FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Is Climate Change really man-made?
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 61, 62, 63  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> The Bigger Picture
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
9/11 Truth critic


Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:45 pm    Post subject: Is Climate Change really man-made? Reply with quote

Global Warming

By Ken Adachi <Editor>
http://educate-yourself.org/lte/globalwarming13sep06.shtml
September 13, 2006

Subject: global warming
From: Lorna
Date: Wed, September 13, 2006 9:32 pm
To: Ken Adachi < Editor>

Could you help me locate any info about global warming? What I am looking for is to find info about locations that will be affected because of the global warming and all the water rising onto land. And the locations in the world and especially in Canada and the States that could potentially be in damage maybe?

Thanks
UNITY

Lorna

***

Subject: Re: global warming
From: Ken Adachi <Editor>
Date: Thu, September 14, 2006 12:40 am
To: Lorna

Hi Lorna,

"Global Warming" is a psychological operation, a "psyops", to condition the public to believe that we are going to be in a lot of trouble in the near future if we don't take steps "X,Y, & Z", and do it quickly. Those "steps" are what the Illuminati want us to follow so they can further consolidate their control over our lives-and still make a ton of money in the process.

Currently, former vice president Al Gore is one of the leading baton twirlers in this parade, but you have a small army of propaganda peddlers out there who are working day and night to "sell" this 'Inconvenient Truth'.

The "Global Warming" promotion campaign is very much in the same propaganda vein as the 'peak oil' campaign, formerly headed up by CIA family alumni Michael Ruppert (who has now fled the country apparently), and discussed at length on our 'Peak Oil' index page.

They keep on pounding at these propaganda themes in order to get you to SUBCONSCIOUSLY accept them as true. That's why these lying jackals continuously employ words like "truth", "true", "honest", "sincere", etc., while they are lying through their teeth to you. Bush, Rice, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Gore, Clinton, etc., do it ALL the time; pathological liars, one and all, of course, but Tavistock-TRAINED pathological liars.

They use television 'documentary' production companies like WGBH in Boston (Nova) or Frontline to manufacture these 'truths'. Their productions are very well done and to the unknowledgeable and naive, they appear VERY convincing and persuasive, but if you had the advantage of a good education and have learned to think on your own, you can discern the carefully crafted distortions and fabrications that they weave into these propaganda films. Recently, they broadcast a "documentary" over Public TV called "Building on Ground Zero". It's the second so -called documentary that I've seen on TV that pretends to explain how the World Trade Center towers collapsed. It was one continuous lie from beginning to end. It included wonderful computer graphics and simulations, of course, but it was a fanciful load of horse manure all the same.

Somewhere between the mid 70's and mid 80's, they were continuously hammering away at a similar propaganda theme which claimed that chlorinated hydrocarbons, such as freon, were responsible for creating huge "holes" in the ozone layer. We heard this from 'documentary' productions companies and politicians alike for at least ten years. The story was utterly untrue and was in fact concocted by Tavistock. Big Illuminati chemical companies like Dupont (one of the top 13 Illuminati families) made an awful lot of money selling the expensive substitute chemical which was used to replace the far less costly freon. Of course, you had to replace the freon in every sort of refrigeration and air conditioning system in existence because it was mandated by law. These laws were passed because, after ten years of propaganda hammering, everyone simply KNEW that freon caused the hole in the ozone layer!

I recognize that there is physical evidence of the warming of the polar regions, Alaska, etc. Some people will argue that it's a normal fluctuation cycle that the earth has gove through many times before. My own suspicion is that they are using secret technology to create the atmospheric warming over polar regions. HAARP is an obvious one, but I'm sure there are other secret systems that we know nothing about.

If there is coastal flooding in coming years due to melting ice caps, it won't happen suddenly and give you a tidal wave effect. It will be very gradual and you'll have plenty of time to relocate to higher ground. I wouldn't worry so much. It's mostly hype.

Sincerely, Ken

Reader Comments

Subject: Global Warming
From: dookiehippo@hotmail.com
Date: Thu, September 14, 2006 10:15 pm
To: Editor

Dear Ken:

Good reply, but I would take note that glaciers worldwide have diminished markedly in the past decade--rather more than a mere "cyclical" explanation might justify. With respect to the "melting Arctic ice-cap/global flooding" phenomenon, I would propose the following experiment: fill a glass with ice cubes and add water up to a given mark--say, 1/2" from the brim; allow the glass to sit for awhile, and the ice to melt. Guess what? The height of the water remains at the mark. While water expands when frozen, it does not retain that increased volume when melted. If that were not the case, one could generate unlimited energy by freezing and melting water, thereby violating the second law of thermodynamics.

Regards,

Kent

***

Hi Kent,

Yes, I realize the trend has been going on for at least a decade. Art Bell was talking about it on the radio in 1996. I'm thinking that it's more man made than Nature made, that's all.

Yes, ice occupies more volume than water. The Second Law of thermodynamics is not really a "law" at all and has been experimentally "broken" on numerous occasions by Tesla, Reich and others. Eric Dollanrd demonstates that very thing on his 1988 videos made for Borderlands. It's rather amazing to see. See the Products page if interested.

Regards, Ken
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wepmob2000
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 03 Aug 2006
Posts: 431
Location: North East England

PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, Bliar and his gang have been quick to use this as a bandwagon to get their beloved 'Black Boxes' fitted to cars, so they track our movements even more than before. If they were serious about emissions they would introduce for example pation 'rationing', with stepped price levels dependent on consumption.
The rafter of stealth taxes they also propose will only reduce car usage in direct correlation to income, again part of a long term plan to keep people in their place. An immobile population is a more compliant population, which is easier to control.
Car-hating eco-nazi's support this to further their own ends, possibly some kind of utopian Amish style community.
All of this while there is no firm scientific concensus as to the causes of global warming or even if it exists.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
paul wright
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 2651
Location: Sunny Bradford, Northern Lights

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 12:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Isn't global warming a result of the uprating of the global-solar frequency, which is rather freeing for humankind as it attenuates our own frequency levels and renders us rather less dependent on consumption to survive, at the same time rendering those entirely parasitic on the human race more visible and obvious?
And isn't the ultimate ambition of those latter, to damp down and falsify this natural cycle, and attempt through propaganda and frequency manipulation, to keep us all imprisoned or enslaved?
Or have I got it wrong here?

_________________
http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
wepmob2000
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 03 Aug 2006
Posts: 431
Location: North East England

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 1:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dh wrote:
Isn't global warming a result of the uprating of the global-solar frequency, which is rather freeing for humankind as it attenuates our own frequency levels and renders us rather less dependent on consumption to survive, at the same time rendering those entirely parasitic on the human race more visible and obvious?
And isn't the ultimate ambition of those latter, to damp down and falsify this natural cycle, and attempt through propaganda and frequency manipulation, to keep us all imprisoned or enslaved?
Or have I got it wrong here?


Thats definitely something worth looking into, it certainly rings a bell. There is very strong evidence from astronomers that global warming is caused by cyclical solar activity. Certainly there was a 'mini ice age' at the end of the eighteenth century and another smaller one during the 1940's. Of course this does not serve the politicians ends at all, so this kind of information is quietly suppressed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mkpdavies
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 44
Location: Woking

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 2:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's a scam. Ask yourself why this little graph isn't put up along with the others from recent history but the ecoterrorists. They are trying to scare us into submission as usual.



There is going to be an ice age sometime in the next few thousand years, as there has been on a fairly regular cycle of the years.

Taxing the last few pence of earnings out of the proles isn't going to change anything.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
9/11 Truth critic


Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry but what does all this have to do with 911? Rolling Eyes
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE<
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:06 am    Post subject: A bit more than that... Reply with quote

By having characters eg Monbiot promote it internally and have 'climate change' demos they are implementing the other side of the coin of the US new world order.

To tax everyone to death by constantly moving the goalpost. Some of the recent announcements are truly alarming.

Rubbish to be weighed with the use of microchip technology.
Being fined by the council putting in letters into the non-recycling bag.
Paying for the road mileage one uses in their car.
Rubbish only being collected twice a month.

They deindustrialised Britain which had the highest safety standards in the world for coal and now they complain China has 30.000 coalmines churning out toxic fumes. Someone needs to use the energy to produce all the junk tha fills the shopping malls which are expanding so fast soon this whole island will be one giant shopping mall.

The real ecological destruction which are wars for natural resources, global poverty, disease and lack of proper sanitation and water for millions of humans is lost on the corporations which sell ecology like they do the war on terror. They fabricate stories to make everyone feel guilty so in the end they are to be made bankrupt...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3138
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shakes his head sadly

To my mind climate change is relevent to 9/11 through the connection of energy and oil. However if you are going to challenge mainstream scientific community, it would be good if you have some pretty solid science to back it up.

My concern is that those that have posted a debunking of climate change are have not even started to convince me that they know more about the science of climate than me (I work in this field) let alone the combined collective wisdom of the IPCC. I don't claim to be an expert but I certainly know more than your average Joe or Joetta

DH's assertion that the warming of earth's climate is due in part to solar radiation cycles has some merit, but that doesn't even come close to debunking the mainstream science that concludes human activity is responsible for the undoubted warming that the earth is experiencing. The rest is pure speculation.

Please think carefully before pursuing this argument. Presumably the climate scientists that you put such faith in TTWSU3 have a website and some scientific papers we can check out?

Personally I believe if anything the threat to the world of climate change is understated and represented by the mainstream media, but unfortunately I don't really have the time to engage in this debate more fully.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
flamesong
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If global warming was a scam, I'm sure the tax raisers would have seized upon it when ecologists first highlighted the issue about 30 years ago.

Only now, when the Sterne report focusses on the economic effects of global warming do the government pay any attention. The taxes are not designed to fix global warming - they are designed to keep the economy buoyant whilst the crisis is stabilised.

Anybody with a true grasp of the situation must surely realise that the industrialisation of modern capitalism is the major cause. Keeping this system afloat will at best only maintain the ecosystem in a stable damaged state. But that is being hugely optimistic. It would require unprecidented global co-operation and some extremely innovative way of circumventing the built in element of competition, which is the essence of capitalism.

Until the economic system fails the ecological system has a poor prognosis.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
uselesseater
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 629
Location: Leeds

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't see the need for putting forward an argument against human activity causing climate change or to debunk it.

Before you can begin to debunk something there needs to be something to debunk. From reading the 'information' presented in the press, I find it incredible that anyone could come to the conclusion that there is even a high probability of humans being the sole cause of global warming.

I understand the basic principle of radiation being reflected back towards the earth caused by CO2. However the scientific preisthood seem to think they can simply leap to the conclusion that humans are causing global warming, without us noticing. I am still to be convinced of the phenomenon.

Anyone who has done a modicum of research into how the NWO crowd operate will know that any major crisis should be treated with great skepticism.

IMHO it's the begining of Eco-Totalitarianism and the basis of the new one world religion, which involves doing away with the dignity of the individual and elevating the earth godess above humans. It's a great way of getting people to accept and to actuall love the fact of their own slavery. We can see this now as people are wringing their hands with glee over the prospect of the techno-feudal society and being driven into poverty for the good of the planet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
James C
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1046

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

uselesseater wrote:
I don't see the need for putting forward an argument against human activity causing climate change or to debunk it.

Before you can begin to debunk something there needs to be something to debunk. From reading the 'information' presented in the press, I find it incredible that anyone could come to the conclusion that there is even a high probability of humans being the sole cause of global warming.

I understand the basic principle of radiation being reflected back towards the earth caused by CO2. However the scientific preisthood seem to think they can simply leap to the conclusion that humans are causing global warming, without us noticing. I am still to be convinced of the phenomenon.

Anyone who has done a modicum of research into how the NWO crowd operate will know that any major crisis should be treated with great skepticism.

IMHO it's the begining of Eco-Totalitarianism and the basis of the new one world religion, which involves doing away with the dignity of the individual and elevating the earth godess above humans. It's a great way of getting people to accept and to actuall love the fact of their own slavery. We can see this now as people are wringing their hands with glee over the prospect of the techno-feudal society and being driven into poverty for the good of the planet.


I'm sorry but the posts claiming climate change to be a conspiracy are typical of all those by people who do not want to accept any responsibility for their actions. If anything, climate change will be a great way of giving power back to the masses as we adjust to living in a carbon reversing world. Think about, less use of oil and gas to feed the greedy corporations. Ever heard of the struggle Cuba faced after its Russian oil suppliers pulled the plug? Cuba's society is now one of the best examples of how people power can get things done.

Read here;

http://www.beyondpeak.com/cuba-beyondpeak.html

I have long since held the view and have promoted such on this website, much to the scorn of others, that 9/11 was about gaining a strategic foothold on oil, gas and the political power attached to these commodities. Climate change, I believe, is a thorn in the side for the PTB who know that not only is oil and gas coming to an end but global warming will add to the whole chaos. That said, it is great cover for the fact that the major governments have f@cked up when it comes to managing the oil supply and tallies well with the need to reduce oil and gas consumption now that oil supply is going into decline. Still, there is plenty of evidence to show that climate change is for real.

Critics might like to read a little by James Lovelock before assuming some conspiracy is at work. Try here
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 6:37 pm    Post subject: Playing their game... Reply with quote

James C wrote:


I'm sorry but the posts claiming climate change to be a conspiracy are typical of all those by people who do not want to accept any responsibility for their actions. If anything, climate change will be a great way of giving power back to the masses as we adjust to living in a carbon reversing world. Think about, less use of oil and gas to feed the greedy corporations. Ever heard of the struggle Cuba faced after its Russian oil suppliers pulled the plug? Cuba's society is now one of the best examples of how people power can get things done.

Read here;

http://www.beyondpeak.com/cuba-beyondpeak.html

I have long since held the view and have promoted such on this website, much to the scorn of others, that 9/11 was about gaining a strategic foothold on oil, gas and the political power attached to these commodities. Climate change, I believe, is a thorn in the side for the PTB who know that not only is oil and gas coming to an end but global warming will add to the whole chaos. That said, it is great cover for the fact that the major governments have f@cked up when it comes to managing the oil supply and tallies well with the need to reduce oil and gas consumption now that oil supply is going into decline. Still, there is plenty of evidence to show that climate change is for real.

Critics might like to read a little by James Lovelock before assuming some conspiracy is at work. Try here


I have tried to claim responsibility for my actions but I am always subverted in that by the corporations. They control society and its products not me. I cannot be made to feel guilty as I dont practice re-cycling which is the ecological answer to increased taxes for the super rich corporations. They who CONTROL PRODUCTION should change production. You cannot ask a poor man to stop burning trees if he is goint to die in the winter without fuel. You cannot ask the hungry person to be environmentally aware when the basics of life aren't guaranteed and Corporations waste 25% of everything they manufacture.

Climate change is exactly like the war on terror. Everyone has heard about it knows about but cant locate it. Some people think its in the ozone, some think its in the cars or airplanes, some think its a cycle nothing to worry about.

To honestly believe that people like Al Gore who run campaigns on climate change aren't up to something sinister or there isn't a conspiracy is indeed to play their game...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
uselesseater
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 629
Location: Leeds

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 7:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

James C wrote:


I'm sorry but the posts claiming climate change to be a conspiracy are typical of all those by people who do not want to accept any responsibility for their actions.

Still, there is plenty of evidence to show that climate change is for real.



Yes I'm all for decentralised energy, free energy or just cleaner energy. However I severly doubt we will ever get this as it is simply far to subversive to allow anyone that level of freedom for certain interests.

I'm not denying a link between human activity and climate change, it's just that i've never seen or heard anything which comes close to proving a link even to a reasonable probability. I do, however remain very open to persuasion.

What I have noticed with proponents of the 'human cause' theory is the fallicious nature of their arguments including mainly appeals to authority, appeals to common belief or presenting a correlation as proof.

Thanks for the link to the book but I have a shelf full of unread books which is ever increasing so I would no doubt never get around to reading it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
quizard
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

this is a good thread
the point a wish to make if i may is that global warming may be happening or maybe not i have not seen anything that has compleatly swayed me in any one direction.

But acting an enviromentaly friendly fashinon for example recycling or using less resourses can only be a good thing. The reason i say this is becasus we should use less because we should have consideration that the ther creatures that share this plannet with us. it is not that we should follow what goverment tells us to do but act as theself appointed costodians of a beautifull plannet. when we are told from many resourses media, scientists, educated indivuals that our climate is changing in one way or another we should realise that the only constant that we know is that there will be change but it is the interpritations of that change that influence us . Look at th inomation given to us to make our conclusions is it bias or is it clearly defined, no it is not we can argue if it is warming or not but realising that as human creatures we can care for our enviroment around us and realising we are not the only animals that live on this plannet and being so big headed that we can solve it by a few discussions and arguments . it is not that i think we can not do something that the will has been sapped and if we are to change like most things has to start from the bottom . when the leader of this country says some thing we question it not because we are 911 or 77 or illumanati theorists but because it is not up to society to believe every thing the goverment does we are allowed to question it and decide if we should or should not act. think about it if you can act shurly you should act as a caring individual that wants not just the truth to come out about 911 etc but someone that cares that society have been decieved and if you care about society you should care for the enviromental impact arround you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
9/11 Truth critic


Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi quizard

Welcome to the site

Why don't you use spellchecker on microsoft word and then cut and paste your message.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
insidejob
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 470
Location: North London

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:42 pm    Post subject: Environment hoax? Reply with quote

Extracts from two books

A CENTURY OF WAR: Anglo-American oil politics and the New World Order
William Engdahl

(part of his argument is that the big oil companies and international banks instigated the 1970s oil price hikes not the Saudis. A 1973 Bilderberg meeting attended by top Westerm politicians and business people was informed of the price hikes before they happened by international banker, Lord Victor Rothschild, who was a research chief at BP at the time. High oil prices meant profits for oil companies and the US dollar as a world currency because oil was priced in dollars. The real rulers of the world are part of the Anglo-American establishment centred on Wall Street, the City of London and key industries like oil and the media.)

Chapter 9, Running the world economy in reverse: Who made the 1970s oil shocks?

Developing the Anglo-American green agenda
p143
'It was no accident that, following the oil shock recession of 1974-75, a growing part of the population of western Europe, especially in Germany, began talking for the first time in the postwar period about 'limits to growth', or threats to the environment, and began to question their faith in the principle of industrial growth and technological progress. Very few people realised the extent to which their new 'opinions' were being carefully manipulated from the top by a network established by the same Anglo-American finance and industry circles that lay behind the Saltsjobaden oil strategy.'

p144
'Beginning in the 1970s, an awesome propaganda offensive was launched from select Anglo-American think tanks and journals, intended to shape a new 'limits to growth' agenda, which would ensure the 'success' of the dramatic oil shock strategy. The American oilman present at the May 1973 Saltsjobaden meeting of the Bilderberg group, Robert O. Anderson, was a central figure in the implementation of the ensuing Anglo-American ecological agenda. It was to become one of the most successful frauds in history.
'Anderson and his Atlantic Richfield Oil Co. funneled millions of dollars through their Atlantic Richfield Foundation into select organisations to target nuclear energy. One of the prime beneficiaries of Anderson's largesse was a group called Friends of the Earth, which was organised in this time with a $200,000 grant from Anderson.'

'The director of Friends of the Earth in France, Brice Lalonde, was the Paris partner of the Rockefeller (oil and banks) family law firm Coudert Brothers, and became Mitterand's environment minister in 1989.'

'British uranium mining giant Rio Tinto Zinc secretly deployed Friends of the Earth in Australia to mobilise opposition to the pending Japanese agreement (on uranium), resulting some months later in the fall of Whitlam's government, Friends of the Earth had 'friends' in very high places in London and Washington.'

p145
'From the outset, the June 1972 Stockholm UN Conference on the Environment was run by operatives of Anderson's Aspen Institute. Aspen board member Maurice Strong, a Canadian oilman from Petro-Canada, chaired the Stockholm conference. Aspen also provided financing to create an international zero-growth network under UN auspices, the International Institute for Environment and Development, whose board included Robert O. Anderson, Robert McNamara, Strong and British Labour Party's Roy Jenkins. The new organisation immediately produced a book, 'Only one Earth', by Rockefeller University associate Rene Dubos and British Malthusian Barbara Ward (Lady Jackson).'

p146
'Among the groups which were funded by these people at the time were organisations including the ultra-elitist World Wildlife Fund, then chaired by the Bilderberg's Prince Bernhard and later by Royal Dutch Shell's John Loudon.'

'With Anderson as chairman and Atlantic Richfield head Thomson Bradshaw as vice-chairman, the Aspen Institute in the early 1970s was a major financial conduit for the creation of the establishment's new antinuclear agenda.

'Had the 1974 oil crisis not raised the market price of oil to $11.65 per barrel or thereabouts, Anderson's investments in the North Sea and Alaska, as well as those of British Petroleum, Exxon and the others would have brought financial ruin. To ensure a friendly press voice in Britain, Anderson at this time purchased the London Observer. Vitually no one asked in Anderson and his influential friends might have known in advance that Kissinger would create the conditions for 400 per cent oil price rise.'

'So as not to leave any zero-growth stone unturned, Robert O. Anderson also contributed significant funds to a project initiated by the Rockfeller family at the Rockefeller's estate at Bellagio, Italy, with Aurelio Peccei and Alexander King. In 1972, this Club of Rome, gave widespread publicity to their publication of a scientifically fraudulent computer simulation prepared by Dennis Meadow and Jay Forrester, titled 'Limits to Growth'. Meadows and Forrester added modern computer graphics to the discredited essay of Malthus, insisting that the world would soon perish for lack of adequate energy, food and other resources. As did Malthus, they chose to ignore the impact of technological progress on improving the human condition. Their message was one of unmitigated gloom and cultural pessimism.'

p147
'One of the most targeted countries for this new Anglo-American antinuclear offensive was Germany. While France's nuclear program was equally if not more ambitious, Germany was deemed an area where Anglo-American intelligence assets had better likelihood of success, given their history in the postwar occupation of the Federal Republic. Almost as soon as the ink had dried on the Schmidt government's 1975 nuclear development program, an offensive was launched.'

'A key operative in this new project was a young woman with a German mother and an American stepfather, who had lived in the United States until 1970, working for US Senator Hubert Humphrey, among other things. Petra K Kelly had developed close ties in her US years with one of the principal new Anglo-American antinuclear organisations created by McGeorge Bundy's Ford Foundation, the Natural Resources Defense Council. The Natural Resources Defense Council included Barbara Ward (Lady Jackson) and Laurence Rockefeller among its board members at the time. In Germany, Kelly began organising legal assaults against the construction of the German nuclear program during the mid-1970s, resulting in costly delays and eventual large cuts in the entire German nuclear plan.'

Population control becomes a US national security issue
'In 1798 an obscure English clergyman, Thomas Malthus, professor of political economy in the employ of the British East India Company's East India College at Haileybury, was given instant fame by his English sponsors for his 'Essay on the Principle of Population'. The essay itself was a scientific fraud, plagiarised largely from a Venetian attack on the positive population theory of American Benjamin Franklin.
The Venetian attack on Franklin's essay had been written by Gianmaria Ortes in 1774. Malthus' adaptation of Ortes' 'theory' was refined with a facade of mathematical legitimacy which he called the 'law of geometric progression', which
he called the invariably expanded geometrically, while the means of subsistence were arithmetically limited, or linear. The flaw in Malthus' argument, as demonstrated irrefutably by the spectacular growth of civilization, technology and agriculture productivity since 1978, was Malthus' deliberate ignoring of the contributing of advances in science and technology to dramatically improve such factors as crop yields, labour productivity and the like.'

p148
'By mid-1970s, as an indication of the effectiveness of the new propaganda onslaught from the Anglo-American establishment, American government officials were openly boasting in public press conferences that they were committed 'neo-Malthusians', something for which they would have been laughed out of office a mere or so earlier. But nowhere did the new embrace of British Malthusian economics in the United States show itself more brutality than in Kissinger's National Security Council.'

'On October 16, 1975, on Kissinger's urging, President Gerald Ford issued a memorandum confirming the need for 'US leadership in world population matters', based on the contents of the classified NSSM 200 document. The document made Malthusianism, for the first time in American history, an explicit item of security policy of the government of the United States.'

'NSSM 200 argued that population expansion in select developing countries which also contain key strategic resources necessary to the US economy posed potential US 'national security threats'. The study warned that, under pressure from expanding domestic populations, countries with essential raw materials will tend to demand higher prices and better terms of trade for their exports ot the United States. In this context, NSSM 200 identified a target list of 13 countries singled out as 'strategic targets' for US efforts at population control. The list, which was drawn up in 1974, is instructive. No doubt, as with other major decisions of Kissinger, the selection of countries was made after close consultation with the British Foreign Office.'

p149
'The 13 target countries named by Kissinger's study were Brazil, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Egypt, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Turkey, Ethiopia and Colombia.'

HOW THE WORLD REALLY WORKS
Alan B. Jones
Chapter 8 'The Greening'

(The Iron Mountain report was eventually declared a hoax by the people who leaked it. But the report's proposals are not the less with us today. It was the analysis and proposals of a secret, influential study group in the 1960s. It looked at how to maintain social control without war. War was thought to: i. give power over people to governments; ii. maintain social stratification; iii. waste money so as the poor don’t get it; iv. reduced populations etc. Proposals to replace war included: the space race; social spending; the cold war and the environment.)

p149
'The subtitle of (Larry) Abraham's book ('The Greening', 1992) is 'The Environmentalists' Drive for Global Power', and describes how the war-substitute that appeared most feasible to the Iron Mountain study group has been converted into an action program.'

p150
'The environmental issue has clearly been selected as the major policy initiative to be developed. Recall that the Iron Mountain report expressed doubt that this issue would prove to be viable if dealt with only on its inherent merits, since the public would not likely view a sullied environment as a sufficiently severe threat to justify spending massive amounts of money on it, much less give up one's life in such a cause. It might be possible, however, to enhance the environmental threat, or even to invent a fake issue if an appropriate real one could not be found, though the conferees thought it better not to further discuss such possibilities in their written report.'

'In the first few pages of his book, Abraham plainly states his fundamental thesis. The real goal of the secret elites, he says, "is nothing less than to control natural resources worldwide. The Insiders of Environmentalism realise - even if many innocent bystanders do not - that the wealth of the world consists of the things that men take form the earth, and they want to control it all... For what is now being unleashed in the name of 'saving the earth' is nothing less than the most historic grab for power in all of human history."

p151
'In April 1970 there also appeared an article by insider George F Kennan in the Council on Foreign Relations' journal 'Foreign Affairs', entitled 'To Prevent a World Wasteland...A Proposal'. The article, no doubt written for the edification of the worker bees in the fields of the elites, was nothing less than the concrete plan for implementing the environmental project suggested by the Iron Mountain Special Study Group...'

p153
'...Just in case the Establishment workers still don't get it, Kennan specifically spells out the environmental issue is to replace society's fixation on the then-current Cold War, of which Kennan was a major architect, as Abraham clearly document. Kennan emotes: "Not only the international scientific community but the world at large has great need, at this dark hour, of a new and more promising focus of attention. The great communist and Western powers, particularly, have need to replace the waning fixation for the cold war with interests which they can pursue in common and to everyone's benefit. For young people the world over, some new opening of hope and creativity is becoming an urgent spiritual necessity. Could there, one wonders, be any undertaking better designed to meet these needs, to relieve the great convulsions of anxiety and ingrained hostility that now rack international society, than a major international effort to restore the hope, the beauty, and the salubriousness of the international environment in which man has his being?"'

p154
It appears in a 1991 book by Jim MacNeil called Beyond Interdependence: 'The Meshing of the World's Economy and the Earth's Ecology', published by the Trilateral Commission, and containing a foreword by David Rockefeller himself. The book lays out the major goal to be sought at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit meeting then being planned: "The major purpose of this conference is to launch a global transition to sustainable development."

"Sustainable growth" says Abraham is "Insider jargon for Green de-industrialisation, global cartelisation of natural resources, and international control of the world's economy... It is a new synonym for Iron Mountain's 'stability', i.e., perpetuating Insider control." We have referred to the same term as "social stability", meaning "keeping the Low's in poverty and the High's in power, forever."

p155
"Politically," says Abraham, "MacNeill teaches that environmental interdependence means the end of national sovereignty. It will provide the 'external necessity' for a world government with new laws and regulations aplenty." And if some nations don't rush to relinquish their sovereignty, remember erosion by the "steady encroachment on their sovereignty by the forces of economic interdependence."

p157
'Dominating the leadership of the US Establishment was the Wall Street lawyer for both Andrew Carnegie and JP Morgan, Elihu Root. Root was both chairman of the Carnegie Endowment and the first honorary chairman of the CFR. Orbiting Root were Morgan bank partners John W. Davis (CFR president 1921-33), Dwight Morrow, Thomas Lamont and Henry Davison, along with other legal powerhouses such as Paul Cravath, Norman Davis, Russell Leffifngwell, and Root's special protégé, Col. Henry L. Simson (FDR's Secretary of War)."

p160
'In September 1987, in Denver, Colorado, there occurred a conference called the Fourth World Wilderness Conference. The 1500 delegates from 60 countries found upon arriving that a conference Declaration had been written for them, stating in part that, because more funding was needed for expanding conservation activities, "a new conservation banking program should be created to integrate international aid for environmental management into coherent common programs for recipient countries based on objective assessments of each country's resources and needs."
These words clearly were not written by whale lovers and tree huggers in attendance, but more likely by the most major of the several major actors that were found in attendance, who included not only David Rockefeller of the Chase Manhattan Bank, but even the seldom seen (in public) Baron Edmund de Rothschild, representing the interests of his 200-year-old international banking family. Abraham suggests that we best pay close attention.'

p161
'In the Third World, we hark back to the fact of the Third World's unpayable debts, and listen to the conference's plan. It proposes that the WCB "act as intermediary between certain developing countries (e.g. Brazil) and multilateral or private banks (e.g. Chase) to transfer a specific debt (Brazil's debt to Chase) to the World Conservation Bank, thus substituting an existing doubtful debt on the bank's books (Brazil owes Chase) for a new loan to the WCB (WCB owes Chase) in return for having been relieved of its debt obligation, the debtor country (Brazil) would transfer to the WCB natural resource assets of 'equivalent value'..."

p162
'The elites wish to reduce the targeted Third World populations to a bare subsistence level in order to reduce to a minimum the costs of producing the raw materials on the lands which the elites are presently trying to wrest from those target countries in the name of world environmentalism.'

p164
'He (Abraham) notes that we should notes that we should not be surprised to find that the figures at the helm of each and every one of the major environmental foundations (such as the World Wildlife Fund, the Heritage Trust, the Nature Conservancy, the National Wildlife Federation, the Sierra Club, the World Wilderness Congress, Conservation International, and the Center for Earth Resource Analysis) are key members of the elite political organsations previously and repetitiously identified (i.e. the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, the Club of Rome, and the Trilateral Commission).'

p165/166
"In May 1990 Daniel Wood interviewed Strong for West magazine. Strong presented the idea that the only way to save the planet from destruction is to see to it that the industrialised civilizations collapse...Wood recounts the conversation: Strong has a novel he'd like to do...In the novel's plot, the World Economic Forum convenes in Davos, Switzerland. Over a thousand CEOs, prime ministers, finance ministers, and leading academics gather... to attend meetings and set economics agendas for the year ahead..."What if" (says Strong) "a small group of these world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it?"...Strong resumes his story. "The group's conclusion is 'no'. The rich countries won't do it. They won't change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialised civilisations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?
"This group of world leaders," he continues, "form a secret society to bring about an economic collapse...These aren't terrorists. They're world leaders. They have positioned themselves in the world's commodity and stock markets...and have engineered, using their access to stock exchanges and computers and gold supplies, a panic. Then, they prevent the world's stock markets from closing. They jam the gears. They hire mercenaries who hold the rest of the world leaders at Davos as hostages. The markets can't close. The rich countries..."

p168
'By and large the environmental groups are active and moving into education. Abraham notes that these environmental groups involve not only private organisations, such as the National Audubon Society, but large corporate entities as well, including Dow Chemicals, AT&T, Exxon, and 3M. "Is it only an accident," asks Abraham, "that all (of these corporate entities) are also members of the National Wildlife Federation's Corporate Conservation Council as well as Maurice Strong's Business Council for Sustainable Development?" He winds up his discussion of the green indoctrination of our children with a look at Captain Planet and similar programs on children's TV.'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
quizard
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry a bit of a rant for that one but i will use it next time thanks for the advice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3138
Location: UK

PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

uselesseater wrote:
.... presenting a correlation as proof.


Sure in climate science there is little that is proven absolutely but when you have geological/tree-ring/ice core/temperature data correlating the way they do showing the link between atmospheric concentrations of green house gases and global temperatures, that is pretty strong evidence.

If you don't believe in climate 'science' (such as the correlation between different variables and the science that explains these correlations) what do you believe in.

There are 3 very good reasons to move away from oil dependence: imminent peak oil (not something I personally accept), human induced climate change (something I do believe beyond any doubt) and the oil curse (which again is beyond doubt: just ask the people of the Niger Delta and countless other places 'blessed' with oil (eg Iraq)).

Any one of these reasons is good enough for us to move away from oil.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
uselesseater
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 629
Location: Leeds

PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ian neal wrote:
uselesseater wrote:
.... presenting a correlation as proof.


Sure in climate science there is little that is proven absolutely but when you have geological/tree-ring/ice core/temperature data correlating the way they do showing the link between atmospheric concentrations of green house gases and global temperatures, that is pretty strong evidence.


Yes I'm in total agreement that greenhouse gases accompany periods of warming. This is not debated, this is what the data shows.

As periods of warming appear to have been always been accompanied by increases in CO2 what I think is up for debate is which is cause and which is effect. Some mainstream (proponents of the human activity hypothesis) climatologists acknowledge that in periods of warming preceed higher levels of CO2 by 800 years.

ian neal wrote:

There are 3 very good reasons to move away from oil dependence: imminent peak oil (not something I personally accept), human induced climate change (something I do believe beyond any doubt) and the oil curse (which again is beyond doubt: just ask the people of the Niger Delta and countless other places 'blessed' with oil (eg Iraq)).

Any one of these reasons is good enough for us to move away from oil.


I'm in total agreement in the need to get away from oil use. It's obsurd that in the 21st century that we still burn fossil fuels for our main source of energy. Nobody likes breathing in the filth that cars produce everyday.

In addition to the reasons you give above I would also say that decentralising the energy supply is of vast significance. If you can't produce your own energy you are basicly a slave to those who control it.

I don't hold out much (any) optimism for workable solutions in the future as long as the current energy cartel remains in power. The prospect of free (solar, wind) energy becoming widely used and useable is highly unlikely. If it were the government would no doubt tax you for using it, just as they do if you source your own biodesiel.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 5:37 pm    Post subject: Sick And Tired Of Being Lectured By Global Warming Hypocrite Reply with quote

Sick And Tired Of Being Lectured By Global Warming Hypocrites
Private jet flying, CO2 belching, bags made by slaves in China transported thousands of miles buying, bulb banning, Al Gore worshipping morons wagging their finger at me when I don't even drive a car get under my skin


Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, April 27, 2007


Quote:
I've had enough of it.

Ninnying fatuous self-important morons who demand that everyone else make sacrifices in the name of mother earth while they zoom around in CO2 belching private jets and lavish themselves in heated swimming pools are hypocrites but perhaps we should be grateful that their frothing absurdities are causing the man-made global warming cult to lose whatever credibility it has left.

Last week, singer Sheryl Crow demanded that we all use one square of toilet paper per bathroom visit to help save the planet. Shortly after these ridiculous comments, the Smoking Gun website uncovered documents showing Crow's touring requirements, which include three tractor trailers, four buses and six cars. I don't even drive a car, so to be lectured about what I can and can't do after I take a * is a bit rich coming from someone whose "carbon footprint" is bigger than King Kong's treads.

At the British premiere of his movie Wild Hogs, actor John Travolta urged everyone to "do their bit" to fight global warming, warning that "We have to think about alternative methods of fuel."

I fly commercial perhaps once every two years for a brief holiday. Travolta has five private jets parked in his runway (pictured above), has produced an estimated 800 tons of carbon emissions, 100 times more than the average person in the last year, is a "serving ambassador" for the Australian airline Qantas and named his son Jett as a tribute to his love of flying. So when Travolta lectures me about "doing my bit" forgive me for taking it with a pinch of salt.

Al Gore is the messiah for the climate change fanatics and his error-strewn polemic An Inconvenient Truth, has been dispatched to every British school on orders of the Blair government, so that kids may be forcefully brainwashed into accepting that man-made global warming is as much a reality as the surveillance cameras, metal detectors and biometric scanning for lunches that they have to endure as part of their "education."

Gore's 20 room private mansion uses 20 times the national U.S. average of gas and electricity, as Gore lavishes himself in his heated swimming pool while poor people and the middle class await the onslaught of carbon taxes to eviscerate any disposable income they have left.

Gore is behind the spectacle of the Live-8 style Live Earth concerts that will take place in numerous cities around the world on July 7 to raise awareness about climate change. The performers who will be showcased at these concerts include people like Madonna, who owns at least 6 gas-guzzling cars including a Mercedes Maybach, two Range Rovers, Audi A8s and a Mini Cooper S.

According to a report, last year "Madonna flew as many as 100 technicians, dancers, backing singers, managers and family members on a 56-date world tour in private jets and commercial airliners." The singer's Confessions tour produced 440 tonnes of CO2 in four months of last year.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------
The Internet leader in activist media - Prison Planet.tv. Thousands of special reports, videos, MP3's, interviews, conferences, speeches, events, documentary films, books and more - all for just 15 cents a day! Click here to subscribe! Find out the true story behind government sponsored terror, 7/7, Gladio and 9/11, get Terror Storm!
---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------

Other acts, including rock group Red Hot Chili Peppers, all use private jets yet are set to throw their stardom behind an effort to propagandize the notion that we are producing too many carbon emissions.

This will all be eagerly lapped up by the majority of Britons, who are zealously supportive of government programs that punish people who don't jump on the climate bandwagon. Fines for putting rubbish in the wrong colored trash can are now commonplace, as state spies roam around leafy suburbs searching through people's bins for evidence of dastardly "enviro-crimes" while tiny cameras are placed inside bean cans to catch potential villains.

The exact level of idiocy these morons embrace was underscored perfectly yesterday when throngs of them queued up outside a London supermarket from 3am to buy "eco-friendly" bags that have become the latest must-have fashion item and another ego trinket for them to grandstand and revel in the pomp that they are saving Mother Earth.

In reality, the bags were made by slaves in China and transported thousands of miles by CO2 belching jet planes. But let's not concern ourselves about that - as long as we can feel good about ourselves while wagging our finger in judgment at anyone who uses those dirty old plastic bags that's all that matters.

These kind of simpletons are also behind the move to completely criminalize the ownership of incandescent light bulbs, despite the fact that their precious "energy saving light bulbs" are loaded with toxic waste that's already banned under EU regulations. They also contain deadly Mercury which will end up in our land fills and our water supply once use of the new CFL bulbs becomes mandatory.

If you still believe in the notion of man-made global warming, then you should be very concerned about the fact that the leading proponents of the theory are all giant hypocrites espousing outlandish and radical measures to combat climate change while fearmongering about doomsday scenarios that will befall us unless we all drastically reduce our carbon footprints, while their own carbon footprints dwarf the average person's by a hundred times or more.

The result of this will be that the mantra of man-made global warming will begin to look increasingly inane and it will eventually lose steam. People with an ounce of common sense will see through the fact that a natural cycle of warming that occurs every few hundred years does not mean the end of the world, and that hysteria is deliberately being whipped up on behalf of governments in order to grease the skids for draconian taxation and control measures that won't even do anything to combat man-made global warming even if it was real, but will do everything to aid the construction of the prison planet that the elite have planned all along.

Meanwhile, real environmental issues like genetically modified garbage poisoning our very food supply, the disappearance of huge swathes of the bee populations across the world, deforestation and toxic waste dumping, all get buried while global warming monopolizes the attention of the phony environmental movement.

No doubt there'll be several responses to this article accusing me of denying that the planet is heating up and saying I'm on the payroll of the oil companies. For those people, I would like to remind you of the fact that it was none other than Peter Sutherland, the chairman of British Petroleum, who rallied his fellow elitists at the Trilateral Commission meeting last month, to exploit the hysteria of global warming in order to impose a standardized carbon tax, a measure that will create artificial scarcity and, just like peak oil, raise prices, reaping billions in profits for oil industry moguls at the very top of the ladder.

-----------------------------------
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wepmob2000
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 03 Aug 2006
Posts: 431
Location: North East England

PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The 'solution' to global warming is always a case of 'do as I say, not as I do'. Its simply the greatest scam ever invented to keep the masses in their proper place.

8000 years ago you could walk from northern England to Denmark, and from the South East to Calais. Yet we are now supposed to fall into line and give up travel, give up our cars, pay more taxes, and a host of other things because rising seas are a 'recent phenomenon', and it must be our (i.e: the plebs) fault.

Notice that none of the measures will make one jot of difference to the elite. We are free to sacrifice a great deal while the elites are free to carry on as normal (with the added bonus of clear roads).

(Did anyone else watch the Time Team special on Tuesday, it cast an interesting perspective on the global scam that is global warming.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
karlos
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 5:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I quite agree.
Although i must confess i have never flown on an aeroplane in my life.

In the 1914 war Germany was flying airships over London and dropping bombs out of the windows by hand. So green travel was around along time ago. Britain has had electric cars like milk floats for over 50 years. The hoover dam was built in the 1930s.
So green energy and green transport has been around for ages
What about windmills and waterwheels and canals

the point is it is the global elite who force us to use petrol
brazil uses sugar based fuel

but now the ruling classes have learnt that they can squeeze us for more taxes more hardships and use the excuse of global warming

it is all lies and double standards. i tried to set up a green transport business, councils, hospitals and the london mayor all refused me, i told them they were in breech of their obligations under the kyoto protocols, but who can i complain to?

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
blackcat
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 7:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
In the 1914 war Germany was flying airships over London and dropping bombs out of the windows by hand.

Not just London - the b****** dropped some on my home town 300 miles north!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
karlos
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Im sorry to hear that.
But airship technology could be improved and it does use very little fuel and can carry alot of people or freight.
As can the canals.
Government doesnt really care.
How many people complained when buncefield depot burnt?
None, no green party person, no other environmentalist said a whisper about pollution during that period.

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Justin
9/11 Truth Organiser
9/11 Truth Organiser


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 500
Location: Cumbria / Yorkshire Dales

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How's this for a coincidence.........I've just come back from Southport today visiting parents and friends and whilst there I visited my favourite second hand book shop. I happen to collect contemporary accounts of the First World War, with my collection of books being mainly but not exclusively naval, and today I bought the 1923 second edition book by Commander A. Rawlinson CMG, CBE, DSO entitled THE DEFENCE OF LONDON 1915-1918. He was a naval volunteer officer brought in by the Admiralty to find a way of shooting down Zeppelins. It looks a great book, written with that wonderful British spirit of 'gifted amateurism', coupled with the ability to 'make do' with whatever is at hand. Apparently, we initially used blind people because of their acute hearing and their ability to detect from which direction the Zeppelin was approaching!!!

Now to the scam that is Man Made Global Warming. With Mars, Jupiter, Venus and Pluto all showing signs of getting warmer, it is clear beyond all reasonable doubt that our friend the Sun has something to do with it. Combatting Global Warming and CO2 is becoming as, if not more, important as fighting the War on Terror - both scams are being used in equal proportions at the moment to persuade the population of the world to willingly accept a fascist global dictatorship that has all our 'best interests' at heart. They (the Illuminati, NWO, NeoCons) really are arrogant if they think they will get away with it!!

_________________
Connect to Infinite Consciousness - enjoy the ride!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
wepmob2000
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 03 Aug 2006
Posts: 431
Location: North East England

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stelios69 wrote:
But airship technology could be improved and it does use very little fuel and can carry alot of people or freight.
As can the canals.


That's one of the great puzzles of this 'green' era, both of these technologies are available and very energy efficient, but nothing is done about using them.

There were IIRC, plans for super Goodyear blimps a few years back, but these appear to have been quashed.

The waterways are used purely for tourism, when they could handle a large amount of the cargo on the roads today. I believe a single horse could pull about 10 tons of cargo in a barge, so how many tons could a Ford Fiesta pull? Perhaps enough to remove 10 lorries from the roads? Maybe 20? Not only are there waterways, but dozens of miles of disused railway cuttings, surely they could be filled with water to expand a canal network?

If the cycle network was a proper network many people would take to their bikes. Instead the network is a joke, its OK in some places for a fun ride out, but otherwise its worse than useless, anyone whos tried to commute to work by bike will know what I mean. For instance in Hartlepool the network largely runs like this..... Properly separated cycle lanes on quiet streets, i.e. pavement...kerb...cycle lane... another kerb... a narrow pavement.... another kerb... then road. On busier faster roads, the cycle path is.... the gutter, but designated as a cycle path by a painted line. On the busiest fastest roads, up to and including dual carriageways, forget about it, you're on your own with no provision for cyclists. What does this say?

In every instance the government's solution to environmental issues seems to be increased taxes and control over the masses, its unbelievable more people are not asking what the real agenda is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wepmob2000
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 03 Aug 2006
Posts: 431
Location: North East England

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Justin wrote:
How's this for a coincidence.........I've just come back from Southport today visiting parents and friends and whilst there I visited my favourite second hand book shop. I happen to collect contemporary accounts of the First World War, with my collection of books being mainly but not exclusively naval, and today I bought the 1923 second edition book by Commander A. Rawlinson CMG, CBE, DSO entitled THE DEFENCE OF LONDON 1915-1918. He was a naval volunteer officer brought in by the Admiralty to find a way of shooting down Zeppelins. It looks a great book, written with that wonderful British spirit of 'gifted amateurism', coupled with the ability to 'make do' with whatever is at hand. Apparently, we initially used blind people because of their acute hearing and their ability to detect from which direction the Zeppelin was approaching!!!


Really interesting stuff, I read somewhere they used devices like giant ear trumpets to detect incoming raids, and having a blind person use one of these was almost as good as having a Radar. There's a reference to this in the old and largely forgotten but excellent comic strip 'Charley's War', (the finest comic strip ever IMHO, and a defiantly anti-war one at that!).

P.S Have you ever read 'Green Balls' by Paul Bewsher, despite the name its a wonderfully atmospheric first hand account by a WWI naval bomber pilot. If not I heartily recommend it, written in much the same the same style as you recount above and available as a reasonably priced reprint (I got my copy for about £3).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2007 5:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wepmob2000 wrote:
stelios69 wrote:
But airship technology could be improved and it does use very little fuel and can carry alot of people or freight.
As can the canals.


That's one of the great puzzles of this 'green' era, both of these technologies are available and very energy efficient, but nothing is done about using them.

There were IIRC, plans for super Goodyear blimps a few years back, but these appear to have been quashed.

The waterways are used purely for tourism, when they could handle a large amount of the cargo on the roads today. I believe a single horse could pull about 10 tons of cargo in a barge, so how many tons could a Ford Fiesta pull? Perhaps enough to remove 10 lorries from the roads? Maybe 20? Not only are there waterways, but dozens of miles of disused railway cuttings, surely they could be filled with water to expand a canal network?

If the cycle network was a proper network many people would take to their bikes. Instead the network is a joke, its OK in some places for a fun ride out, but otherwise its worse than useless, anyone whos tried to commute to work by bike will know what I mean. For instance in Hartlepool the network largely runs like this..... Properly separated cycle lanes on quiet streets, i.e. pavement...kerb...cycle lane... another kerb... a narrow pavement.... another kerb... then road. On busier faster roads, the cycle path is.... the gutter, but designated as a cycle path by a painted line. On the busiest fastest roads, up to and including dual carriageways, forget about it, you're on your own with no provision for cyclists. What does this say?

In every instance the government's solution to environmental issues seems to be increased taxes and control over the masses, its unbelievable more people are not asking what the real agenda is.


i find it strange also, maybe they dont think its needed.

i hate to guess why but it dosnt seem like they are not planning on a large population needing services, everything gets underfunded or closed down.

i hope im wrong but it does fit the culling that has been mentioned before,
why pay for things and spend millions and billions on things that wont get used later in the future, the world runs on money and it is all that matters to these people so its not illogical to think they would go for the cheaper and easier option rather than spend billions changing the way we live and do things to be more earth friendly.

the control ensures no fight back and no getting away.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1846
Location: Currently Andover

PostPosted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:45 am    Post subject: 'No Sun link' to climate change Reply with quote

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/default.stm

Quote:
A new scientific study concludes that changes in the Sun's output cannot be causing modern-day climate change.

It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen.

It also shows that modern temperatures are not determined by the Sun's effect on cosmic rays, as has been claimed.

Writing in the Royal Society's journal Proceedings A, the researchers say cosmic rays may have affected climate in the past, but not the present.

"This should settle the debate," said Mike Lockwood from the UK's Rutherford-Appleton Laboratory, who carried out the new analysis together with Claus Froehlich from the World Radiation Center in Switzerland.

_________________
Currently working on a new website
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
lockerbie
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

another reiteration of what we already knew. i saw a presentation on the twisted science in the "global warming swindle" a few days after it was broadcast. which said the same thing. not only were the graphs short by 20 years they had also been messed about with quite alot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> The Bigger Picture All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 61, 62, 63  Next
Page 1 of 63

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group