by Craig Bannister
Climate alarmism is “the biggest fraud in the field of science” and the 97% consensus claim is nonsensical, Apollo 7 astronaut Walter Cunningham tells MRCTV in a preview of his presentation at the upcoming Heartland Institute climate conference, July 7-9.
“Since about 2000, I looked farther and farther into it,” Col. Cunningham (USMC, Ret.) tells MRCTV in an exclusive interview. “I found that not one of the claims that the alarmists were making out there had any bearings, whatsoever. And, so, it was kind of a no-brainer to come to the conclusion.”
Cunningham rejects the notion of man-made climate, not only as fact – but also as even qualifying as an actual “theory”:
“In the media, it was being called a theory. Obviously, they didn’t know what it means to be a theory.”
“If we go back to the warmist hypothesis – not a theory, but, a hypothesis – they’ve been saying from the very beginning that carbon dioxide levels are abnormally high, that higher levels of carbon dioxide are bad for humans, and they thought warmer temperatures are bad for our world, and they thought we were able to override natural forces to control the earth’s temperature. So, as I’ve looked into those, that’s the problem that I’ve found, because I didn’t find any of those to be correct – and, they certainly were not a theory, it was just their guess at what they wanted to see in the data they were looking at.”
Cunningham urges Americans to look at the data and decide for themselves, instead of taking anyone else’s word for it:
“You go out and take a look at it and you find out that a lot of it is pure nonsense and wishful thinking on the part of the alarmists who are looking for more and more money to fall into their hands.”
“Don’t believe it just because your professor said it. You gotta go take a look at it. Go back and look at the history of temperature and carbon dioxide, and you look at the value of carbon dioxide, and how it’s a benefit today.”
Cunningham notes that, while climate alarmists are concerned that the atmosphere currently contains 400 parts per million of CO2, that’s only a tenth of the level his spacecraft had to reach before causing concern. In his Apollo craft, an alarm would go off when CO2 reached 4,000 parts per million and, in today’s space shuttle, the trigger is 5,000. And, in submarines where crewmen may be on three-month missions, CO2 has to reach 8,000 parts per million before the alarm is activated.
“In one area after another, we find these people overly concerned about, one, the danger they’re trying to push on us and, secondly, the claim that we can somehow or other control the earth’s temperature by affecting it,” Cunningham says.
“I can’t say we don’t have any impact, at all, but it’d be so miniscule and so tiny, that it wouldn’t be worth any effort.”
So, what does dictate the Earth’s temperature? Cunningham says it’s well-established that “principle controllers” are natural forces like sun, ocean temperature, and even volcanic activity.
Thus, he calls climate alarmism “the biggest fraud in the field of science”:
“The case is, to me, really, it’s laughable to find somebody who claims to be a serious scientist – that he would buy into this. So, I would really question anybody who claims to be a scientist doing this – so, what they do is try to control the nomenclature.”
“To me, it’s almost laughable, it’s the biggest fraud in the field of science, certainly in my lifetime, maybe the biggest one in centuries.”
“If you go back and you look at the data that has been well-documented over the years, you can look and see, for example, that right now both carbon dioxide and temperature are simultaneously at one of the lowest levels in at least the last 600-800 million years. The last time they were both together at this low a level, more or less, was 300 million years ago, and if you go back go back about 500-600 million years ago, carbon dioxide was 15 times higher than what it is now. So, what I’m getting at is this, the history shows you that most of this is just plain nonsensical today.”
“And, the amazing thing to people like me… is that there are people that believe the nonsense they’re being fed.”
The media are largely to blame for public misconceptions – not because they’re intentionally misleading the public, but because they “just don’t want to go into the time and trouble to find out.” “If they do go into it and look at it for themselves, they become a lot more neutral in their presentation,” he says.
Worst of all, Cunningham says, media are promoting the “nonsensical” claim that there’s scientific consensus accepting the hypothesis of man-made climate:
“When they’re out propagating this so-called 97% of scientists believe we’re controlling the temperature – I mean, that’s the most nonsensical, stupid number in the world – and all they have to do is do a little research on Google – I’m not going to do it for them – go in there and take a look and you find out that’s a ridiculous statement that people are making – and even the president makes a statement like that.”
“If you have a totally anonymous survey of real scientists involved in this field, I would almost guarantee you that you going to have a majority that are not going to agree with the alarmists.”
“I can only tell you that, even back in the days of Apollo, we didn’t have to face this kind of nonsense,” Cunningham concludes.
Kingman, Arizona, June 27, 2014 – On Wednesday, June 25, Arizona State Senator Kelli Ward held a public forum to discuss public concerns regarding white vapor trails in the skies. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) representatives Sherri Zendri and Beth Hager were on hand to answer questions from local residents who presented studies, personal research, and blood samples they claim prove that planes are spraying chemicals.
Senator Ward stated the meeting was a response to “relentless” communication from constituents who are concerned with vapor trails commonly called contrails or condensation trails. However, residents say the trails are not standard contrails but rather “chemtrails” being sprayed as part of a global program of weather manipulation. One resident claimed the difference between contrails and chemical trails is easy to spot because the contrails are short and dissipate quickly, while the chemtrails are long, dragged out, and crisscross the sky.
Meeting attendees listed a variety of reasons they believe the government is spraying. These include poisoning of the food and people to manipulating the weather patterns. Senator Ward and the ADEQ representatives repeatedly told attendees that they have no jurisdiction over chemical spraying whether it was happening or not. In a video of the meeting the frustration from citizens is easily seen.
ADEQ communications director Mark Shaffer said they regularly receive phone calls and emails on the topic, but “Our standard response has been that there is no credible scientific evidence about chemical spraying or geoengineering.” Geo-engineering is the science of manipulating the climate for the stated purpose of fighting man-made climate change. These include Solar Radiation Management (SRM), the practice of spraying aerosols into the sky in an attempt to deflect the Sun’s rays and combat climate change.
According to a recent congressional report:
The term “geoengineering” describes this array of technologies that aim, through large-scale and deliberate modifications of the Earth’s energy balance, to reduce temperatures and counteract anthropogenic climate change. Most of these technologies are at the conceptual and research stages, and their effectiveness at reducing global temperatures has yet to be proven. Moreover, very few studies have been published that document the cost, environmental effects, socio-political impacts, and legal implications of geoengineering. If geoengineering technologies were to be deployed, they are expected to have the potential to cause significant transboundary effects.
In general, geoengineering technologies are categorized as either a carbon dioxide removal (CDR) method or a solar radiation management (SRM) method. CDR methods address the warming effects of greenhouse gases by removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. CDR methods include ocean fertilization, and carbon capture and sequestration. SRM methods address climate change by increasing the reflectivity of the Earth’s atmosphere or surface.
Aerosol injection and space-based reflectors are examples of SRM methods. SRM methods do not remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, but can be deployed faster with relatively immediate global cooling results compared to CDR methods.
One of the many dangers of manipulating the weather is the loss of blue skies. According to a report by the New Scientist, Ben Kravitz of the Carnegie Institution for Science has shown that releasing sulphate aerosols high in the atmosphere would scatter sunlight into the atmosphere. He says this could decrease the amount of sunlight that hits the ground by 20% and make the sky appear more hazy.
Although a number of authorities have warned about the dangers of geoengineering techniques, the risks are seen as secondary to the perceived risks of climate change. The interesting thing to note is that although proponents of geoengineering hail it as the solution to climate change and sustaining life, studies show that geoengineering could actually have the reverse effect of heating the Earth.
According to a recent study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, if geoengineering programs were started and then suddenly halted the planet could see an immediate rise in temperatures, particularly over land. The study, titled “The impact of abrupt suspension of solar radiation management”, seems to indicate that once you begin geoengineering you cannot suspend the programs without causing the very problem you were seeking to resolve.
Many of those who were in attendance to the Arizona meeting believe the SRM programs are not only in the developmental research phase but are currently active. Weather modification techniques in the form of cloud-seeding programs are active in China, for example. With researchers warning that the very initiation of geoengineering programs could cause global temperatures to rise, it does make sense that governments would work to keep quiet about domestic geoengineering programs. Geoengineering in one country could cause drought in another part of the world after all, and no government wants that responsibility.
Arizona citizens also pointed to a 1996 document entitled “Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather by 2025” where the U.S. Air Force discusses a number of proposals for using the weather as a weapon. There was also mention of the Environmental Modification Treaty signed by the United States to halt global weather modification. Others mention companies like Weather Modification, Inc. On this corporation’s website you can peruse different planes that you can pay to run a cloud seeding operation. They even offer a list of clients and sites that are active.
Whether or not Senator Ward or the ADEQ hold another meeting on the topic remains to be seen. One thing is certain though, the citizens of Arizona are keeping their eyes on sky and they are not going anywhere anytime soon.
by Mike Adams
When drug companies are caught faking clinical trial data, no one is surprised anymore. When vaccine manufacturers spike their human trial samples with animal antibodies to make sure their vaccines appear to work, we all just figure that’s how they do business: lying, cheating, deceiving and violating the law.
Now, in what might be the largest scientific fraud ever uncovered, NASA and the NOAA have been caught red-handed altering historical temperature data to produce a “climate change narrative” that defies reality. This finding, originally documented on the Real Science website, is detailed here.
We now know that historical temperature data for the continental United States were deliberately altered by NASA and NOAA scientists in a politically-motivated attempt to rewrite history and claim global warming is causing U.S. temperatures to trend upward. The data actually show that we are in a cooling trend, not a warming trend (see charts below).
This story is starting to break worldwide right now across the media, with The Telegraph now reporting (1), “NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been ‘adjusting’ its record by replacing real temperatures with data ‘fabricated’ by computer models.”
Because the actual historical temperature record doesn’t fit the frenzied, doomsday narrative of global warming being fronted today on the political stage, the data were simply altered using “computer models” and then published as fact.
Here’s the proof of the climate change fraud
Here’s the chart of U.S. temperatures published by NASA in 1999. It shows the highest temperatures actually occurred in the 1930’s, followed by a cooling trend ramping downward to the year 2000:
The authenticity of this chart is not in question. It is published by James Hansen on NASA’s website. (2) On that page, Hansen even wrote, “Empirical evidence does not lend much support to the notion that climate is headed precipitately toward more extreme heat and drought.”
After the Obama administration took office, however, and started pushing the global warming narrative for political purposes, NASA was directed to alter its historical data in order to reverse the cooling trend and show a warming trend instead. This was accomplished using climate-modeling computers that simply fabricated the data the researchers wished to see instead of what was actually happening in the real world.
Using the exact same data found in the chart shown above (with a few years of additional data after 2000), NASA managed to misleadingly distort the chart to depict the appearance of global warming:
The authenticity of this chart is also not in question. It can be found right now on NASA’s servers. (4)
This new, altered chart shows that historical data — especially the severe heat and droughts experienced in the 1930’s — are now systematically suppressed to make them appear cooler than they really were. At the same time, temperature data from the 1970’s to 2010 are strongly exaggerated to make them appear warmer than they really were.
This is a clear case of scientific fraud being carried out on a grand scale in order to deceive the entire world about global warming.
EPA data also confirm the global warming hoax
What’s even more interesting is that even the EPA’s “Heat Wave Index” data further support the notion that the U.S. was far hotter in the 1930’s than it is today.
The following chart, published on the EPA.gov website (4), clearly shows modern-day heat waves are far smaller and less severe than those of the 1930’s. In fact, the seemingly “extreme” heat waves of the last few years were no worse than those of the early 1900’s or 1950’s.
Short-sighted agricultural practices cause more global warming than CO2
Seeing these charts, you might wonder how the extremely high temperatures of the 1930’s came about. Were we releasing too much CO2 by burning fossil fuels?
Nope. That entire episode of massive warming and drought was caused by conventional agricultural practices that clear-cut forests, poisoned the soils with chemicals and plowed the top soil away. Lacking trees to retain moisture, areas that were once thriving plains, grasslands and forests turned to desert. Suddenly, the cooling effects of moisture transpiration from healthy plant ecosystems was lost, causing extreme temperatures and deadly drought.
Shortsighted agricultural practices, in other words, really did cause “warming,” while a restoration of a more natural ecosystem reversed the trend and cooled the region.
Reforestation is the answer
This brings us to the simple, obvious solution to all this. If you want to cool the planet, focus on reforestation efforts. If you want to retain moisture and keep your soils alive, you need diverse plant-based ecosystems, not clear-cut fields running monoculture operations.
Forests act like sponges that soak up rainwater, and then they turn around and slowly release that water back into the air, “moisturizing” the atmosphere and keeping humidity levels high enough to support other nearby grasses, shrubs and plants. When you clear-cut forests — as has been done all across the world to make room for mechanized agriculture — you effectively raise temperatures by eliminating nature’s plant-based water retention and cooling systems.
Industrialized farming, in other words, has already been historically shown to radically increase continental temperatures and “warm” the region. So why isn’t the White House warning the world about the dangers of industrialized agriculture?
The answer: Because it doesn’t accomplish anything that’s politically important to this administration. It’s far more important to use the false panic of global warming to shut down clean coal power plants (U.S. coal plants are FAR cleaner than China’s) and drive the population into a state of subservient obedience through doomsday scare tactics.
Now we conclusively know the government is lying about global warming
As an environmentalist, I’m always concerned about pollutants and emissions, especially heavy metals being dumped into the atmosphere. But I’ve also learned over the years that almost everything the federal government aggressively promotes to the public is a blatant lie. Rarely does anything resembling the truth ever come out of Washington D.C.
These people are experts at lying with bad science, hiding their deceptions behind the cover of “scientific thinking” and making outlandish claims such as saying that anyone who doesn’t believe their fabricated data must also believe the Earth is flat. Remember, the people who are telling you that burning fossils fuels is causing runaway global warming are the very same people who also claim mercury in vaccines is safe to inject in unlimited quantities, toxins in GMOs are safe to eat, chemotherapy works great for cancer patients and that there’s no such thing as any food or nutrient that prevents disease.
These are the same government people who build massive networks of underground bunkers and caves in complete secrecy while publicly claiming preppers are conspiracy theorists. It’s the same government that lied about running inhumane medical experiments on prisoners via the National Institutes of Health, then got caught and had to apologize decades later.
If you think this same government is telling you the truth about global warming, you probably need to have your head examined. But not by a government-licensed psychiatrist, or she’ll dose your head full of psychiatric medications that cause you to lose so much of your cognitive function, you’ll actually start to believe CNN’s broadcasts.