Fear prevents us from thinking. The emotional panic that accompanies fear actually shuts down the prefrontal cortex –the rational thinking part– of our brains. A populace that stops thinking for itself is a populace that is easily led, easily manipulated and easily controlled.
Our leaders —those unseen, residing high-above the puppets in elected office– know this.
They rule us by fear.
Noel Brown, 1989
Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program (UNEP), said back in 1989 that governments had just a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it spirals beyond human control.
He said entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. And, quoting eminent scientists of the time, warned that coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees” threatening political chaos.
Excess carbon dioxide is pouring into the atmosphere because of humanity’s use of fossil fuels and burning of rain forests, said Brown. The atmosphere is retaining more heat than it radiates, much like a greenhouse. The most conservative scientific estimate that the Earth’s temperature will rise 1 to 7 degrees Celsuis in the next 30 years, he claimed (an absurdly wide range).
Brown finished by saying that even the most conservative scientists ″already tell us there’s nothing we can do now to stop a change″ of about 3 degrees C, and he concluded with a scripted oration about how all nations need to reduce the use of fossil fuels and slash their emissions of carbon dioxide.
Well, it’s now been 34 years since Brown made those prophesies, and global temperatures, as measured by satellites, are closely mirroring those of the late 1980s. Rather than the prophesied rise of 1 to 7C in 30 years, Earth has risen 0.1 – 0.3C in 34 years:
In fact, this level of warming can only be viewed as a good thing, for biodiversity.
It is cooling which should concern us, and there are a number of eminent solar physicists warning that ‘that comes next’.
James Hansen, 2006
Often described as ‘the father of the global warming’, NASA’s James Hansen has made many-a catastrophic climate claim over the decades.
“The greenhouse effect is here,” he pronounced June 23, 1988 during his Congressional testimony on man-made global warming; a testimony where Hansen explained to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, there is only a “1 percent chance” that he is wrong in blaming rising temperatures around the world on the buildup of man-made gases in the atmosphere.
Asked in an interview in New York City in 1989, “If what you’re saying about the greenhouse effect is true, is anything going to look different down there in 20 years?”, Hansen replied, “The West Side Highway will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change.”
By 2006, instead of admitting he maybe overegged the catastrophe a little, Hansen actually doubled-down. As alarmists often do, Hansen simply pushed his doomsday date back a few years in the hope that no one would notice. He said in September, 2006 that the world now had a 10-year window of opportunity to take decisive action on global warming and avert a catastrophe.
Hansen pleaded with governments, imploring that they adopt an alternative scenario to keep carbon dioxide emission growth in check and limit the increase in global temperatures to 1 degree Celsius (1.8F): “I think we have a very brief window of opportunity to deal with climate change … no longer than a decade, at the most,” he said at the Climate Change Research Conference (2006).
If the world continues with a “business as usual” scenario, Hansen said temperatures will rise by 2 to 3 degrees Celsius (3.6 to 7.2F) and “we will be producing a different planet.”
On that ‘different’ planet, ice sheets would melt quickly, causing a rise in sea levels that would put most of Manhattan under water. Melting Arctic sea ice and a polar bear population decline were Hansen’s go-tos in an attempt to pile the pressure on world governments: “It is not too late to save the Arctic, but it requires that we begin to slow carbon dioxide emissions this decade.”
Two years later, in 2008, Hansen was still at it, now claiming that the Arctic would be ice free by 2018. Within just “5 to 10 years the Arctic will be free of sea ice in the summer,” he announced on June 24, 2008:
Suffice it to say, Hansen’ was’s utterances were proven yet more nonsense, and 10 years after he made that ice-free claim, Arctic sea ice volume was up 7 percent with melting at the slowest rate on record.
And even today, as we enter the summer of 2023, Arctic Sea Ice volume is doing just fine. Levels are actually above those of the past few years, and even residing within the 2004-2013 mean, as calculated by the Danish Meteorological Institute.
And that’s not to mention the extraordinary gains occurring on Greenland this summer…
Somehow, despite his decades of epic fails, James Hansen still holds credibility, he still has sway and say within the anthropogenic global warming field, and is still a go-to ‘expert’ for propagandizing rags such as The Guardian.
How anyone proved so wrong for so long can still garner the praise and accolades James Hansen does is testament to the agenda at play. The political tool that is AGW will keep on rolling, for as long it’s needed, and the ever growing line of the poor and ill informed will continue following that Pied Piper into the Hamelin cave, where their self-respect and ability to think critically will never be seen again.
Hansen hasn’t been thrown under the bus because he still toes the line, he still spouts the scripted narrative. What do these guys have on him? Or is it that he’s simply too proud to admit that he got it wrong? There is still time to save face, Hansen; however, at 82 years old, you probably only have a 5 to 10 year window of opportunity to take decisive action.
Waldhams and Maslowski, 2007
Professor Peter Wadhams, of Cambridge University and Professor Wieslaw Maslowski, of the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California are two more scientists to have been left embarrassed by failed Arctic foretellings.
Back in 2007, Prof Wadhams, a self-professed leading expert on Arctic sea ice loss (a genuine field?), claimed that summer sea ice would be “completely gone by 2013.” However, and in a all-too familiar story, the year 2013 delivered levels 25% higher than when Wadhams made his claim.
Then in 2012 –I assume knowing he was about to be proven wrong– Wadhams bumped his prediction to 2016. This was a date supported by Prof Maslowski who, in 2013, published a paper in the Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences forewarning of an ice-free Arctic by 2016 — plus or minus three years.
Once again though, far from the ZERO ice prophesied, 2016 actually saw the quickest Arctic refreeze ever recorded (in DMI books dating back to the 1980s), with sea ice extent advancing 405,000 m2 (1.05 million km2) in just three weeks.
Stupid reality didn’t stop Wadhams cashing in on his fear-mongering, though. His book entitled A Farewell To Ice, in which he again repeated the assertion that the polar region would ice-free within just a few years, was published in 2016 to the predictably blind critical acclaim of AGW Party propaganda rags such as, yes you guessed it, The Guardian, among others.
The Ice Fields On Kilimanjaro Are Still Here
Finally for today –and the list is truly exhaustive– we have Tanzania’s Kilimanjaro — the fourth most topographically prominent peak on Earth.
Kilimanjaro has long been at the center of climate research. In Al Gore’s 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth, Africa’s tallest mountain was used to demonstrate the effects of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming on glaciers.
The film showed a series of photos of the mountain, each appearing to show less and less ice/snow cover over time. “Within the decade, there will be no more snows of Kilimanjaro,” Gore declared, which gave the peak until 2010 before ‘meltdown’.
Needless to say, that didn’t play out.
In fact, a recent expedition up the mountain just last year revealed, if anything, growth:
Gore’s claim can be traced to 2002, to a time when global warming simply meant ‘milder winter temperatures and decreasing heavy snowstorms’–rather than the nonsensical ‘DoubleThinking’ mess it has had become today in order to be maintained.
Back then, researchers gave Kilimanjaro’s snow a little longer than Gore did (despite him citing the same study), stating that “if current climatological conditions persist, the remaining ice fields are likely to disappear between 2015 and 2020.”
But even those more conservative doomsday dates have now passed by and Kilimanjaro’s glaciers are, as shown above, still around. Better yet, the fields are doing just great, with record snowfalls besieging the peaks in recent years (particularly in 2018).
This means that, 1) climatological conditions didn’t persist as expected, or 2) the scientists got it plain wrong.
Both scenarios are terminal for the CAGW hypothesis.
Douglas Hardy, a co-author of that 2002 paper Gore was citing, recently said that the original research relied on existing estimates of the size of the ice fields made in 1912, 1953, 1976 and 1989, as well as on aerial photographs taken during their February 2000 trip to Kilimanjaro.
In fairness, Hardy has admitted that the prediction was made with an important caveat, “if climatological conditions of the past 88 years continue.” Those climatological conditions clearly did NOT persist, Hardy conceded, meaning the glaciers didn’t diminish nearly as quickly as predicted, and now, are even showing signs of reversing that trend of loss.
Despite said caveat, dire prophesies such as Hardy’s are routinely used to enforce poverty-inducing policies, particularly around energy. Soaring utility bills are hitting the tightest of pockets due to this orchestrated usurping of a now out-of-favor fossil fuels sector by wholly inadequate renewables.
Scientists like Hardy were, knowingly or not, assigned the task of advancing a narrative.
The ‘climate crisis’ is a key one component of The Great Reset — the largest wealth/power transfer in the history of mankind.
Putting aside that can of worms, and returning to the science, nobody is doubting that ice loss can and does occur, nor that, generally speaking, global ice fields have been on the decline since the 1980s. It is the cause that is up for debate, and it is the string of flawed projections and the incessant peddling of dire tipping point deadlines that have skeptics querying the motives.
Also ignored by Hardy’s 2002 study, and in turn by soothsayer Al Gore, is that snow on Kilimanjaro is a function of elevation, not temperature. The higher sections of the mountain are ALWAYS below freezing, year round (summer highs touch -5.5C, with winter highs hitting a very similar -6C), meaning the glaciers’ fluctuations can not be subject to ‘global warming’.
Rather, the ice fields are a product of moisture and precipitation patterns. Supporting this fact is the below graph which reveals that the majority of the mountains snow actually falls during the summer months (which in Tanzania run Nov through April):
The official hypothesis has failed.
Global warming no longer means ‘rising global temperatures leading to decreasing heavy snowfalls’, as was originally claimed by the IPCC. Reality has rendered that prognostication an abject failure. But rather than scrapping the hypothesis and coming up with a new one (how science should work), all the same dire consequences of AGW have been maintained but the forecasts have been flipped on their head: global warming can now also mean record-breaking snowfall, ice gains and low temperatures.
‘Climate change’ is the re-branding, and so long as the climate ‘changes’ the hypothesis will be correct, maintained. The elites have worked themselves an unchangeable position –the climate will always change, of course– and the dutifully propagandized among us unquestioningly lap it all up and march on the streets demanding the destruction of their ancestors hard-earned prosperity (via access to cheap and reliable energy).
Over time, glaciers will retreat and glaciers will advance, temperatures will rise and temperature will fall — and the forcings involved will remain unfathomably complex, infinitely more complex than the AGW Party would have you believe.
Our planet’s climate behaves cyclically never linearly, and the next stop on its wheel of change looks to be global cooling. There is no getting away from it. The past acts as our our crystal ball, and we ignore it at our peril.
The eradication of cheap and reliable energy as we enter the next cyclical bout of global cooling is suicide.
Intentional? –the cynic in me wonders.
Reject the manufactured fear.