Alex talks with architect John Young, who runs the website Cryptome. The site is a repository for information about freedom of speech, cryptography, spying, and surveillance. In February 2010, Cryptome was briefly shut down by Network Solutions for alleged DMCA violations after it posted a "Microsoft legal spy manual." Alex also talks with University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey Professor Donald Light, author of The Risks of Prescription Drugs. Lord Christopher Monckton, prominent critic of the theory of anthropogenic global warming, checks in from Cancun, Mexico, where the United Nations is holding its climate change talks. Alex also covers the latest news and takes your calls.
Ultra elitist environmental group The Royal Society has published a series of papers to coincide with the latest round of UN climate talks, in which influential scientists suggest that politicians should force the population of the developed world to adhere to a system of rationing in order to stave off rising global temperatures.
The papers suggest that 1930s and 40s style crisis rationing should be implemented by Western governments in order to reduce carbon emissions. Such a move would see “limits on electricity so people are forced to turn the heating down, turn off the lights and replace old electrical goods like huge fridges with more efficient models. Food that has travelled from abroad may be limited and goods that require a lot of energy to manufacture.” the London Telegraph Reports.
“The Second World War and the concept of rationing is something we need to seriously consider if we are to address the scale of the problem we face,” one Royal Society affiliated professor states.
Professor Kevin Anderson, Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, added that in his view, economic growth in the developed world should be completely halted within the next two decades if the planet is to avoid mass upheaval in the form of rising sea levels, floods, droughts and mass migration.
“I am not saying we have to go back to living in caves,” he said. “Our emissions were a lot less ten years ago and we got by ok then.”
Ironically, Anderson’s point here reveals a fundamental flaw in the theory of anthropogenic warming, namely that CO2 emissions have increased, yet temperature rise is slowing. By all accounts, the warming trend observed predominantly throughout the 1980s and 90s stopped just over a decade ago.
Even the Royal Society itself was forced to admit this fact in a recently published guide, titled ‘Climate change: a summary of the science’ which was altered following multiple complaints from 43 of the Royal Society’s own members that “knowledgeable people” were seeing through brazenly alarmist climate change rhetoric.
It is hardly surprising to see the Royal Society still pushing a de-industrialization agenda, however, given it’s history and cadre of members and patrons.
The Royal Society, a 350 year old establishment outfit, has traditionally been the most vocal proponent for the hypothesis of AGW.
It was the former president of The Royal Society, Lord May, who made the infamous statement “The debate on climate change is over.”
When he was head of the Society, May told government advisors: “On one hand, you have the entire scientific community and on the other you have a handful of people, half of them crackpots.”
The Royal Society has thrown its full weight behind the global warming movement, lending its absolute support for legislation aimed at reducing carbon emissions by 80%, a process that will devastate the global economy and drastically reduce living standards everywhere.
It has been even more vehement than national governments in its advocacy of the man-made cause of global warming, calling for such drastic CO2 cuts to be made in the short term, not even by the usual target date of 2050.
The society has also conducted extensive research into geoengineering the planet, and continually lobbies the government to divert funding into it. A recently published lengthy UK Government report drew heavily upon the Society’s research and concluded that a global body such as the UN should be appointed to exclusively regulate world wide geoengineering of the planet in order to stave off man made global warming.
This information becomes even more disturbing when you consider the mindset of those who make up the membership of the Society. It is riddled with renowned eco-fascists, open eugenicists and depopulation fanatics.
One notable member is James Lovelock, an eco-fascist who advocates ending democracy and instituting an authoritative elite to oversee global climate management and a radical stemming of the human population in order to combat climate change. He is also a patron of the Optimum Population Trust, a notorious UK-based public policy group that campaigns for a gradual decline in the global human population, which it refers to as “primates” or “animals”, to what it sees as a “sustainable” level.
Lovelock is also an ardent advocate of geoengineering. In 2007 Lovelock proposed laying vast swathes of pipes under the world’s oceans in order to pump water from the bottom of the seas – rich in nutrients, but mostly dead – to the top. The idea being that the action would encourage algae to breed, absorb more carbon and release more dimethyl sulphide into the atmosphere, a chemical known to seed sunlight reflecting clouds. Such methods are also covered in the Commons report.
Another member is Jonathon Porritt, former chair of the UK Sustainable Development Commission, one of former Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, who has stated that Britain’s population must be cut in half from around 60 million to 30 million if it is to build a sustainable society.
Porritt, also a member of the Optimum Population Trust, a connection that caused raised eyebrows when it was announced that Porritt was to be a part of a forthcoming Royal Society“Objective” Global Population Study.
Also on theRoyal Society’s working group for their global population study is another of their patrons, and another OPT member, BBC darling wildlife broadcaster and film-maker Sir David Attenborough. Attenborough has called for a one child policy like that of Communist China to be implemented in Britain. The proposal is one of the OPT’s main initiatives. Again, how is this man’s influence going to result in an “objective” study on population?
Another member of that working group is Cambridge economist Sir Partha Dasgupta, also a fellow of the OPT.
Professor Malcolm Potts, another member of the working group was the first male doctor at the Marie Stopes Abortion Clinic in London, he also advised on the UK’s 1967 Abortion Act.
Marie Stopes was a prominent campaigner for the implementation of eugenicspolicies. In Radiant Motherhood (1920) she called for the “sterilisation of those totally unfit for parenthood [to] be made an immediate possibility, indeed made compulsory.” That group, according to her, included non-whites and the poor.
Stopes, an anti-Semite Nazi sympathizer, campaigned for selective breeding to achieve racial purity, a passion she shared with Adolf Hitler in adoring letters and poems that she sent the leader of the Third Reich.
Stopes also attended the Nazi congress on population science in Berlin in 1935, while calling for the “compulsory sterilization of the diseased, drunkards, or simply those of bad character.” Stopes acted on her appalling theories by concentrating her abortion clinics in poor areas so as to reduce the birth rate of the lower classes.
Stopes left most of her estate to the Eugenics Society, an organization that shared her passion for racial purity and still exists today under the new name The Galton Institute. The society has included members such as Charles Galton Darwin (grandson of the evolutionist), Julian Huxley and Margaret Sanger.
Perhaps most notably, the head of the Royal Society’s new study, John Sulston, most famously played a leading role in the Human Genome Project, the effort to identify and map the thousands of genes of the human genome. Sulston worked under James D. Watson, a notorious eugenicist who has previously argued that black people are inherently less intelligent than whites and has advocated the creation of a “super-race” of humans, where the attractive and physically strong are genetically manufactured under laboratory conditions. Watson is also affiliated with the Royal Society, indeed, in 1993 he received the society’s Copley Medal of honour for “outstanding achievements in research in any branch of science, and alternates between the physical sciences and the biological sciences”.
Sulston is also a leading advocate of the renowned Atheist group, The British Humanist Association.
It is clear that this organisation and these people are immersed in the science of eugenics, and that they have continued the science under the guise of environmentalism. They hate humanity and any notion that their studies will represent anything other than an establishment avocation of mass depopulation is farcical.
Given the standing of the Royal Society and its ability to influence policy making on an international scale, it is imperative that the media, places of education, government representatives and the wider public are made aware of these facts.
—
Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor at Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and regular contributor to Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.
TRANSCRIPT: This week marks the one year anniversary of the release of emails and documents from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia that we now know as Climategate.
Sitting here now, one year later, it’s becoming difficult to remember the importance of that release of information, or even what information was actually released. Many were only introduced to the scandal through commentary in the blogosphere and many more came to know about it only weeks later, after the establishment media had a chance to assess the damage and fine tune the spin that would help allay their audience’s concern that something important had just happened. Very few have actually bothered to read the emails and documents for themselves.
Few have browsed the “Harry Read Me” file, the electronic notes of a harried programmer trying to make sense of the CRU’s databases. They have never read for themselves how temperatures in the database were “artificially adjusted to look closer to the real temperatures” or the “hundreds if not thousands of dummy stations” which somehow ended up in the database, or how the exasperated programmer resorts to expletives before admitting he made up key data on weather stations because it was impossible to tell what data was coming from what sources.
Few have read the 2005 email from Climategate ringleader and CRU head Phil Jones to John Christy where he states “The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only 7 years of data and it isn’t statistically significant.” Or where he concludes: “As you know, I’m not political. If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isn’t being political, it is being selfish.”
Or the email where he broke the law by asking Michael Mann of “hockey stick” fame to delete a series of emails related to a Freedom of Information request he had just received.
Or the email where he wrote: “If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone. We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind.”
Or the other emails where these men of science say they will re-define the peer review process itself in order to keep differing view points out of the scientific literature, or where they discussousting a suspected skeptic out of his editorial position in a key scientific journal, or where theyfret about how to hide the divergence in temperature proxy records from observed temperatures, or where they openly discuss the complete lack of warming over the last decade or any of the thousands of other emails and documents exposing a laundry list of gross scientific and academic abuses.
Of course, the alarmists continue to argue–as they have ever since they first began to acknowledge the scandalÑthat climategate is insignificant. Without addressing any of the issues or specific emails, they simply point to the “independent investigations” that they say have vindicated the climategate scientists.
Like the UK parliamentary committee, which issued a report claiming that Phil Jones and the CRU’s scientific credibility remained intact after a rigorous one day hearing which featured no testimony from any skeptic or dissenting voice. After the release of the report, the committee stressed that the report did not address all of the issues raised by climategate and Phil Willis, the committee chairman admitted that the committee had rushed to put out a report before the British election.
Or the Oxburgh inquiry, chaired by Lord Ron Oxburgh, the UK Vice Chair of Globe International, an NGO-funded climate change legislation lobby group. The Oxburgh inquiry released a five page report after having reviewed 11 scientific papers unrelated to the climategate scandal that had been hand-picked by Phil Jones himself. It heard no testimony or evidence from anyone critical of the CRU. Unsurprisingly, it found the climategaters not guilty of academic misconduct.
Regardless of what one thinks of the veracity or independence of these so-called investigations into the climategate scandal itself, what has followed has been a catastrophic meltdown of the supposedly united front of scientific opinion that manmade CO2 is causing catastrophic global warming.
In late November of 2009, just days after the initial release of the climategate emails, the University of East Anglia was in the hotseat again. The CRU was forced to admit they hadthrown away most of the raw data that their global temperature calculations were based upon, meaning their work was not reproducible by any outside scientists.
In December of that year, the UN’s Copenhagen climate talks broke down when a negotiating document was leaked showing that–contrary to all prÑit would be the third world nations bearing the brunt of a new international climate treaty, with punishing restrictions on carbon emissions that would prevent them from ever industrializing. The document, written by industrialized nations, allowed the first world to emit twice as much carbon per person as the third world, and was widely seen as an implementation of a eugenical austerity program under a “green” cover. This agenda was further exposed by the influential Optimum Population Trust in the UK, which began arguing that same month that rich westerners offset their carbon footprints by funding programs to stop black people from breeding.
In January 2010, the United Nations’ much-lauded Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change began to fall apart as error after error began to emerge in this supposedly unassailable peer-reviewed, scientific document asserting human causation of catastrophic climate change. That month it was revealed that a passing comment to a journalist from an Indian climatologist that the Himalayan glaciers could melt within 40 years found its way into the much-touted Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth report on climate change via a World Wildlife Fund fundraising pamphlet. When IPCC defenders tried to pass the universally derided prediction off as a legitimate mistake, the coordinating lead author of that section of the report admitted that the IPCC knew that the report was based on baseless speculation in a non-peer reviewed work, but included it because “We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action.”
Later that month, doubt was cast on another claim in the IPCC report, this one that 40% of the Amazon rainforest was in danger of disappearing due to manmade global warming. These doubts were confirmed in July when the claim was sourced back to pure, unverified speculation on the now-defunct website of a Brazilian environmental advocacy group. Just this month, the exact opposite of the original claim was shown to be the case when a new study appeared in Science demonstrating that forests in past warming periods were not decimated but in fact blooming with life, experiencing a “rapid and distinct increase in plant diversity and origination rates.”
Also in January, the UK Information Commissioner ruled that researchers at the CRU had broken the law by refusing to comply with Freedom of Information requests, but that no criminal prosecution would follow because of a statute of limitations on prosecuting the illegal activity.
In February, the UK Guardian revealed that a key study co-authored by Phil Jones that purported to show there was no such thing as the well-researched Urban Heat Island effect was found to have relied on seriously flawed data. This, according to the Guardian, led to “apparent attempts to cover up problems with [the] temperature data.”
In September, John Holdren, the man who had previously advocated adding sterilizing agents to the water supply to combat the overpopulation problem which he thought would ravage the Earth by the year 2000, and who currently is the Science czar in the Obama White House,advocated a name change for global warming to “climate disruption,” further affirming the theory’s non-scientific status as an unfalsifiable prediction that anything that ever is due to manmade carbon dioxide.
Later that month, Britain’s prestigious Royal Society rewrote its climate change summary to admit that the science was infused with uncertainties and that “It is not possible to determine exactly how much the Earth will warm or exactly how the climate will change in the future…”
In October, a carbon reduction advocacy group called 10:10 released a video to promote its campaign in which those skeptical about participating in the program are literally blown up.
And just this month, Scientific American, a publication that has been noted for publishing increasingly alarmist reports about the reality and the dangers of manmade-2 induced global warming, a poll of its own readers that found over 77 believe natural processes to be the cause of climate change and almost 80 responded that they would not be willing to pay a single penny on schemes to “forestall” the supposed effects of supposedly-manmade global warming (warming that even climategate scientist Phil Jones now admits is no longer taking place).
And this is only the briefest of overviews of the range of information that Climategate.tv has been tracking over the past year. The reports undermine the data, its sources, the scientific processes used, the scientists themselves, and their conclusions. It shows that the main temperature records that are used to determine the highly-problematic concept of the global mean temperature are in fact in the hands of scientists like Phil Jones and James Hansen with a direct stake in the continuation of the alarmist scare. When these scientists are questioned on the sources of their data they advocate deleting emails and even deleting data itself. They admit that key data underlying their calculations has already been deleted.
And yet, with all of this, they have the audacity to continue to suggest that there is overwhelming concensus on the “science” of global warming. They call for public debates with skeptics who they invariably accuse of being funded by Big Oil, and then, when those debates are actually organized, they then back out of those debates. They then continue to call for the imprisonment of anyone who dares to question this supposed iron-clad .
And now, they are preparing to meet once again.
Next month, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change will descend on Cancun, Mexico, to once again try to hammer out a globally-binding agreement on the restriction of carbon emissions. They will once again act as if carbon dioxide is a vile poison and not one of the essential ingredients of life on this planet. They will once again pretend that a causal link between carbon dioxide and catastrophic or unprecedented warming has been established. They will once again pretend that inflicting severe austerity on the third world in the name of greening the earth is anything other than eugenics by another name.
This year, though, there will be a difference. The public at large is another year older, another year wiser, and less prepared than ever to accept unquestioned the dire assertions of grandstanding politicians and the scientists they fund that the world is on the brink of imminent destruction. When they say the science is certain and settled, we will know better. When they say that this is humanity’s last chance, we will see them for the Chicken Little’s they have always been.
This is not a call for complacency. In fact, now that the public is more skeptical than ever about the climategaters and others of their ilk, the danger of binding international agreements enacted by unelected institutions and empowering global taxation is at an all-time high. They are hoping to ram through an agreement that will put the final nail in the coffin of climate realism before the corpse of the global warming hoax even has the chance to rot.
We have to speak out against this fraud now, and more loudly than ever. We must make our voices heard when we assert that science is about honesty, about openness, about the search for the truth, and that those who reject those principles will no longer be heeded by a public that has been stretched long past the point of credulity.
Once again the UN-funded scientists and politicians are telling us that the hour is nigh, and perhaps, for once, they are right. The end is almost here for those who are trying to establish their global governance in the name of a scientific fraud. If we continue to speak out on this issue, perhaps there will be no UNFCCC conference next year after all.
For if climategate has taught us anything, it is that just one year can make all the difference.
One of the first tasks of the new Republican-controlled House of Congress will be to launch a full investigation into the man-made global warming fraud, as the climate change con that threatens to tax and regulate the American middle class out of existence is exposed to what could prove terminal scrutiny.
“The GOP plans to hold high profile hearings examining the alleged “scientific fraud” behind global warming, a sleeper issue in this election that motivated the base quite a bit,” writes the Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder.
As Politico’s Darren Samuelsohn and Robin Bravender reported yesterday, Barack Obama can count of substantially less allies in his effort to push through his cap and tax agenda, because over two dozen of them were defeated in the mid-term elections, being replaced by Republicans who on the whole are increasingly skeptical towards man-made climate change.
“Come January, Obama will be working with a Congress that will have little appetite for the types of sweeping energy reform he sought over the last two years. With the House in Republican hands, some of the climate issue’s most vocal advocates have been dislodged from their powerful perches, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman,” states the article.
Any proper investigation into global warming is likely to turn up a plethora of evidence of fraud and scientific manipulation.
As the Climategate fiasco and the many other scandals that followed in its wakehighlighted, the establishment scientific community has engineered an effort to silence any voices of doubt towards anthropogenic global warming, and in addition has exaggerated and outright faked data to support their conclusion that man-made CO2 emissions lead to catastrophic climate change.
In the attempt to indoctrinate the world to accept man-made global warming, its proponents have increasingly turned away from hard science and resorted to crude and self-defeating propaganda.
As we have repeatedly highlighted, eco-fascism is bearing its teeth and in doing so revealing the true agenda behind the global warming movement – micro management, authoritarian control, and eventually genocide of the human population.
An infomercial released by the 1010 Global climate group at the end of September depicted children being liquidated in an explosion of blood and guts for not reducing their carbon footprint. The organization was forced to remove the video from its website and issue and apology – but the damage had already been done.
The climate change agenda is already on the ropes and has been for over a year. A true investigation into its fraudulent foundation must be welcomed as another step towards ending its stranglehold over human development, prosperity, and progress for good.
This will also free up resources, funding and time for the real environmental problems in the world to be tackled head on, not the ones invented by Al Gore, Maurice Strong and the rest of the global elite, who couldn’t care less about the environment but have sought to exploit genuine concerns about the planet to push through their dictatorial agenda.
—
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show. Watson has been interviewed by many publications and radio shows, including Vanity Fair and Coast to Coast AM, America’s most listened to late night talk show.
The United Nations has ensnared the world in voluntary treaties intended to become mandatory later, tricking politicians and the public. The treaties may be vague and open to interpretation over time, using a tactic known as ‘incrementalism’. These treaties affect many branches of government. The treaties are designed to deindustrialize and economically break nations, restrict energy resources (especially for electricity and transportation) and implement taxation schemes based on manipulated science from the UN (the EPA has authority to implement Cap-and-Trade).
EVIL DECEPTIONS
Agenda 21 Sustainable Development was introduced at the 1992 Earth Summit; it is not a treaty but uses treaties as a tool to implement its action plan for depopulation and total control. Michael Shaw has described Agenda 21 as the head of a monster whose tentacles have infiltrated all levels of government, affecting almost all areas of life, and he says that if you take out the head of the monster (Agenda 21), its tentacles will wither.
The UN avoids using the word ‘treaty’. Most people understand that treaties erode national sovereignty and power. Voluntary treaties can be used to slide a foot in the door in order to trample sovereignty later through mandatory regulations.
Conventions, Protocols, Agreements, Covenants and Accords take the form of a treaty, which may be binding international legal instruments or may become binding later when negotiations are completed.
An Initiative is a type of referendum in which a proposal is placed on the ballot by way of petition.
A Declaration does not have any legal power to enforce compliance but relies on the moral weight it carries.
UNFCCC: UN Framework Convention on Climate Change is a voluntary treaty ratified by the US in 1992 following the Earth Summit; no limits were set for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but the treaty provided for updates (protocols) to set mandatory limits.
The Kyoto Protocol is an amendment to the UNFCCC which is legally binding but the US never ratified this treaty. The Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012, hence the push to ratify it, or a similar treaty like the Copenhagen Accord.
SCARY POLITICAL POLICIES
According to Richard Courtney’s article (May 1999) the real danger of global warming is the extreme response that politicians have had to imaginary global warming. Courtney says that the theory of global warming was developed during the Industrial Revolution in the 1880’s, but remained relatively obscure until 1979 when Margaret Thatcher became the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
Courtney’s article explains that Thatcher desired respect and followed the advice of Sir Crispin Tickell, depopulation advocate and UK ambassador to the UN. He pointed out that she could gain international credibility if she promoted the global warming (GW) deception because most politicians are scientifically illiterate (Thatcher holds an undergraduate degree in chemistry). The benefits to the Thatcher Administration GW policies were:
* GW fear was used to weaken US power- if all other countries enacted carbon taxes and industrial reductions they could pressure and gain benefit over the US.
* Thatcher belonged to the Conservative Party that held a grudge against the National Union of Mineworkers who were blamed for the Party’s prior defeats, so GW provided an excuse shut down many coal mines and eliminate the miners’ political power.
* Nuclear energy emits no carbon dioxide (CO2), and many coal plants were replaced with nuclear power plants. Nuclear power, which presents its own risks, was 4 times as expensive as coal-fired electricity.
* The new nuclear power plants were necessary to produce nuclear weapons.
Thatcher established the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, the operating agency for the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Hadley is located at East Anglia University, the focal point of the ‘Climategate’ scandal.
RETURN OF THE GLOBAL WARMING ZOMBIE
EPA
UN global warming policies refuse to die because the EPA enforces them and endorses UN IPCC “science”. The EPA created the first Cap-and-Trade scheme for acid rain by expanding the Clean Air Act in 1990 that generates billions a year in taxes for a problem that is not serious and this is the model for carbon taxation.
The EPA, through the Clean Air Act and a broad Supreme Court case ruling in 2007, has authority over air pollution that endangers public health. In 2009 the EPA came out with the CO2 ‘endangerment finding’ that determined CO2 threatens public health! Therefore, the EPA appears to have the authority to regulate harmless CO2 and other minor greenhouse gas emissions (Texas is suing the EPA). The EPA has an 18,000 page document with new regulations that includes a Cap-and-Trade scheme, which is the back-up plan because the national bills for Cap-and-Trade failed.
The EPA and other federal agencies have received money from the taxpayer funded $787 billion Recovery Act stimulus program to pursue useless green policies. Over $7 billion dollars has been allocated to the EPA directly; the total amount for all agencies pursuing restrictions on electricty and transportation, in the name of the environment, is not known.
DOE
The Department of Energy (DOE) has received over $30 billion from the Recovery Act stimulus program. The DOE is spending this money on perpetuating bad UN policies that include:
Energy Efficiency- this paves the way for licensing your home for energy efficiency (HR 2454).
Modernizing the Electric Grid- this program institutes the “Smart Grid” program that monitors your energy usage: how much is used, when it is used, and it can even track some appliances. Some people fear that the government will use the grid to remotely control personal energy usage. Here’s a map of the DOE’s consolidation of federal grids across America:
Carbon Capture and Storage- this program is a giant waste of money because carbon is harmless and even if there was 500% more carbon dioxide in the environment, it would be a benefit for agriculture and would not harm the atmosphere or animals and humans.
Transportation: Obama is proud of this program and boasted about creating jobs at a battery plant in Michigan, but $548 million was spent to create 309 jobs (that’s $1.4 million per job).
Renewable Energy: this program focuses on biofuels, wind and solar power. Biofuel crops have cut down on food production. Wind and solar are inefficient. Of course, industrial hemp, a plant that is a source of fuel, food, paper and plastic replacement, is not mentioned, nor will it receive any funding because it threatens too many monopolies and is illegal to grow.
ECONOMIC VAMPIRES
The centralization of power designed to depopulate and control people is funded by the people. The policies are dreamed up in think tanks affiliated with the UN, like the Club of Rome, famous for this quote:
“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, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”
The policies are then supported by UN “science” that has proven to be manipulated, if not outright fraudulent. Based on inaccurate UN science, nations fund these programs and implement the policies. The taxpayers fund the governments, so We The People are actually paying for our own demise!
NGOs (Non Governmental Organizations) are deeply rooted in promoting propaganda to implement these programs and over 2400 NGO representatives went to the 1992 Earth Summit, and over 17,000 attended the parallel forum.
Here is a list of foundations that fund global warming propaganda and programs:
Deindustrialization through limiting electricity and transportation is a primary goal of Agenda 21 and the people are funding it. Therefore, the people and a true free market should decide the course of the future. Fossil fuels pollute, but severely reducing them would set us back to a pre-industrial existence. Nuclear power has serious risks. Renewable energy will not sustain an industrialized society.
AWAKENING FROM THE NIGHTMARE
Darkness is destroyed by light. Exposure of Agenda 21’s dark intentions is the first critical step. Action is essential. The most effective way to get rid of Agenda 21 is to educate your hometown local government officials (both city and county) that have far more power than most people realize.
Click here to download information from FreedomAdvocates.org to give to your local officials:
We have a tremendous opportunity to replace 37 Governors on November 2nd and to restore State sovereignty and action that can be taken on the state level. Please read “STATES OF EMERGENCY” at MorphCity.com (publish date 10/21/2010).
Here's an interesting event taking place tomorrow as bloggers across the world collectively focus on the topic of water.
Unfortunately, the focus is on supporting the United Nations' efforts to poison our water supply. I joined the site in order to bring attention to the "real" problems we face regarding clean water.
A man of courage steps forth from the ruins of academia. Top AmericanphysicistHal Lewis resigns from the American Physical Society because of the corruption related to the global warming/climate change scam. In a letter to the APS, Lewiswrites; "It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist." From UK's Telegraph:
The following is a letter to the American Physical Society released to the public by Professor Emeritus of physics Hal Lewis of the University of California at Santa Barbara.
Sent: Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis
From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society
6 October 2010
Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).
Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it.
. Lord Christopher Monckton, prominent critic of the theory of anthropogenic global warming, checks in from Cancun, Mexico, where the United Nations is holding its climate change talks. Alex also covers the latest news and takes your calls.
It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!
Ultra elitist environmental group The Royal Society has published a series of papers to coincide with the latest round of UN climate talks, in which influential scientists suggest that politicians should force the population of the developed world to adhere to a system of rationing in order to stave off rising global temperatures.
According to 
