of storms..winter storms….Pahleeeeez! It’s like the Weather Channel has become reality t.v. with all the fake drama!

        4. “They want everyone to be in a panic” (about ordinary winter conditions) – so very true. The East Coast is having an ordinary January storm and my poor elderly mother keeps calling me from California to check up on me (when perhaps it should be the other way ’round). She’s in front of the tv all day and they are panicking her, poor thing.

    2. Susan A. – Are you sure we have nothing to do with other planets’ weather conditions? Just kidding. Obviously the sun has some influence, like its flares and everything. We simply do not have the models yet to understand how that affects climate. For the moment, I am enjoying the normal winter chill and glad that it is giving the lie to all the alarms for the moment.

      1. Solar flares do not affect climate. Do not speak from a knowledge base from which you do not possess. That’s why this board is a dumpster fire of what you term “disinfo”

        1. I get solar flare alerts out of an Australian site because I don’t trust the USSA to send alerts (that’s said). We’ve had a lot of solar flares the last few day – just had an XFlare (the biggest) – an X1.3 – hope it sends some warmer temps if it was pointed at the Earth.

        2. Oops…actually solar activity is theorized to impact weather. Please look up the dark ages in Europe which was linked to a seriously low solar period. Taught in public schools – therefore could be a strong theory.

        3. “That’s why this board is a dumpster fire of what you term “disinfo””

          I find this comment amusing.

        4. You are the one that is wrong here Birtram.

          We are speaking and sharing information about what we are learning.

          If you would like to learn about what CERN and the CLOUD experiment tells us about Cosmic Rays from our Sun & Cosmic Rays from the Galaxy having a warming effect on our Solar System, please feel free to Google or You Tube this subject, and then get back to us with what you have learned. We will be happy to listen, & if you provide us with new information, we will be happy to learn & share it with others as well.

  2. In light of the article above, it is nice to see that irony is alive and well in the Antarctic. Having the “rescue ship” on its way to document the awesome coming apocalypse of melting ice stuck there, in the ice, says more than I could produce.

    It is obvious that this has been a propaganda coup. Al Gore’s “carbon exchange” is a classic example of chaos profiteering. In the end the message is the same; “send money, do as we say, and we’ll make it all go away”.

      1. Never heard anyone promise to make “global warming” go away!? Seems more like a plan to make sheeple run around making “Home alone” faces while being fleeced. Keep the simple people scared and feeling guilty! Proud and confident is bad manners for a slave …

        1. It’s more than just a weather issue as in this article. There’s an attempt on this very site at making people confused and promoting junk science. With that in mind I move the discussion below further up, as several posting here need to be shown for hiding behind irrational arguments.

          So Dust Guys you have no defense for the Star Wars DEW theory scientist. As reported before, the expert late Col Bob Bowman who pioneered the system never accepted Wood.

          Grabbe’s new book available and you’ll see the exact same tactics used against the reviewer in this article as a few here did to me to try to end rational discourse.

        2. I don’t want to end it, dud, I want you to pick it up. Tell me how the toilets got vaporized. What’s the matter? Why keep changing the subject.

          Oh, and don’t affect a wounded mien, as if I’m giving you the vapors, Marzi ole’ pal. If you enter the kitchen, you know it might be a tad toasty. Buck up and answer the damn question: how were the toilets instantly vaporized?

    1. It is summertime in the Antarctic! Huge ice cutting barges could not get to them, so the global warning ‘scientists’ were helicoptered out. The poor crew of 22 was left behind to man the vessel. They were following the path of a previous explorer who got stuck there for a year over 100 years ago. Interesting that the MSM is busted for not reporting who they were and even saying they are tourists! Cannot stop chuckling!

    2. Lophatt, I love it, too funny!

      And call me crazy, but I’m thinking that the Antarctic tragedy is a hoax, too. My first clue was the # of passengers that were rescued….52. The number used to describe how many people were killed in Tavistock Square on 7/7/2005(7). MSN headlines today say the Chinese icebreaker, Snow Dragon, sent to set the still ice-locked ship has stalled and in trouble. If you read the article, the story seems to change. They are asking the Aurora Australis, with the 52 passengers, to stay nearby in case something happens to the Aurora Australis. (Why isn’t it half way home already?)

      My story would be complete if I could figure out the true meaning of aurora, and also if there were not a journalist from the Guardian on board. (Boo hoo, he’s going to beat us to the story, when it does happen.)

    1. I have seen this video; it was offered at Top Documents website and I watched it–both distressed and thankful for the exposure of vital information.

      Dr. Tracy has pulled together the crux of the dilemma; who are these “bona fide” scientists who will sometimes betray their calling?
      Where is Hippocrates when we need his wisdom? This is really a society based on the culture of a royal court where the King or Queen rules by devine right and edict; no one dare question for fear of their livlihood or even their life.

      We are sliding backwards into total serfdom in an age of high-definition technology. Worse, the inmates are running the asylum. Those at the apex of the food chain are totally committed. (And they should all be committed.)

  3.–001.jpg I don’t have my brain wrapped around this whole scam. We all know that “we” want clean air and water. We know that corporate pollution and vehicle pollution are a threat. Is the whole climate change thing all about guilting individual citizens through worst case scenarios of global catastrophe in order to change their behaviors (drive smaller more expensive cars) while corporations continue to pollute? Most people are aware that the Bible prophesies extremely uncomfortable weather conditions for the “end times.” Is it possible these people are taking the Biblical message and neutering it of religious content to call it science?

    1. Of course we all want clean air; the problem is the Michael Mann-style climate scientists have fraudulently trotted out the notion that carbon dioxide is “pollution.” What it is called, in the real world, is “plant food.”

      More of it in the atmosphere would be an undiluted benefit to mankind.

      “while corporations continue to pollute”

      Yes, but they’re not doing it here any more, where the clean air act forced them to cut emissions to essentially nothing. In addition, 97% or so of what came out of an automobile’s tail pipe when I was growing up in the 1960s and 70s is now absent.

      But under the illustrious Bubba and his good pals the Republicans, back in the 90s, NAFTA and GATT were sold to us as fantastic economic magical formulae: “free trade” will make us rich! So those nasty industries systematically were shuttered on our shores and recreated overseas, primarily Mexico, at first, but now mostly in Asia. And guess what! Those countries could give a shit about the air they breathe; choke on this:

      God, in the Old Testament, called the evil men who did evil deeds “His servant” on many occasions. Those men had no idea they were tools in His hands. Their equivalent today are equally clueless. They don’t read, much less comprehend, the Bible.

  4. “The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fifth Assessment Report, released on September 27, 2013, came replete with an assemblage of legitimizing features along these lines (“scientific,” “scholarly,” “authoritative,” “peer reviewed,”). Also termed the “Climate Bible,” journalists and policymakers alike regard it as “authoritative” and “the gold standard” of climate science.”
    ~James Tracey

    Once all of the “experts” declare the “correct” brand of truth, anyone questioning any of their findings will automatically be asked where their tin foil hat is. So many are willing to place blind faith in authority even when authority has proven that they are not very trustworthy.

  5. I’ve always thought this agenda had another motive than we think of taking away our toys.

    Has it occurred to anyone that China’s emergence as a competitor for resources all over the globe is one development that has been feared for some time? Imagine a billion people all wanting to live at the level of consumption of the US public, and spreading out everywhere to do it? Perhaps the global warming stories fall into the category of the “noble lie” so beloved of our elites? They create false events, why not something vaguely provable but directed at keeping China from moving without any inhibition everywhere it can? The one thing controlling Chinese power has always been its population, which can have critical problems emerge in an instant, to put its rulers over a barrel. What happens when it finds it can go anywhere and secure any resource, not just within its own boundaries? I think that is making some people quake in their boots (and other people see how it will make their fortunes in the next equivalent to the US of the 20th century).

    1. Hi A. Peasant,

      Many thanks for those two links. Excellent complimentary and corroborative references to Prof. Tracy’s most excellent article.

      I’d never heard of Henrik Svensmark until stumbling upon your post. But given the context of disinformation and deceit in which we live, let alone the supressive politics that seem to be inherent to the process of all refereed journals, that shouldn’t be all that surprising.

      Svensmark’s work seems to be something on which it will be well worth keeping tabs.

  6. So if we don’t believe the ‘truth’ we are climate deniers, but if we should question the truth, then we are branded conspiracy theorists – at best. Talk about being backed into a corner.
    Herd them up, shove them into their little boxes, put a lid on them and label it. Then spy on them.

    1. Well Makky, that’s where the “mental health” intervention comes in. Whether it’s the MSM or some “alternative AUTHORITY”, your only “choice” is to believe.

      Me, I think I’ll pass.

        1. The photo you posted is a Thermite demonstration Marzi.
          That explains the molten metal, but when you see images of “the last spire”, one of the 47 centre box coulombs in WTC2, it appears to turn to dust without the flash or heat from Thermite. Its still a mystery.

        2. It’s not a mystery. If thermite destroyed three buildings, comprising more than a billion and a half tons of mass, the way this picture depicts, it would have been the greatest light show of all time. Just look at that tiny urn, and all those photons! When we watch the towers turning into dust, of course, we see…dust. No light show. I’m amazed anyone believes such nonsense.

        3. Glad you all take such an interest in dust and light shows together as in disco. A well schooled attempt at wooden science whereas you know where the sites are that explain it all. ae9/11 and 9/11 blogger so just start watching the videos . Oops, forgot you’ve seen it all and have an order to write complete unscientific personal opinions.

        4. Marzi: provide a direct link to a video where they use thermite to vaporize a large porcelain object. Thanks!

        5. Guess you didn’t read that the cut steel beams were spewed out and landed below – then they were gathered by people endangering themselves who were not warned to wear masks and the steel was sent off to China. Check out photo of molten metal too 8 weeks after…..

          Melting point of steel is 2400-2800 NOT 1,400 of jet fuel either. Also, please find one other “scientist” who believes your “theory”. Wood has no other supporters.

        6. I am well aware of all those facts Marzi, but what we see in the CNN clip of the last spire does not look at all like Thermite in action though. Can we agree on that much?

          Dr. Woods is speculating on what could have caused the “dustification” of steel beams etc. She is also trying to solve the mystery of why so many cars burst into flames even several blocks away from the WTC complex.

          I know that 9-11 was an inside job for sure, but clearly, Thermite was not the only tool in the traitor’s tool box. Can we agree on that as well?

        7. Terry, my advice is not to bother with Marzi, whoever he is, until he acknowledges that tens of thousands of large porcelain objects were transformed into dust that morning, essentially instantly, and that cutting charges can’t explain that.

          Mr. Marzi is very intent. Very, very intent, on his refusal to ever address that issue.

          Thermite is the “magic bullet theory,” one step advanced. It is the perfect co-opting of the 911 truth issue. Whereas the visible government, in the 60s, created a fake theory to cover up the secret government’s action, now, the secret government does the same thing, obscuring their activities using hacks like Steve Jones. The visible government’s story being impossible for a sentient being to accept, they knew that they would have to infiltrate the skeptics.

          If “Marzi,” whoever he is, even once acknowledged the toilet problem, he would achieve a modicum of credibility. But because he refuses to ever do that, he must be discounted completely.

        8. Thermite alone, does not explain the total pulverization of so many of the human victims either, & at one acre per floor, the fact that “miles” of virtually indestructible industrial carpeting is completely missing from the remaining rubble of the WTC, only adds to the mystery.

          If anyone can offer up any possible explanations for the “total” destruction of all those file cabinets that instantly leaves their undamaged paper contents “blowing in the wind”, you have my undivided attention.

        9. Where is your “scientist” who supports Woods theory? You still haven’t answered that.

        10. Terry, lophatt is your man. Or Judy Wood. Those are the only two theories I am aware of, and I’ve only studied. Wood’s. Even though lophatt rejects her hypothesis, he recommends her book as essential reading, if one is to understand ALL the evidence. So I recommend that you read it. Unfortunately, the model lophattt finds most persuasive cannot be found in a single book. I have only read some of the articles about it –there used to be a dude around here calling himself Mr. Eleven, (my translation from the Spanish), who linked to some of them at Veterans Today. They are technical, and challenging. Wood’s book may be technical sometimes, but it is a pleasure to read.

          Now, I have grown to respect lophatt’s opinion greatly, and if he knows both theories very well, and favors one over the other, he’s probably right. I don’t know, because I only know one of the theories well.

          One thing about the Tesla technology angle that appeals to me is that we know that the secret government has it. Whether 911 was a demonstration of it, weaponized, as I long ago concluded, remains an open question.

        11. The majority of the buildings is simply not there. What is there, with the exception of stray beams (mostly from lower floors) had to go somewhere. It was turned to dust, that’s steel, (TOILETS), desks, office furniture, carpet, computers, and…people.

          Dr. Wood may annoy some. She did a wonderful job of pointing to the obvious (and not so obvious). There are others who have taken the dust sample results, done the math, and arrived at a nuclear cause. No conventional explosive or incendiary is capable of sublimating all that material.

          The “spire” is the best example of this as you can see it with your own eyes. That is a collection of massive steel beams. If thermate could (and it can’t) do that you wouldn’t have a “burbler”, you’d have a “sparkler”.

          I would assume that they would use cutter charges in strategic locations. It wouldn’t do to have a hole instead of a pile. No one has ever conventionally demolished a building even close to the size of these.

          Dr. Wood thinks it was some sort of directed energy. It may have been. The dust samples indicate nuclear activity in the proper amounts. If I understood more about directed energy, and had access to where we were with that, I would happily change my opinion. Right now we have the capability to do this with nukes.

          Jones’ theory can’t explain the evidence. Just like Dr. Wood claims that it CAN’T be done by nukes, Jones claims EVERYTHING was done by thermate. As Patrick says, I think it’s a “limited hangout”.

        12. I see beams falling and dust coming off of them as acceleration occurs. not really a mystery as dust will fall much slower than steel. I am not sure why patrick is talking about logical fallacies when he is espousing straw man arguments. In no way does AE911 truth claim the towers were brought down using aluminothermics exclusively, in fact they claim that some combination of incendiaries and explosives best suit the available evidence. Judy wood has no scientific theory what-so-ever she wants to turn people away from something that is provable towards something fantastic that could never be proven. she would have a better time arguing that it was God himself that brought the towers down rather than argue DEW with no evidence at all. her idea of science is look at all the pretty pictures, where are the towers? that’s weird must have been space beams. so compelling. I think she should team up with gene rosen and go on tour.

        13. Patrick, no brother I haven’t. I vaguely remember thumbing through some of the pictures many years back when we still had one of those big corporate book stores around here but I never read it. I have just seen her on youtube and visited her site. With all respect, I really enjoy reading your battles with Mark(who is strangely absent on this AGW stuff) and am usually sympathetic with your views but I think you have given Judy Wood a pass when you ought not have. You also wrote my favorite comment on here so far to carl “Ha, ha, Carl has no logic!” that still makes me laugh.
          there are lots of operatives on here but I don’t think Marzi is one of them. She/he seems legit to me. I think we should make a master list of trolls on here. The most recent blog seems to have picked up new ones.

  7. Fact- The polar caps on Earth have been shrinking for several years.
    Fact- The polar caps on Mars have been shrinking at the very same rate.

    The fact is that our entire solar system is showing signs of warming right out to Pluto despite no change in the Sun.

    Man can not be seen as responsible for our climate change any longer.

      1. Doomed Lophatt? No..
        Not if we can accept change.

        Our challenge is to understand the truth about our reality.
        Our responsibility is to reject whatever can be proved to be wrong.
        Our duty is to share what we know.

        AL Gore’s”hockey stick” is doomed.

    1. Terry – It is difficult to know what ‘facts’ reported are true, believe the evidence shows the polar caps are in fact increasing. The global warming crew that was just rescued from the frozen southern tundra formed in the summertime may testify to that. It is not clear when they will be able to report, they were helicoptered to an ice breaking vessel that was unable to reach them and now may have to go rescue another Chinese ice breaker, also sent to rescue them but is now stranded. Wonder who is paying for all these rescues? Here’s an article about all the vessels stranded in the northern polar cap!

      1. Climate change and global warming is not to be denied Kathy.

        Global warming is the prevailing direction of climate change on our planet at this time. Our climate is always changing. That is natural.

        Only 10,000 years ago, most of North America was covered by an ice sheet two miles thick. What is important to understand, is that our climate is always changing, not because of man driven increased CO2 in our atmosphere or any other human activity, but from solar & galactic forces (cosmic rays) far beyond our control..

        Urban & industrial pollution is “bad”, but any decent volcanic eruption dwarfs “our” contribution to the real air pollution “problem”.

        We only exist in nature.
        We do/can not control nature.

    2. I think the conclusion that we must reach, on the side of caution, is that our irresponsible carbon emissions are also causing global warming on Mars. Hence not only will our planet be lifeless if no remedial action is taken immediately (send your checks to the World Bank and IMF) but life on Mars will cease as well.

      1. All my checks to the World Bank & IMF are blank.

        Coming from the land of Mordor (Alberta Tar Sands) I know that we need to clean up our act & develop sustainable energy projects, but the scientific evidence is stacking up to our fossil fuel addiction playing a irrelevant role in climate change on Earth as well as Mars.

        Did you know that our solar system has warmed up enough for Pluto
        to have an atmosphere? Think about that the next time someone blames “us” for climate change.

        1. My condolences on living in Mordor, although from the radio reports about North Dakota, such places are booming (like gold rushes and mining towns always do before they are played out).

          The charting on the trends in global warming are subject to interpretation and should not necessarily be dismissed as fraudulent. The real problem is that power politics and the mercantile system we’re had in this world for about 500 years will always go after resources and then sell them to the highest bidder (no matter who is living on top of the resources). If you’re interested in avoiding war like the Iraq War you have to get the word out about resources peaking in some area and marauders moving on to find it elsewhere.

          I grew up in a region where people get into their cars at the drop of a hat (Southern California). My siblings adore windshield time. I have learned to hate it. Part of it came from my experiences during Bush. Part of it came from living in a part of the country which gets ice and snow on the roads.

          I believe the function of our two party system (two hands of the same elite) is to try and balance out the excesses of the prior tenure by proposing alternatives, even if they are lame. Right now, the Democrats are doing lame. When people get fed up and invite the Republicans back, we’ll probably have another “Game on!” for a “Let’s roll” to take more scarce peak oil, even if everyone says it’s fine right now. I don’t think it’s fine in a world where every Chinese person will have a car just like Americans. I don’t begrudge other people their dreams – but let’s not forget who manufactures dreams for them.

        2. Two strange facts about China & cars.
          1- China now buys more new cars than any other country on the planet.
          (beating out the USA where there are 750 cars per 1,000 people.
          2- There are only 4 cars per 1,000 people in China.

  8. Excellent post.

    The world and its ‘affairs’ are now conducted and maintained through snob appeal, specifically intellectual and technological snob appeal.

    By world, I mean the civilized world of modern man, which of course, has reached the tipping point where it is totally destroying all other, ‘uncivilized’, aspects of the globe.

    Which, further of course, spells D-E-A-T-H, on a massive scale.

    Even to the civilized and snobby ones. Though they may well be the last to realize this.

    Ned Lud

  9. “The fact that the IPCC is capable of forthrightly carrying out one of the greatest scientific frauds in human history, setting long range governmental policies while enlisting allegedly intellectual sophisticates and “progressive” news media as its most devoted foot soldiers, is no small-scale feat. It is, rather, an immense achievement in modern propaganda and thought control that only hints at the powerful forces behind a much more far-reaching agenda.”

    Well, James, on more than one occasion I have addressed who in my opinion the left really are (an expression of the HG Wells/Fabian Society plot to create 1984 with tax-free foundation money, for those new around here), and I have congratulated you whenever you have held their feet to the fire–but your self-described romantic attachment to them gets harder and harder to understand. Seemingly, you want them to be something they have never been–you want them to be what their propaganda says they are. It’s probably because most of them are nice people, Lenin’s useful idiots. If their paymasters revealed themselves openly and unapologetically as O’Brian, most lefties would become libertarians el-quicko.

    That said, per the quote, I’ll give my own history. It will perhaps shed a little light. In the 70s I absorbed what came to be “New Age” ideas. At college, at the dawn of the 80s, I was introduced to a form of Hinduism which posited that through the correct, Hindu, principles, society could be ideally ordered–that is, the most evil and corrupt would not be allowed to scramble to the top and control everyone below; the morally virtuous, who had no desire for power, would be selected by the mass, to lead them. It’s a bunch of hooey, obviously, but kids can believe anything.

    Well, this led, inevitably, to socialism, and even communism. We loved coalitions, and meetings and teach-in kinds of deals. I remember this one guy, Dr. Don, who held a PhD in sociology, and was as hard core a communist as you could find in those days–and that’s saying something. One day, after he had finished teaching some bullshit, we were talking about how the revolution would come about. How would the proletariat rise? I announced the answer in two words: the weather.

    Dr. Don looked at me as if lizards were crawling out of my ears. “The weather!?” What the hell was a fool like me doing wasting his time. But then I ran down the litany that today’s climate change warm-mongers regard as the key pillars of their faith. He thought about it, and allowed after a while that I might have a point.

    The point I’m making HERE is that the old left had not yet co-opted the New Age dreamers at that point. The doctrinaire commies were rigidly sociological, and had no space for mysticism; communism, after all, is strictly atheistic.

    Alas, even the most in-denial commies finally noticed the collapse of world communism, and any-port-in-a-storm fashion, like a soon-to-be disembodied demon seeking out any warm body to occupy, the commies chose to possess the New Age movement. And now they ALL agree with my old self: for them, today, it’s the weather, stupid.

  10. If anyone wants to get inside the heads of those who promote sustainability (as they define it) and climate change (caused by man and not as yet unaccounted for factors, some of which led to climate change long before man existed) — there are free university online courses. These courses are something I am looking at to help explain the positions of these people more fully and to understand what assumptions and contradictions they are taking in.

    The reason I think it is important to know this kind of thing (“know your enemy” if you are already convinced that they are wrong) is because we are on the receiving end of policy which our representatives in government bodies are just stupid and venal enough to rubber-stamp, as they fall for some higher authority having supremacy in an extra-legal fashion over what we have in this country.

    Think about the ban on the sale of incandescent lightbulbs for example, and all that implies. Imagine being caught trafficking in that! Why? Because they said so. Not because some heavy-metal containing fluorescent is safer in the long run. Just because it upholds another probably fictional narrative and we are in the reality show they have staged (once again).

    How do you win? You study “Rommel”‘s book, like Patton did.

  11. Sadly, having faith in the integrity of those who would have you believe that they are above impeachment is naive. This is no unique. In fact, if anything, it is the norm.

    Why would someone believe that because a person has a degree and wears a lab coat they are honest? I’m sure there are such people, but I’m much more certain there are others who are not.

    Most scientists are either earning grant money or chasing it. They are “employees” or job seekers. Those with the money control this as they do everything else. That’s what “wealth” is for.

    Look at all of those M.D.’s who participated in the mind control program and continue to participate in torture to this day. Look at those who work for the pharmaceutical industry (either “full time, or just in their offices).

    “Climate change” is a meme that those in control have decided to ride into more oppression. They plan to beat us down further and this is an excellent vehicle to do that with. The best tools for them are the ones that get naive people to assist in their own destruction.

    We all want clean air and water. No question about it. That is not what this is about. That is the psychological device they use to attack anyone who points to their scam. This blind faith in authority figures is disappointing. How many examples of this type of fraud to we have to endure before that myth is abandoned?

    1. Thanks Norm, interesting video. Personally this illustrates the central problem with building a “movement” around fear of a poorly understood phenomena.

      “Climate”, like everything else in the Universe, is interconnected. It would be an arrogant and completely erroneous statement to say that we understand the weather. If it is true that the climate is “changing”, how do we know that isn’t a “normal” event? If it is, would might the consequences of artificially manipulating that be, if we could?

      I think its reasonable to assume that the sun plays a role in this, as well as a host of other factors, known and unknown. To date, I have seen no consistent evidence that convinces me that anything has changed since they began recording this. On any given day you can read one group of “true believers” who cry doom and gloom and tell us that the poles are melting and we’re all going to drown. In another location you can read about world record-shattering ice accumulations.

      This “forming teams” is more akin to sports fans than science. Nobody wants to admit that they don’t know everything. Opportunists want to use this created fear for their own purposes. This is much like the countless programs out there that tell us we’re all going to be annihilated by meteors or something.

      It may very well be true that the climate is changing. That may be natural, or not. If we can’t answer that question with certainty how do we ascribe a cause? If we know the cause, how do we design a “fix” for it?

      Man is not in control of its environment. Not to the extent that we may wish to believe. I have seen the results of “scientific” attempts to “balance” nature by artificially introducing non-native species, for example. They did not go well.

        1. Peasant, yes I agree. It’s important work. I only mean that it illustrates that what he’s studying is but one aspect of a much larger whole. The more we know, the better.

          It is careful and necessary. I am deeply suspicious of any political types who seize onto something like this and try to ride it to stardom. We live in a dangerous world. Always have, always will.

        2. So far no political types have tried to seize upon Svensmaek. He has been working on his theory since 1995. 19 years. Through intense opposition, got experiments done in copenhagen and published in 2006. 8 years. Crickets.

          Synopsis of documentary here.

          More recent news here.

          Example of political whoredom here.

        3. Yes, I was referring to the whole “Climate Change” issue, not Dr. Svensmaek’s work.

    1. You have to wonder about the ‘real’ agenda behind the climate alarmism now also being pushed in earnest by the State Department.

      The ‘climate science crowd’ itself pushes the hysteria because, pragmatically speaking, that fear keeps vast funds of funding flowing from public coffers to each ‘climate scientist’s’ favorite research niche.

      But why would the ‘elite interests’ who own the U.S. government get behind this?

      I mean apart from the money to be made from the ‘cap & trade scam?’

      I cannot see anything beyond making ‘hydro carbons,’ in an economic sense, artificially scarcer, so as to further drive up profit margins. But perhaps somebody else has a more plausible hypothesis to offer.

    1. The lead sentence is most amusing: “Antarctic sea ice has grown to a record large extent for a second straight year, baffling scientists seeking to understand why this ice is expanding rather than shrinking in a warming world.”

      What are the odds that the morons trapped in the ice are going to come home and admit that they have bought a pig in a poke, that their entire academic research careers have been a grand waste, and that they are deeply sorry for having spend so much public money on pure nonsense?

      1. Patrick, my point exactly. Does this remind you of anything? In other words they are totally ignoring what’s staring them right in the face because they KNOW better. Why, all the “Kool Kidz” say that we’re drowning.

        Maybe this is nature’s way of “culling the herd”. It’s like the “Southerner’s Lament”; “Hell, that ain’t nothin’, watch this!”. “Come on lads, we KNOW that’s not an ice field. Can’t be, the UN says we’ll be able to park this boat in the Hollywood Hills when we get back”.

        When your starting point is the meme, there can be disastrous consequences.

        1. “When your starting point is the meme, there can be disastrous consequences.”

          Sums up the “how,” as in: How did the American Public get into the mess it finds itself mired in?

          You’re on a roll with the one-liner profound truths in this thread.

  12. A distinction should be made between two kinds of authority: ‘the authority of a consensus’ and ‘the authority of the discursive logic and empirical investigation that is inherent to the endeavors of authentic scientific investigation.’ For I want to lean, here, a little bit on Prof. Richard Lindzen’s credentials as a climate scientist and share with you a statement he made on the heels of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report:

    I’d quote the statement in its entirety, but I don’t want to violate any copyright. However, just the first paragraph or so to whet your appetite:

    “Each IPCC report seems to be required to conclude that the case for an international agreement to curb carbon dioxide has grown stronger. That is to say the IPCC report (and especially the press release accompanying the summary) is a political document, and as George Orwell noted, political language “is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.

    With respect to climate, we have had 17 years without warming; all models show greater tropical warming than has been observed since 1978; and arctic sea ice is suddenly showing surprising growth. And yet, as the discrepancies between models and observations increase, the IPCC insists that its confidence in the model predictions is greater than ever.”

  13. Excuse me if this is off topic. A NY Judge has declared it is constitutional for Homeland Security to declare areas of our country constitutional free zones – one hundred miles around all borders and all international ports of entry. Sounds mighty frightening to me!

    1. You are indeed correct. This has actually been in place for some time now, Alex Jones has been ranting about this for the last couple of years. I think it was included in the Patriot Act, or the NDAA legislation, I’m not sure, buy yea, some frightening stuff for sure!

      1. Probably have seen this on the AJ site but the gravity of it did not sink in. Now that the ACLU has finally taken up a cause I agree with and a judge dismisses their case, it is very chilling. When you consider how many airports are international entry points, pretty much the whole country has been declared constitutional free!

  14. False scientists and fake politicians! Its now coming out that Obama is Bill Ayers son! That’s why they staged the scripted “mailman” Youtube to “testify” under fake polygraph test that Bill Ayers rich mobster mom, Mary, said Obama was a “foreign student” – – – because being a foreign student is better than being Bill Ayers, a domestic terrorist’s son!

      1. I think the “smart money’s” on Frank Marshall Davis. Spitting image of him. Friend of gramps. Spent a lot of time “bonding” with him in his youth. Gramps used to bring him over to Franks.

        Frank was a pedophile, Communist pornographer and poet. Sort of the Gene of his day. He used to write a lot about “deflowering” underage white women. He had some racy photos of Stanley Ann.

        Gramps and Grandma were quite a pair. He was a globe trotting furniture salesman. She was a high school-educated bank executive. Grandma hat LOTS of social security numbers too. She was ahead of her time “flipping” real estate for the bank. None dare call it “money laundering”.

        Mom was either a social worker with a masters degree or a PhD (you choose) who peddled “micro loans” in Indonesia, oddly, just at a time when the CIA was engineering a regime change there.

        There are photos of “mom” and the grand-parents and little Stanley-Ann in her French language school uniform in Beirut. Those furniture salesmen really used to get around in those days.

        Now, every bit of that is just as believable as the tale we’re trying to unravel. Funny that. Someone should really talk to the Yale and Princeton English Departments about bolstering their program.

        1. Lophatt, I always thought that’s who is father was as well. They look too much a like. It horrifies how Obummer’s background has been protected…I fear it is even worse than we suspect it is.

        2. The “horrifying” part is that so much of it IS out there and nothing is done about it. All of my stuff comes from other’s careful research. I’m just paraphrasing it.

          It is very clear to me what happened with this. The fact that nobody will touch it is telling.

        3. It is indeed scary. Everyone used to laugh at me when I shrugged and called him the “Anti-Christ”. Now? Not so much. It is damn frightening what he’s gotten away with.

          My guess is that this is Obama’s mom Khadijah and second family
          …The connections will probably disappear from the Internet… but lots of people figured it out before I did. Listening to Bill speak through puppet Nancy Ruth Owens was the clincher for me, then seeing all the connecting themes, quotes and mis-speaches in Fugitive Days and Dreams *from* my Father (by Bill Ayers) And THEN seeing that family picture with Khadijah and the Ayers and Obama – and pictures of the dohrn-Ayers boys with young Obama.

      2. Khadijah, now the wife of Louis Farrakahn, is my guess, from looking through online pictures for family resemblances – she has a younger son who looks very much like Obama. Plus there are pictures of her with Obama along with who I think is Mary and Thomas Ayers and I think Khadijah’s mom. If I can find a link to that image, I’ll share it – the shapes of the mouth of both Obama and Mary Ayers in that picture are comically similar and frankly, look like the Joker of Batman. Khadijah’s mom looks like the same woman that early pictures of Obama is seen visiting and being carressed by in Africa. There are accounts online of two women in hajibs sitting behind Obama and being rudely asked to leave just because of their attire – I think that the identity of those women might provide a clue (my guess is they are Khadijah and her mom) – Check out Bill Ayers’ wikipedia that seems to be written by himself, he talks about telling Diana Oughton that monogamy isn’t for him way back when Obama would have been born and also about attending orgies. Read this article to hear evidence that Bill Ayers wrote Dreams *from* my Father and this article too: and and then read Fugitive Days and also and you will see an alarming number of common themes, vocabulary and connections. Frank Marshall Davis doesn’t live in Obama’s neighborhood nor has he been fingered as writing his book, nor has his son penned a sweet play about Obama’s conversations with Michelle on their first date: play itself is a short, sweet dramatization of what Barack and Michelle might have talked about on that now canonized interlude at a Baskin-Robbins. And, although no one’s going to start a race riot after seeing this play, you do get to watch some delicious moments. Right out of the blocks, the woman character says, “Hey– Your mama’s white, right?” “So,” comes the retort. “So how come you don’t date white girls?” “Who says I don’t?”
        Watch the video with the Mailman supposedly testifying (to who?) with polygraph and the biggest push is to get everybody to believe that Mary Ayers told the Postman that Obama was foreign. So staged and scripted.

        1. Yikes, that would be something…
          I’ve always contended his mother was a jackel (“Omen” readers out there?)

      3. Nancy Ruth Owens (scripted puppet) on YouTube is the one who I heard from that Obama’s dad is white and mom is black. She shows what looks to be a severely photoshopped picture of a man with dyed red hair, and no lips!!! It looks to me to be an altered picture of Bill Ayers. Nancy says that Obama’s father is named Thomas Beauchamp Owens but I don’t believe it. However, coincidentally, Bill Ayers father IS named Thomas G. Ayers. Nancy never says what the black mother’s name is, I didn’t watch all her YouTube videos, too violent. But I just started looking at photographs from when Obama was a senator, before he knew people would be scrutinizing him. And it seems there are some connections that are more like family than others. Some people live closer and seem to have appeared more often with him than others. Khadijah Farakahn seems suspect to me. Its hard to find the old pictures because new ones are drowning out the old. That is one sign that somebody dishonest with cash wants old info to disappear.


    Based upon Goebbels’ Principles of Propaganda by Leonard W. Doob, published in Public Opinion and Propaganda; A Book of Readings edited for The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. I can paste ‘em here if you can’t locate (isn’t too long).

  16. Has anybody seen these bizarre “Nancy Ruth Owens” YouTubes where she claims to be Obama’s incestuous (as in doing it with Obama!) half-sister. She claims to have been going on “missions” since she was 9, and to have been raped by Pablo Escobar when she was 10. And to have killed and cut off all sorts of people’s limbs and pulled out their hearts and killed JFK, jr. The most interesting thing about listening to her, though, is that she says that Obama’s dad was white and named Thomas Owens while his mom was black. The thing that is interesting about this is that Thomas G. Ayers is the father of Bill Ayers who has been fingered as the author of Obama’s book, Dreams from My Father. And Louis Farrakhan’s wife Khadijah. REmember when there were two women sitting behind Obama with hajib, headscarves, who were asked to leave and it caused a stir? That was probably his mom, Khadijah, and grandma.

    1. From all accounts, a DNA test would prove whether the two girls in the Whitehouse are the Offspring of Mr. Obama, and also prove if he has ever engaged in heterosexual relations. I would bet money on the answer to both points being no.

      1. Oddly, some people don’t have an “eye” for inherited family characteristics. Obama’s girls are his. Do you think this Obama family picture is photoshopped?
        Here is a picture of his grandma and she sure does look like the woman in the other picture I can’t find, where she is standing next to Khadijah who both have Obama’s arms & hands along their shoulders, along with what looks to me like Mary Ayers & Thomas Ayers.

  17. Of course the climate is always changing, and too much pollution is a bad thing. Surely we have all seen blue skies turn to milky gray with all the crisscrossing of airplane trails. If geo-engineering is a good thing, was is their a massive coverup? What would Americans do if they knew the worst storms are caused intentionally?

  18. Climate Change Alert!
    The mayor of Indianapolis banned driving in the city today due to cold temperatures. Are we really this lame of a country anymore. I grew up in upstate NY and would drive 2 hours to go skiing in sub zero temps all the time. Granted, I’m a little older now and not as enthusiastic about going out in the cold, but it seems to me that if we aren’t going to become wimpified(had a better word for this) on our own, the government will enforce a program of wimpification on us. What a bunch of nanny state BS! What if these wimps had been in charge of the Battle of the Bulge,, or the Frozen Chosin? Why don’t we just hang a sign on the front door saying “come on in and whoop us, We’re too cold to fight”. Give people a reason to stay home and watch the price is right and they will take it every time. Probably just a lock down exercise like after the BMB.

    1. Rich, we are in the deep south now but I spent 30 years of my life in Mpls and another several years in another northern State. I experienced the ’94 freeze in Mpls – record number of days where the highs didn’t get out of the -30 range…it was crazy. Lots of warnings to be careful (as bazaar stuff can happen to cars) and schools closed but the state office alerts + the Weather Channel drama = it’s like the new reality TV drama. Yes people, it is cold. Yes, you have to dress right and be smart about things. It’s winter…it is a cold winter. The world is not ending because of the cold 🙂

      Now, Canada: Please shut our attic door…

    2. Exactly, it is the wussification of America. Worked for a utility in upstate NY and attendance was mandatory during storms. When the gov. declared states of emergency, car insurance becomes null and void. The company always said they would cover any liabilities and thank goodness, never had to find out if that was true. Had to travel the thruway and on rare occasions they closed it, the trip was a thousand times more dangerous traveling on winding, deserted, country roads!

    3. I am a libertarian. I believe the state should have no power to make such decrees.

      I live in Indianapolis,and can refute one aspect of Rich’s argument.

      I grew up in Chicago, where nightmarish cold and snow was normative. Here, the line that Interstate 70 draws, slicing through the center of the city, two worlds of weather exist. It’s weird. If you live in northern Indiana, you are used to harsh winters. If you live in southern Indiana you have little idea.

      Rarely is such severe weather seen here. The mayor, if he did not act as he did, would be ruined, politically. This place simply can’t go on as if life is normal. We don’t get weather like this. So cut the poor slob some slack.

      1. Slack? HA! I’m giving him all the slack in the world. I certainly wouldn’t want a person’s political scalp for not telling me to button my coat, and wear warm sockies. That is my responsibility and part of my libertarian make up as well. Of course, if everyone stays inside from the cold and fails to shovel their sidewalks, the resulting slip/fall injuries will be his fault too. So he is screwed either way.

  19. Rush Limbaugh has a caller on discussing chemtrails! He has to be a brave man to be the first to discuss this on a national level! Let’s all take pictures and forward to our reps as this brave caller has done! He jokes about if they are trying to counteract global warming they are very successful, wonder how many this may awake? He has a fb page that I will like!

    1. “He has to be a brave man to be the first to discuss this on a national level”

      I heard it. I didn’t know what to make of it. Certainly Snerdley knows better than to send such calls through.

      Rush is a master of the craft. I had a friend in college who was working on his PhD in communications. This was the early 80s. I never watched TV, but he did. He said that all comedians in America waited to see if Johnny Carson broached a subject before they knew it was “safe.” Johnny was the gatekeeper of what we are allowed to joke about–probably because his instincts were a gift, not because he was taking orders.

      I see Rush as holding that position, in conservative thought.

      I think it was a trial balloon. He was testing the waters. Everyone knows that he would think of chemtrails as a “kook-test” question. Perhaps he thinks it’s on the brink of breaking out, so he let a level-headed caller make the case, and he stood back, taking the stance of an observer well marinated in irony. He can’t be blamed; he didn’t promote it. But if the culture is ready, he can always say that he treated her respectfully. Because that’s true. If there is a backlash, he can say the opposite.

      He knows his business.

      1. Timing is everything! Loved Johnny Carson. Rush was very respectful and to me expressed real concern. Let’s hope this story is about to break, these manmade storms are literally killing us. I’m in SC and many poor folks had their water lines burst with this extended, unprecedented freezing. Was not previously aware most in the south do not have cellars and water lines spraying in the ceiling cause a huge reconstruction issue.

Leave a Reply