Sunday, April 10, 2016



MAIN article follows my comments…………………………

The one more "nail in the coffin" is TRUTH'S coffin "driven in" by the "Secular New World Order." (SNWO) "They" know all too well how to apply the Josef Goebbels' syndrome........"Tell a like BIG enough and LONG enough and it becomes TRUTH to the masses." AND the biggest lie of the whole bunch is the pseudoscience "green house effect."

The pseudoscience used by the SNWO is that carbon dioxide (CO2) , released by man's use of fossil fuels to "drive" industry and transportation, is the MAIN cause of global warming by the alleged "green house effect." . The most obvious reason CO2 does not cause MAN MADE global warming is that one volcano releases more CO2 than all the cars, trucks, trains, factories and airplanes since the Model "T" Ford!

The "real" science reveals that it is impossible for CO2 to cause global warming by the green house effect.  The "ice cores" used to support global warming that shows CO2 fluctuations in the past that is tied to climate change is nothing but bad interpretation of the data........the facts are clear.....CO2 is a BUFFERED gas. When there is an increase of CO2 in the atmosphere there is an increase in biomass by photophosphorylation and limestone formation by chemical deposition.  The green house effect is that the CO2 acts like the "glass"  in a green house that insulates and holds the heat that is generated inside the house by the infrared energy that passes through the glass.  Note that the "glass" is the ceiling of the house!  If CO2 is the supposed "glass" equivalent it would have to held at high altitude to capture the heat like the glass ceiling in a green house.  The problem is the density of CO2 (44 grams per mole)  causes it to "SINK" to the surface where it enters the biological carbon cycle and limestone chemical cycle ..the "buffering agents"  preventing it from "trapping" heat from the sun. I taught biology in New York State for 35 years and the carbon cycle was a core topic in the syllabus. There were many optional topics that could be covered at the discretion of the teacher but the carbon cycle was a mandatory core for all teachers I retired in 2000 right at the time the New York Regents instituted the "new" Living Science curriculum.   One GLARING change was the moving of the core carbon cycle to the alternate optional topics! I'll let the reader "connect all the dots!" 
In addition, I suspect that the apparent rapid changes in climate over the last 30 years may not be the just the "natural cyclic" phenomena referred to in this article but may very well be manipulated by the clandestine DARPA HAARP geoengineering "chemtrail" project and "they" conveniently blame the apparent climate instability on "man made global warming." the guy who commented there is no "nail" in the global warming coffin...I say......FOLLOW THE MONEY! The scientists who claim the science supports carbon driven manmade global ARE supported by government grants! CONNECT the dots! "Money talks crap walks." SIMPLE....those who support manmade global warming GET THE MONEY and sadly.....the news media's "ears!"

Folks...we all have been SNOW'd by SNWO. Man made global warming is NOT is POLITICAL and VERY evil.

WHY is this "lie" necessary? The last obstacle to the final implementation of the SNWO is the United States and CO2 is their "nail in America's coffin."


'1 more nail in coffin of global-warming deception'

Climate 'experts' wrong again! Weather extremes predate fossil-fuel economy

Published: 4 hours ago


Greg Corombos is news director for Radio America.


A new, exhaustive study on precipitation levels over more than 1,000 years shows the assumptions made by the United Nations and other climate-change activists are badly flawed, suggesting human activity may not be having the impact on global climate that so many insist it’s having.

The report from Stockholm University in Sweden examined Northern Hemisphere rainfall statistics over a 1,200-year period. Researchers concluded that extremes between heavy rainfall totals and droughts were more severe centuries ago, before the fossil fuel-based economy ever existed.

“Hopefully, this will be one more nail in the coffin of the great deception that is the global-warming deception,” said Dr. Tim Ball, a former climatologist at the University of Winnipeg who taught classes on global precipitation for some 25 years.

Ball is also the author of multiple books, including “The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science.” He told WND and Radio America this report comes as no shock to him. In fact, he wrote about the very same issue just five months ago. Ball said the problem amounts in part to willful ignorance on the part of climate-change proponents.

“They list three major greenhouse gases: water vapor, CO2 and methane,” he said. “They then ignore water vapor. They just say the amount humans produce is of no significance, so they just assume it’s constant. That’s a problem.”

He continued, “The second problem is there is inadequate temperature data to build their computer models. The weather data covers only about 25 percent of the world’s surface. How do you build your models on that? The answer is you don’t.”

Don’t be fooled any longer — it’s just a power grab. Read “The Greatest Hoax: How the Global-Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future.”

He said reality has proven the experts wrong at every turn.

“Every single prediction they’ve made with temperature, starting in 1990, has been wrong,” Ball said. “Every one has been wrong. One simple word definition of science is prediction. If you can’t predict, you haven’t got science.”

Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with Tim Ball: 

Tim Ball says rainfall and drought extremes predate fossil-fuel economy



But as lacking as the data is on temperature levels, Ball said the scientists are even further behind on precipitation.

“The data for precipitation is even worse,” he said. “Measuring rainfall and measuring the water content of snow are some of the most difficult things to do in the weather and climate business.”

Ball said a perfect example of the weak precipitation data could be seen five years ago when scientists tried to predict the impact of monsoons on Africa during the growing season. Half the models predicted a wetter season, and the other half concluded it would be drier.

“Their conclusion was that there weren’t enough precipitation data stations to even meet the minimum requirement of the World Meteorological Association,” he said. “So the lack of data is the serious problem that supports what these people (in Stockholm) are finding.”

According to Ball, this new study also puts the lie to the climate-change premise that temperature is the most important factor when examining where the climate is trending.

“Temperature variation is an issue, but it has to change quite a bit before it comes difficult,” Ball said. “For example, they talk about a two-degree Celsius warming. All you’ve got to do is look at a city that’s just south of you that’s two degrees warmer, and they get along very nicely, thank you.”

He said precipitation is far more important.

“But when you get precipitation change, that impacts flora and fauna and humans tremendously,” he explained.

Ball said 200 climatologists were surveyed in the year 2000 to select the 20 worst natural disasters in the 20th century. Of those 20, scientists picked 11 droughts and five floods.

“So the knowledge of precipitation and its impact is actually more important,” he said.

Ball said the Stockholm report also erodes the credibility of climate-change scientists on another front, namely their contention that rising global temperatures lead to more and more severe droughts.

“They said with global warming, there’ll be more droughts, but that’s counter-intuitive. If you’ve got warmer temperatures, you’ve got more evaporation, more water in the air, therefore fewer droughts,” he said. “Again that illustrates how wrong their thinking is.”

Scientists who believe in human-triggered climate change admit the Stockholm study will intensify the existing debate.

“Do their results invalidate current predictive models? Certainly not. But they do highlight a big challenge for climate modelers, and present major research opportunities both for modelers and climate scientists,” wrote Matthew Kirby of California State University’s Department of Geological Sciences in response to the study.

Another researcher, James Renwick of the Victoria University of Wellington, stated the new data suggests the wet-dry extremes will come this century instead of the last one.

That leaves Ball shaking his head.

“They will look for some way around the evidence. They’ll say this is wrong, that’s wrong and so on,” Ball said. “They’ve done that every time. They had a hypothesis, and they accepted it as proven right from the start. Every time evidence came out that contradicted it, they found ways of blunting that.”

He said the most egregious example was after 1998, when temperatures began leveling off but carbon dioxide levels kept rising, in contrast to the belief that the two factors were linked.

“Instead of correcting their science, they changed from global warming to climate change,” Ball said. “This is what they constantly do. They try to blunt the evidence and deflect the evidence because it’s not fitting with their political agenda.”

It’s also apparently not fitting with their financial agenda. Ball contends so many scientists swear by man-caused climate change simply to keep the research dollars pouring in.

“These people, I guarantee you we’ll find out, are very heavily funded by government in this research,” Ball said. “Of course, if you look at Paris and how much money was put into the Green Climate Fund. It’s all driven by money, not by science and the truth.”

He said this was proven by the Australian government in recent years.

“What the Australian government said was, ‘You’re telling us the science is settled. Well fine. We’ll cut off all the funding to the research.’ Of course everybody scrambled, ‘Oh, no no no. Hold on a minute here,'” Ball said.