God, Hope & Helping Others
Monday, March 31, 2014
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/044525_IPCC_report_global_warming_apocal...
(NaturalNews) The IPCC has just released its latest "Apocalypse Now" report(1), threatening all humankind with imminent self-destruction if industrial output of CO2 is not immediately and drastically curbed. The UN global government report concludes that global warming is "severe, pervasive and irreversible," a position which seems to be little more than a foregone death sentence for the human race, even if drastic changes are made right now.
As head of a research laboratory myself -- I was the first scientist to discover industrial tungsten contamination in superfoods -- I share the overall concern about humankind's impact on the global ecosystem. Yet an intelligent look at the IPCC's report reveals it to be based on selective, cherry-picked science, the wild exaggeration of Earth's historical cycles, a bizarre ignorance of plant physiology and how CO2 helps restore deserts to farmlands, and the willful ignoring of far greater threats to humankind such as GMO pollution, heavy metals contamination and the resource extraction model driving our entire global economy.
The IPCC's doom-and-gloom report, in other words, looks like theater, not science. As part of that theater, the National Science Foundation actually awarded $700,000 for the production of what's being called "Climate Change: The Musical!" (2)
And it's theater being put on for a specific purpose: to frighten the world's populations and national leaders into surrendering to global dictatorial control over national economies. If nations can be swept into a system where all forms of economic activity are tightly controlled by global dictators -- including transportation, industry, agriculture and even cow ranching -- then all power has been usurped by the globalists.
Remember: the IPCC is not saying, "we should all act locally to reduce CO2 emissions" as responsible citizens and communities. No, the IPCC is functioning as a propaganda branch of the UN, which is saying something far more sinister: "Put us in control of your national economies, where we decide how much CO2 you are ALLOWED to emit" (and pay us taxes, to boot!).
That's a very different proposition, and it smacks of a dictatorial power grab using junk science as a weapon of extreme fear to bring the population in line.
The goal of the global warming alarmists is not to save humanity but to enslave it. And accomplishing this task requires some truly mind-bending warped science interwoven with social engineering fear tactics. In effect, the IPCC function a lot like a terrorist organization because it spreads fear and terror in order to achieve its political goals. (Look it up, that's the definition of a terrorist.)
There's also a whole lot of dishonest social engineering taking place in the global push for UN domination of all world economies. Global warming believers, for example, have resorted to using the term "climate denialists" against anyone who doesn't agree with their distorted science. The very phrase is intellectually dishonest, as it implies that certain people don't believe in the existence of the climate at all.
It's kind of like if I say that water contains unlimited free energy, but you express skepticism about water as free energy, so then I call you a "water denialist" as if you don't even believe in the existence of water. That's the kind of deceptive linguistics now being pushed by global warming dictators-to-be.
With each passing day, the whole global warming scheme feels more and more like a "shove it down your throat" mandate, much like Obamacare which tried to shove high-priced health insurance down all our throats. If you thought Obamacare was bad, just wait until the UN rolls out "Climate Care" and forces you to pay a monthly fee for breathing, farting and driving, all of which release greenhouse gases. Do them all at the same time -- if you are so coordinated -- and you get triple-taxed!
When carbon dioxide levels rise in the atmosphere, plant life explodes to tap into that CO2 and convert it into oxygen and other byproducts of plant metabolism. This is why higher CO2 levels will result in massive global reforestation of former deserts and arid areas. There will be a global explosion of crop yields and an abundance of food for everyone.
Want proof? CO2 generators are routinely installed in greenhouses to accelerate plant growth and increase food production. The higher the CO2 in the greenhouse air, the more rapidly the plants grow and produce food. This is a scientific fact that even the IPCC can't make go away.
In fact, here's an advertisement for a greenhouse CO2 generator which enables "maximum growing potential" and "increases production."
Yes, higher CO2 levels increase food production precisely because most food-producing crops are constantly starved for CO2.
Yet the IPCC, in its doom-and-gloom report, claims that higher CO2 levels will reduce food production and cause global food shortages. It says there is "Risk of food insecurity linked to warming, drought, and precipitation variability, particularly for poorer populations."
As you might have already noticed, every flood, drought, rain storm, cold spell, hot day, cold day and gentle breeze gets automatically attributed to "global warming" almost as if the Earth never had any weather at all until global warming became a concern. If the sun comes up tomorrow, it must be because of global warming! And if it's a cloudy day, that's global warming, too! There were no weather extremes on our planet, we are foolishly led to believe, before the age of modern industry.
This "weather blame game" is of course pronounced to be "scientific" and therefore irrefutable. But where is the science, really? Weather events are extraordinarily complex, requiring vast supercomputers running 24/7 in order to make laughably bad predictions for the evening news weather report. Climate data is so wishy washy that a person can cherry pick almost any "science" they want out of the data.
Using one particular point of view on the data, I could "scientifically prove" that darkness causes ice, or that sunlight destroys food crops. With enough historical data, almost anyone could carve out supporting data for any theory imaginable: when trees wave, it causes the wind to blow!
Climate science is so poorly understood that anyone calling global warming "conclusive" is kidding themselves. It's no more conclusive than the loony idea that life exists nowhere else in the universe except on planet Earth, and we know that because Earth is the only place where we've found life. An absence of refuting data does not conclusive prove the truth of the limited set of data you've chosen to consider.
Thank goodness US Secretary of State John Kerry has cleared everything up for us with his scientific brilliance, saying the costs of inaction would be "catastrophic," adding:
Unless we act dramatically and quickly, science tells us our climate and our way of life are literally in jeopardy. Denial of the science is malpractice. (3)
But denial, of course, is exactly how the White House handles the issue of genetic pollution from GMO crops. It's how Obama deals with the issue of GMO labeling, mercury in dental amalgams, mercury in vaccines or even the toxicity of aspartame (which has recently been linked to increased death risk in women). Denial is the entire philosophy of the federal government when it comes to the national debt, too. And a collapse into economic ruin is likely to be far more catastrophic than rising CO2 levels -- but they keep on spending us into oblivion anyway, in total denial of economic reality. Will Kerry now admit this is "economic malpractice?"
When it comes to real science, the White House is practically the Ministry of Denial! All the other threats to human life -- the GMO food supply, toxic medicines, toxic pesticides and toxic industry -- are routinely ignored by default. Global warming is magically selected for scrutiny only because it serves the power centralization goals of global power brokers, not because people like John Kerry or Barack Obama suddenly feel irresistible urges to act in the long-term interests of humankind and the ecosystem.
If they really felt that humanity needed to be saved from catastrophic collapse, they would protect the power grid from solar flares, for starters. They would outlaw genetically engineered seeds to help prevent catastrophic genetic pollution and "ecocide" collapse. They might even outlaw toxic cancer-causing chemicals in the food supply like sodium nitrite, found in nearly all processed meats.
Any claim that world leaders have suddenly become incredibly concerned about the future of humankind if pure, laughable theater. Whether there's real science backing global warming or not, politicians have no interest in the real science anyway. All they are interested in is concentrating their power over humanity, and if an invocation of scary-sounding global warming can help them crush freedom and seize control over world economies, then that's their game plan!
Their call to "save humanity" is just a ploy for control. It's not a true spiritual calling for these people. If it were, they would be warning about all the other threats to humanity that conflict with the profits of big business (such as genetically modified seeds and mercury in vaccines).
Sources for this article include
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/044525_IPCC_report_global_warming_apocal...