Inhofe Weighs Criminal Probe of Scientists’ Climate Change E-Mails

FOXNews.com
February 23, 2010

The Senate’s top global warming skeptic on Tuesday is calling for a possible criminal investigation into the scientists accused of manipulating the data once used as the centerpiece of international climate change research.

Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., is considering a request to the Department of Justice for a probe of scientists who he claims deliberately falsified data used by climate change advocates. He is also planning on grilling Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lisa Jackson at a hearing Tuesday morning about her decision to rely on information from the U.N.’s International Panel on Climate Change to institute an endangerment finding that gives the EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

Inhofe is releasing a 40-page report that will be used by Republicans to answer how she can continue to advocate for new global warming regulations even as the findings by the IPCC and the work of the East Anglia Climate Research Unit in Britain create doubt about climate science.

Read entire article

75 Reasons to be Skeptical of "Global Warming"

by Josh Fulton

Global Research, February 23, 2010

joshfulton.blogspot.com - 2010-02-21

* Carbon dioxide contributes to only 4.2 - 8.4% of the greenhouse gas effect

* Only approximately 4% of carbon dioxide is man-made

* Water vapor accounts for 90 - 95% of the green house gas effect

* 99.99% of water vapor is natural, meaning that no amount of deindustrialization could get rid of it

* There have been many times when the temperature has been higher than it is now including the Medieval Warming Period, the Holocene, the Jurassic, and the Eemian

* Increases in carbon dioxide follow increases in temperature by about 800 years, not precede them

* Phil Jones of the Hadley CRU, and key figure in the "climategate" scandal, admits that there has been no "statistically significant" global warming since 1995

* 2008 and 2009 were the coolest two years of the decade

* During the Ordovician period carbon dioxide concentrations were twelve times what they are now, and the temperature was lower

* Solar activity is highly correlated with temperature change:

* Studies show that half of all recent warming was solar

* Mars has warmed about 0.5°C since the 1970's, approximately the same that earth has warmed over the same period

* The 0.7°C increase in temperatures over the last century is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends

* The distance between Earth and Sun changes every year, affecting the amount of energy the earth receives

* Earth’s tilt oscillates between 21.4° and 24.8°, which affects the distribution of the sun's energy

* Dr. Roy Spencer has written that clouds have been a more important driver of climate than carbon dioxide since 2000

* Approximately 40% of the uncertainty in temperature projections come from uncertainty in the strength of the "feedback loop" between temperature and carbon dioxide. Recent research suggests the "feedback loop" is less than half as strong than many had presumed

* James Hansen of NASA said in a simulation of temperatures from 1880 to 2000 soot accounted for 25% of observed global warming

* Research suggests that soot could have nearly as much impact on climate change as carbon dioxide

* Antarctica has 90% of earth's ice and it is growing

* Arctic sea ice has returned to 1979 levels, which is when records began

* The Arctic ice caps have recovered from their loss in 2007

* The Arctic is now 1°C cooler than it was in the 1940's

* Polar bear populations are increasing

* Polar bears are able to swim over 60 miles continuously

* Sea level 81,000 years ago was 1 meter higher than it is now while carbon dioxide levels were lower

* A chart of sea level change over millions of years looks like this:

* According to satellite data, sea level has been decreasing since 2005

* Instead of hurting forests, the increased level of carbon dioxide has been helping them grow

* The official "record" for temperatures only goes back 150 years

* Although the IPCC may have 2500 members, only approximately 800 contribute to the scientific writing of the report

* Only 52 scientists contributed to the 2007 IPCC summary for policy makers, although diplomats from over 115 countries contributed

* Only 20% of the members of the IPCC deal with climate science

* Head of the IPCC, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri has no background in climate science. His PhD is in economics and he worked as a railway engineer before becoming head of the IPCC

* Former IPCC lead author Ben Santer openly admits that he altered portions of the 1995 IPCC report to make them "consistent with the other chapters"

* John Christy, former lead author on the 2001 IPCC report, speaks of his former co-lead authors deliberately trying to sensationalize the report

*Richard Lindzen, another lead author on the 2001 IPCC report, accused the IPCC of being "driven by politics"

* Michael Mann's "hockey stick" graph, which was featured prominently in the 2001 IPCC report, was created using only portions of a data set. The red line is the graph of Mann's selected data, while the black line is the graph of all the data:

* When asked to act as an expert reviewer on the IPCC's last two reports, Dr. Nils Axel-Morner was "astonished to find that not one of their 22 contributing authors on sea levels was a sea level specialist"

* Until 2003, the IPCC's satellite-based evidence showed no upward trend in sea level, so they used an increase of 2.3mm in one Hong Kong tide-gauge to adjust the entire global sea level up 2.3mm

* The IPCC's claim that the Himalayan glaciers were melting was based off of a phone interview with a non-scientist. They were forced to retract the claim

* The IPCC claim that global warming was led to increased natural disasters was based on an unpublished report that had not been subject to peer-review. They were forced to retract the claim

* The IPCC's claim that global warming was going to lead to deficiencies of up to 50% in African agriculture was based on a non-peer-reviewed and non-scientific paper. They were forced to retract the claim

* The IPCC's claim that "up to 40% of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation" was based on a non-peer-reviewed and non-scientific paper. They were forced to retract the claim

* The IPCC reported that 55% of the Netherlands was below sea level when just 26% of the country is below sea level. They were later forced to retract the claim

* According to the United States Historical Climatology Network (USHNC,) 90% of US climate-monitoring surface stations have been found to be "poorly situated," meaning that they have a margin of error greater than 1°C, more than the global warming in the entire 20th century. (The US surface data is generally considered the best surface data in the world):

* Many climate-monitoring surface stations are in locations that look like this:

* Temperature measurements from climate-monitoring surface stations are collected by hand. At one surface station in California, Anthony Watts found that only data from 14 out of 31 days had been completed in a month

* If a surface station is missing data for a particular day, data from surrounding surface stations is used to fill-in. Since 90% of all surface stations are poorly situated, even if a surface station itself is not poorly situated, if its data is missing for a day, there is a very good chance its temperature will be calculated using data from surface stations that are poorly situated

* In April 1978, there were 6,000 climate-monitoring surface stations. There are now about 1,200

* The vast majority of climate-monitoring stations that were lost were rural ones, which have been shown to give the most accurate data:

* The raw data is "adjusted" by a computer program. The net effect of this "adjustment" has been to increase the "adjusted" numbers over the "raw" numbers by .5°F, an increase that has been growing year by year:

* Difference between the USHCN "raw" data (in blue) and NASA "homogenized" data (in red):

* According to a leaked email in "climategate," "temperatures in Darwin [a monitoring station in Australia] were falling at 0.7 Celsius per century […]but after the homogenization, they were warming at 1.2 Celsius per century. [...][W]hen those guys “adjust,” they don’t mess around."

* According to a leaked email in "climategate," computer programmer Harry Harris called the CRU data set "hopeless," and said "the rest of the databases seem to be in nearly as poor a state as Australia was. [...]This whole project is SUCH A MESS. No wonder I needed therapy!!"

* When looking at source code leaked in "climategate" used to "process" and "adjust" temperatures, software engineer John Graham-Cumming said he found at least five errors and "wouldn't trust it"

* The Hadley CRU, the institution at the center of the "climategate" scandal, threw out original temperature data because it claimed it did not have "storage space"

* In 1990, Dr. Phil Jones, the man at the center of the "climategate" scandal, contributed to a paper arguing that the effect of urban warming in eastern China was "negligible." This became a key reference source for the IPCC. It turns out that 49 of the 84 climate-monitoring stations used for this report had no history of their locations or other details. This included 40 of the 42 rural stations. Of the rest, 18 had "certainly been moved" during the study period, including one that was moved five times over a total distance of 41 km. When Jones "re-examined" data in the same area for a 2008 paper, he found that urbanization was responsible for 40% of the warming found from 1951 to 2004

* Ross McKitrick and Patrick Michaels have argued that half of the global warming trend from 1980 to 2002 is caused by urban warming

* The Hadley CRU has been accused of using data from just 25% of Russia's surface stations, deliberately overstating Russia's warming by .64°C between the 1870's and 1990's

* According to emails leaked in "climategate," when "Climate Research" published articles by global warming skeptics, Phil Jones and others urged scientists to "stop considering 'Climate Research' as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal"

* William Connolly, a Wikipedia administrator and co-founder of Realclimate.org, a website that supports the theory of anthropogenic global warming, "touched" over 5,400 Wikipedia articles, routinely omitting voices that were skeptical of global warming

* Large computer climate models are unable to even simulate major features of past climate such as the 100 thousand year cycles of ice ages that have dominated climate for the past 700 thousand years

* This is a picture of what Britain looked like in the summer of 2009 when its sophisticated climate "supercomputer" had predicted a "barbeque summer":

* The US government spends over $2.5B funding climate research every year, and over $7B when grants for technology, tax breaks, and foreign aid are included (this is while Exxon gave $22M to global warming skeptics over a 10 year period)

* Many scientist assert that government grant money is given preferentially to advocates of man-made global warming

* Bart Chilton, a CFTC commissioner, said "carbon markets could be worth $2 trillion in transaction value – [...]within five years of trading (starting). [...]That would make it the largest physically traded commodity in the US, surpassing even oil"

* The owners of the trading floor where the carbon credits will be traded, including Goldman Sachs and Al Gore, stand to earn trillions if cap-and-trade is passed

* The cap-and-trade bill allows the government police powers to come into your home and inspect it for "energy efficiency," and to fine you every day your home is not compliant

* Australian homes now have to undergo a mandatory energy-efficiency assessment - costing up to $1500 per property - before they can be sold or rented under new laws to tackle carbon emissions

* UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has called for "global governance structure" to monitor greenhouse gases, which everyone on the planet emits with every exhale

* The United Nations forecasts that the global population will rise, peak and then decline between 2050 and 2300 to just under 9 billion

* Despite proclamations that there is a "consensus" and the debate is "settled," 18% of scientists surveyed in the last poll trying to discern scientific opinion do not believe in man-made global warming

* 45% of Americans think global warming is man-made, down 9% from just half a year earlier

* In the court case Dimmock v Secretary of State for Education and Skills, a British judge ruled that there were nine "inaccuracies" in An Inconvenient Truth, including Gore's claim that sea level could rise by up to 20 ft. The IPCC's own report predicted a maximum rise of 59cm in sea level over 100 years. The Science and Public Policy Institute has taken issue with thirty five of Gore's claims in An Inconvenient Truth

* Al Gore bought a $4M condo feet from ocean in Fisherman's Wharf, San Fransisco, a city he had explicitly warned about in An Inconvenient Truth

UN Climate Panel Admits Dutch Sea Level Flaw

Posted by bluemana on February 17, 2010

Reported via Reuters:

OSLO — The UN panel of climate experts overstated how much of the Netherlands is below sea level, according to a preliminary report on Saturday, admitting yet another flaw after a row last month over Himalayan glacier melt.

A background note by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said a 2007 report wrongly stated that 55 percent of the country was below sea level since the figure included areas above sea level, prone to flooding along rivers.

The United Nations has said errors in the 2007 report of about 3,000 pages do not affect the core conclusions that human activities, led by burning fossil fuels, are warming the globe.

“The sea level statistic was used for background information only, and the updated information remains consistent with the overall conclusions,” the IPCC note dated February 12 said.

Skeptics say errors have exposed sloppiness and over-reliance on “grey literature” outside leading scientific journals. The panel’s reports are a main guide for governments seeking to work out costly policies to combat global warming.

Read More: Reuters

Scientists Plan Man-Made Earthquakes To Combat Global Warming

The Telegraph reports on a geoengineering project by climate change scientists to block the sun by simulating volcanic eruptions:

A global plan to put man-made particles into the atmosphere to deflect the Sun’s heat would rapidly lower global temperatures until cuts in carbon dioxide emissions took effect, they argued.

They acknowledged concerns about geoengineering but said multi-national experiments should begin soon before it is too late to reverse climate change or in case a rogue state carried out separate measures.

The environmental scientists, David Keith of the University of Calgary in Canada, Edward Parson of the University of Michigan and Granger Morgan of Carnegie Mellon University, were writing an editorial in the journal, Nature.

They called for governments to establish a multimillion-pound fund for research into the simulated volcanoes and other solar-radiation management techniques for shielding the Earth against sunlight.

“The idea of deliberately manipulating Earth’s energy balance to offset human-driven climate change strikes many as dangerous hubris,” they wrote.

“Many scientists have argued against research on solar radiation management, saying that developing the capability to perform such tasks will reduce the political will to lower greenhouse gas emissions. We think that the risks of not doing research outweigh the risks of doing it.”

They said the cost of solar radiation management was 100 times lower than the price tag for cutting emissions to achieve the same effect, raising the risk that small groups of nations or even rogue states could act alone…

[continues in the Telegraph]

Mad Scientists Want To Simulate Volcanoes To Block Sun

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, January 28, 2010

Even as the very foundation of the global warming fraud collapses as a result of scandal after scandal, and the manufactured link between CO2 emissions and temperature increases is vehemently debunked, mad scientists with sympathetic allies in the White House are proposing to simulate volcanoes in order to block out the sun.

Despite the fact that Climategate, Glaciergate, Amazongate, and a host of other mammoth, caught red-handed examples of global warming alarmists engaging in outright fraud to manufacture a link between CO2 emissions and climate change have been exposed over the last two months, geoengineering nuts are still insisting on the necessity of carrying out their own man-made climate change by loading the atmosphere with sulphuric particles in an effort to block the very source of all life on earth – the sun.

“A geoengineering project to block the sun by simulating volcanic eruptions would be 100 times cheaper than cutting greenhouse gas emissions, climate change scientists said,” reports the Telegraph.

“The environmental scientists, David Keith of the University of Calgary in Canada, Edward Parson of the University of Michigan and Granger Morgan of Carnegie Mellon University, were writing an editorial in the journal, Nature.”

“They called for governments to establish a multimillion-pound fund for research into the simulated volcanoes and other solar-radiation management techniques for shielding the Earth against sunlight.”

No, this isn’t a script from V or some tacky alien invasion B movie – esteemed scientists are really proposing to treat the sun – without which all life on earth would perish – as a mortal enemy to the environment.

With no justification whatsoever, and with scant regard for the health consequences, these lunatics actually want to create artificial volcanoes in an attempt to produce global dimming.

No doubt the following benefits that are associated with exposure to sulphur will be enjoyed as an added bonus by the same kind of people who advocate genocidal measures of population reduction.

- Neurological effects and behavioral changes
– Disturbance of blood circulation
– Heart damage
– Effects on eyes and eyesight
– Reproductive failure
– Damage to immune systems
– Stomach and gastrointestinal disorder
– Damage to liver and kidney functions
– Hearing defects
– Disturbance of the hormonal metabolism
– Dermatological effects
– Suffocation and lung embolism

As we have previously highlighted, a prominent supporter of geoengineering proposals is none other than White House science czar John P. Holdren, a key Obama advisor who infamously co-authored a book in which he called for a “planetary regime” to enforce draconian population control measures such as forced abortion, infanticide and mandatory sterilization, as well as poisoning the water supply.

In April last year, Holdren revealed that high-level talks had already taken place to explore the possibility of “geoengineering” the environment by “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays”.

“It’s got to be looked at,” Holdren was quoted as saying, “We don’t have the luxury of taking any approach off the table.” The AP also reported that Holdren said he had raised the concept in administration discussions.

But for some, simply launching gargantuan atmospheric experiments to block out the sun doesn’t go far enough. A new book staunchly advocated by none other than NASA’s James Hansen calls for cities to be razed to the ground, industrial civilization to be destroyed, and acts of sabotage and eco-terrorism in the name of halting whatever invented environmental catastrophe alarmists are threatening this week.

“The only way to prevent global ecological collapse and thus ensure the survival of humanity is to rid the world of Industrial Civilization,” writes author Keith Farnish, adding that “people will die in huge numbers when civilization collapses”.

As we have repeatedly stressed, the innumerable scandals currently rocking the global warming establishment are eating away at whatever credibility the climate change authodoxy had left, but unless we follow through and weed out the systemized detritus that already infests every level of our society in the name of climate change, these sophisticated crackpots are just going to keep pushing ahead with their lunacy.

This starts with a wholesale rejection and noncompliance with any policy, regulation, or mandate instituted in the name of stopping the manufactured fraud that is man-made global warming.

Research related links

1. UN defends scientists over leaked emails
2. Scientists say hackers skewed climate-change emails
3. Scientists to simulate supernovas with world’s largest laser
4. Scientists Call AP Report on Global Warming ‘Hysteria’
5. CIA Teams Up With Climate Scientists
6. Top Japanese Scientists: Warming Is Not Caused By Human Activity
7. Climate skeptics claim leaked emails are evidence of collusion among scientists
8. Global warning: We are actually heading towards a new Ice Age, claim scientists
9. Media Missing the Plot on ‘Climate Gate’: It’s the Fraud, Stupid!
10. Gore says supercomputing can be killer app in climate change
11. U.S. Government Mad Scientists Geo-Engineer Atmosphere
12. Government Scientists Propose “Geo-Engineering” Earth’s Upper Atmosphere

Climategate update: ‘The wheels are coming off for the IPCC’

E. Thomas McClanahan
Kansas City Star Editorial
January 25, 2010

The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is supposed to represent the unimpeachable view of science. Now we’re learning just how sloppy it’s methods have been. First came the revelation that the prediction on melting Himalayan glaciers was unverified. Now comes a report that the UN wrongly linked global warming to natural disasters.

What’s happening is that after the Climategate e-mail revelations, skeptical views from credentialed scientists — dismissed or suppressed up to now — are getting a second look. In other words, the wheels are coming off for the IPCC.

All in all, not a good week for the IPCC. Two major errors, both of them integrating inflammatory, un-reviewed results into what had been advertised as the most authoritative peer-reviewed summary of the state of climate science. This follows the collapse of Copenhagen, and the Climategate emails’ evidence of pressure to influence the results of climate science. All of them working in the same direction: to slant the evidence presented to the world toward the conclusion that AGW is a current crisis, a world cataclysm.

Research related links

1. Climategate: why it matters
2. Climategate Investigator Is Member Of Vehemently Pro-Man Made Global Warming Organization
3. “Climategate”: Peer-Review System Was Hijacked By Warming Alarmists
4. ClimateGate For Dummies
5. Rep. Miller Calls For Climategate Investigation
6. First Climategate, now Glaciergate
7. UN defends scientists over leaked emails
8. Scientific Siege Against UN-IPCC Farce Revealed
9. Penn State Will Investigate Climategate
10. Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren involved in unwinding “Climategate” scandal
11. Inhofe Announces Climategate Investigation on Fox News
12. TV Environmentalist Goes Nuts Over ClimateGate

THE NEW CLIMATE CHANGE SCANDAL

Express.co.uk Monday January 18,2010

By: Anil Davar

FRESH doubts were cast over controversial global warming theories yesterday after a major climate change argument was discredited.

The International Panel on Climate Change was forced to admit its key claim that Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 was lifted from a 1999 magazine article. The report was based on an interview with a little-known Indian scientist who has since said his views were “speculation” and not backed up by research.

It was also revealed that the IPCC’s controversial chairman, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, described as “the world’s top climate scientist”, is a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics and no formal climate science qualifications.

Dr Pachauri was yesterday accused of a conflict of interest after it emerged he has a network of business interests that attract millions of pounds in funding thanks to IPCC policies. One of them, The Energy Research Institute, has a London office and is set to receive up to £10million from British taxpayers over the next five years in the form of grants from the Department for International Development.

Dr Pachauri denies any conflict of interest arising from his various roles.

Yesterday, critics accused the IPCC of boosting the man-made global warming theory to protect a multi-million pound industry.

Climate scientist Peter Taylor said: “I am not surprised by this news. A vast bureaucracy and industry has been built up around this theory. There is too much money in it for the IPCC to let it wither.”

Professor Julian Dowdeswell, a glacier specialist at Cambridge University, said: “The average glacier is 1,000ft thick so to melt one even at 15ft a year would take 60 years. That is a lot faster than anything we are seeing now so the idea of losing it all by 2035 is unrealistically high.”

The IPCC was set up by the UN to ensure world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change. It issued the glacier warning in a benchmark report in 2007 that was allegedly based on the latest research into global warming.

The scientists behind the report now admit they relied on a news story published in the New Scientist journal in 1999. The article was based on a short telephone interview with scientist Syed Hasnain, then based in Delhi, who has since said his views were “speculation”.

The New Scientist report was picked up by the WWF and included in a 2005 paper.

It then became a key source for the IPCC which went further in suggesting the melting of the glaciers was “very likely”.

Yesterday, Professor Murari Lal who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report, said: “If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, then I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments.”

Last year the Indian government issued its own scientific research rejecting the notion that glaciers were melting so rapidly.

Before the weakness in the IPCC’s research was exposed, Dr Pachauri dismissed the Indian government report as “voodoo science”.

The revelations are the latest crack to appear in the scientific consensus on climate change.

It follows the so-called climate-gate scandal in November last year when leaked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit appeared to show scientists fiddling the figures to strengthen the case for man-made climate change.

The scandal prompted critics to suggest that many scientists had a vested interest in promoting climate change because it helped secure more funding for research.

Last month, the Daily Express published a dossier listing 100 reasons why global warming was part of a natural cycle and not man made.

The greatest threat of the 21st century: not AGW but Eco-Fascism

James Delingpole
London Telegraph
Friday, January 8th, 2010

As you freeze your butt off in a winter whose severity the politicised weather forecasters of the Met Office utterly failed to predict, and as you wonder how you can afford gas and electricity bills which have been grotesquely inflated by taxes and legislation designed to “combat global warming”, spare a thought for a fellow victim of eco-fascism who’s even worse off than you. In a week or so this poor man could be dead.

His name is Peter Spencer, he’s a farmer in New South Wales, and his livelihood has been stolen by the Australian government in the name of – you guessed it – “combatting climate change.” That’s why he is now sitting atop that windblown tower you see in the photograph, on sheep farmland rendered useless by eco-legislation, starving himself to death in protest at his government’s callous disregard for his property rights. This is his 46th day on hunger strike.

Jo Nova has been following the story closely. Here’s the eco-political background:

As a part of Australia’s commitment to protect native vegetation and to reduce carbon emissions under the Kyoto protocol, Peter Spencer and thousands of farmers like him, have been subjected to a government imposed ban on land clearing.

The saved trees are natural carbon sinks worth an estimated $10.8 billion to the government in reduced carbon emissions, should Kevin Rudd’s emissions trading scheme go ahead. But the farmers, who can no longer develop this land have received no compensation.

Peter Spencer is among the victims of this legalised theft. He first told his story here in 2006.

Full article here

Research related links

1. Be Part Of The Spiritual Renaissance of the 21st Century
2. Unconventional Warfare in the 21st Century: U.S. Surrogates, Terrorists and Narcotraffickers
3. 21st Century Traitors
4. The Great Depression of the 21st Century: Collapse of the Real Economy
5. Welcome To The 21st Century Police State
6. WHO declares first 21st century flu pandemic
7. Electronic Elections: Vote Fraud in the 21st Century
8. The Final Solution: Bio Solutions for the 21st Century (Satire)
9. Climate pact in jeopardy as China refuses to cut carbon emissions
10. 21st Century Internment Camps: Disaster relief or civil rights disaster?
11. Bill Gates Supports Fascism With His Money
12. Greens at G-20 Summit Call for ‘Rich’ Nations to Fund Underdeveloped Countries

Big Chill: Coldest Weather in Over Two Decades

Infowars.com
January 6, 2010

Global warming? What global warming? How will Al Gore explain this?

From AccuWeather:

Nearly the entire eastern half of the United States is enduring bitterly cold temperatures not experienced since 1985. Even Florida, which has been hovering around freezing levels overnight recently, is also feeling the almost-nationwide chill.

“It’ll be like the great winters of the ’60s and ’70s,” said AccuWeather.com Chief Meteorologist and Expert Long Range Forecaster Joe Bastardi.

The last time a large swath of severely low temperatures struck the nation was in January 1985. That historic arctic outbreak had below-zero temperatures Fahrenheit stretching from Chicago eastward to New York City, and all the way south to Macon, Ga.

Read entire article

Research related links

1. December was coldest month in 28 years
2. Cold weather kills scores in India
3. Weather Channel Founder to Sue Al Gore
4. Weather Channel Founder Wants To Sue Al Gore For Global Warming Fraud
5. Global warming? Temperatures break 125-year-old record in New Brunswick
6. Highest Unemployment in Three Decades
7. Frigid Weather on Earth Day Cools Global Waming Hype
8. Russia reigns over its weather
9. Holdren Can’t Get Climate Change Doomsday Story Right
10. U.S. Manufacturing Slumps to Weakest in 2 Decades
11. Climate change rhetoric spirals out of control
12. Playing with weather stirs debate in China

Pope urges lifestyle changes to save environment

Reuters
Friday, January 1, 2010

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) – Pope Benedict used his traditional New Year address on Friday to call on people to change their lifestyles to save the planet, saying environmental responsibility was essential for global peace.

Recalling that world leaders had gathered in Copenhagen last month for the U.N. climate conference, the pope said action at a personal and community level was just as important to safeguard the environment.

“Nevertheless, in this moment, I would like to underline the importance of the choices of individuals, families and local administrations in preserving the environment,” the Pope told the thousands of faithful gathered in St. Peter’s Square.

“An objective shared by all, an indispensable condition for peace, is that of overseeing the earth’s natural resources with justice and wisdom.”

Full story here.

Research related links

1. Pope warns against undermining U.N.
2. Pope calls for “world political authority”
3. Pope blesses U.N. flag, calls for “binding international rules”
4. Bin Laden: Pope Helps Anti-Islam Crusade
5. Brit environment boss wants to put carbon tax on driving, heating and holidays
6. Destroying California Farms to Save Smelt
7. Irish Environment minister Sammy Wilson: I still think man-made climate change is a con
8. Bayer Partners with United Nations to Push “World Environment Day”
9. Tax motorists more to help save the planet
10. U.N. Claims Oil Tax and “Green New Deal” to Jumpstart Economy
11. Democrat Proposes Bill to Save Newspapers
12. The great carbon credit con: Why are we paying the Third World to poison its environment?

Leading Global Warming Crusader: Cap and Trade May INCREASE CO2 Emissions

Washington’s Blog
Friday, Jan 1st, 2010

James Hansen – the world’s leading climate scientist fighting against global warming – told Amy Goodman this morning that cap and trade not only won’t reduce emissions, it may actually increase them:

The problem is that the emissions just go someplace else. That’s what happened after Kyoto, and that’s what would happen again, if–as long as fossil fuels are the cheapest energy, they will be burned someplace. You know, the Europeans thought they actually reduced their emissions after Kyoto, but what happened was the products that had been made in their countries began to be made in other countries, which were burning the cheapest form of fossil fuel, so the total emissions actually increased…

See also this and this.

Environmental groups such as Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace are also against cap and trade (and see this and this), as is the head of California’s cap and trade program for the EPA.

Hansen also told Goodman that (notwithstanding Paul Krugman’s assertions) most economists say that cap and trade won’t work:

I’ve talked with many economists, and the majority of them agree that the cap and trade with offsets is not the way to address the problem.

As I have previously pointed out:

• The economists who invented cap-and-trade say that it won’t work for global warming

• European criminal investigators have determined that there is a tremendous amount of fraud occurring in the carbon trading market. Indeed, organized crime has largely taken over the European cap and trade market.

• Former U.S. Undersecretary of Commerce for Economic Affairs Robert Shapiro says that the proposed cap and trade law “has no provisions to prevent insider trading by utilities and energy companies or a financial meltdown from speculators trading frantically in the permits and their derivatives.”

• Our bailout buddies over at Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup and the other Wall Street behemoths are buying heavily into carbon trading (see this, this, this, this, this and this). As University of Maryland professor economics professor and former Chief Economist at the U.S. International Trade Commission Peter Morici writes:

• Obama must ensure that the banks use the trillions of dollars in federal bailout assistance to renegotiate mortgages and make new loans to worthy homebuyers and businesses. Obama must make certain that banks do not continue to squander federal largess by padding executive bonuses, acquiring other banks and pursuing new high-return, high-risk lines of businesses in merger activity, carbon trading and complex derivatives. Industry leaders like Citigroup have announced plans to move in those directions. Many of these bankers enjoyed influence in and contributed generously to the Obama campaign. Now it remains to be seen if a President Obama can stand up to these same bankers and persuade or compel them to act responsibly.

  In other words, the same companies that made billions off of derivatives and other scams and are now getting bailed out on your dime are going to make billions from carbon trading.

• One the largest boosters for cap and trade invented credit default swaps – which were supposed to increase financial stability, but instead were a large part of the reason that the world economy crashed last year

Humanity’s Right to Life

Neil Comment:
If you think that Fidel Castro is an opposition to the New World Order and the Globalists, think again...! Castro seems like he is an opponent to Obama and the Globalists, but as you see in this statement below, he actually complaining about the fact that the Copenhagen meeting was not able to reach their planned agenda, diverting your attention away from Climategate and the leaked documents that is the real reason that the meeting failed. Instead he is implying that it is Obama and his crew that are the reason for the failure. This is of course a blatant lie. Fidel Castro is just a puppet for the New World Order (a controlled opposition) just like Obama and the rest of the Eco-Fascists. There is no Left or Right! There is just the left and right arm of the International Bankers/Elite.

Humanity’s Right to Life
By Fidel Castro

December 31, 2009 "Juventud Rebelde " -- Climate change is already causing enormous damage and hundreds of millions of poor people are enduring the consequences.

The most advanced research centers have claimed that there is little time to avoid an irreversible catastrophe. James Hansen, from the NASA Goddard Institute, has said that a proportion of 350 parts of carbon dioxide by million is still tolerable; however, the figure today is 390 and growing at a pace of 2 parts by million every year exceeding the levels of 600 thousand years ago. Each one of the past two decades has been the warmest since the first records were taken while carbon dioxide increased 80 parts by million in the past 150 years.

The meltdown of ice in the Artic Sea and of the huge two-kilometer thick icecap covering Greenland; of the South American glaciers feeding its main fresh water sources and the enormous volume covering the Antarctic; of the remaining icecap on the Kilimanjaro, the ice on the Himalayan and the large frozen area of Siberia are visible. Outstanding scientists fear abrupt quantitative changes in these natural phenomena that bring about the change.

Humanity entertained high hopes in the Copenhagen Summit after the Kyoto Protocol signed in 1997 entered into force in 2005. The resounding failure of the Summit gave rise to shameful episodes that call for due clarification.

The United States, with less than 5% of the world population releases 25% of the carbon dioxide. The new US President had promised to cooperate with the international effort to tackle a new problem that afflicts that country as much as the rest of the world. In the meetings leading to the Summit, it became clear that the leaders of that nation and of the wealthiest countries were maneuvering to place the burden of sacrifices on the emergent and poor countries.

A great number of leaders and thousands of representatives of social movements and scientific institutions, determined to fight for the preservation of humanity from the greatest risk in history, converged in Copenhagen on the invitation of the organizers of the Summit. I’d rather avoid reference to details of the brutality of the Danish police force against thousands of protesters and invitees from social and scientific movements who traveled to the Danish capital. I’ll focus on the political features of the Summit.

Actually, chaos prevailed in Copenhagen where incredible things happened. The social movements and scientific institutions were not allowed to attend the debates. There were heads of State and Government who could not even express their views on crucial issues. Obama and the leaders of the wealthiest nations took over the conference, with the complicity of the Danish government. The United Nations agencies were pushed to the background.

Barack Obama, the last to arrive on the day of the Summit for a 12-hours stay, met with two groups of invitees carefully chosen by him and his staff, and in the company of one of them met at the plenary hall with the rest of the high-level delegations. He made his remarks and left right away trough the back door. Except for the small group chosen by him, the other representatives of countries were prevented from taking the floor during that plenary session. The presidents of Bolivia and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela were allowed to speak because the Chairman of the Summit had no choice but to give them the floor in light of the strong pressures of those present.

In an adjacent room, Obama brought together the leaders of the wealthiest nations, some of the most important emerging States and two very poor countries. He then introduced a document, negotiated with two or three of the most important countries, ignored the UN General Assembly, gave a press conference and left like Julius Caesar after one of his victorious wars in Asia Minor that led him to say: “I came, I saw, I conquered.”

Even Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, had said on October 19: “If we do not reach a deal over the next few months, let us be in no doubt, since once the damage from unchecked emissions growth is done, no retrospective global agreement in some future period can undo that choice. By then it will be irretrievably too late...”

Brown concluded his speech with these dramatic words: “We cannot afford to fail. If we fail now we will pay a heavy price. If we act now, if we act together, if we act with vision and resolve, success at Copenhagen is still within our reach, but, if we falter, the Earth will itself be at risk and, for the planet, there is no Plan B.”

But later he arrogantly said that the United Nations could not be taken hostage by a group of countries like Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Tuvalu. At the same time, he accused China, India, Brazil, South Africa and other emerging countries of being lured by the United States into signing a document that throws the Kyoto Protocol in the wastebasket without a binding agreement involving the United States and its wealthy allies.

I find it necessary to recall that the United Nations Organization was born hardly six decades ago, after the last World War, when there were no more than fifty independent countries. Today, after the hateful colonial system ceased to exist thanks to the resolute struggle of the peoples, it has a membership of over 190 independent nations. For many years, even the People’s Republic of China was denied admission to the UN while a puppet regime was its representative in that institution and in the privileged Security Council.

The tenacious support of the growing number of Third World nations would prove indispensable to China’s international recognition and become an extremely significant element for the acceptance of that country’s rights at the UN by the United States and its NATO allies.

It was the Soviet Union that made the greatest contribution to the heroic fight against fascism. More than 25 million of its people perished while the country was terribly devastated. It was from that struggle that it emerged as a superpower with the capacity to partly balance the absolute domination of the US imperial system and the former colonial powers to plunder the Third World countries unrestrictedly. Following the demise of the USSR, the United States extended its political and military power to the East, --up to Russia’s heart-- and enhanced its influence on the rest of Europe. Therefore, what happened in Copenhagen came as no surprise.

I want to insist on how unfair and outrageous were the remarks of the Prime Minister of the UK and the Yankee attempt to impose as the Summit Accord a document that was at no time discussed with the attending countries.

During his press conference of December 21, Cuba’s Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez made a statement that cannot be disproved. I will quote from some of its paragraphs: “I would like to emphasize that no agreement of the Conference of the Parties was reached in Copenhagen, that no decision was made as to binding or nonbinding commitments or pertaining to International Law; that simply did not happen. There was no agreement in Copenhagen.”

“The Summit was a failure and a deception for the world [...] the lack of political will was left in the open...”

“...it was a step backward in the actions of the international community to prevent or mitigate the effects of climate change...”

“...the average world temperature could rise by 5 degrees...”

Right then our Foreign Minister adds other interesting data on the likely consequences of climate change according to the latest scientific research.

“...from the Kyoto Protocol until today the developed countries’ emissions rose by 12.8%... and 55% of that volume corresponds to the United States.”

“The average annual oil consumption is 25 barrels for an American, 11 barrels for a European, less than 2 barrels for a Chinese and less than 1 barrel for a Latin American or Caribbean citizen.”

“Thirty countries, including those of the European Union, are consuming 80% of the fuel produced.”

The fact is that the developed countries signatories of the Kyoto Protocol increased their emissions dramatically. Now, they want to replace the adopted bases of the emissions from 1990 with those of 2005. This means that the United States, which is the main source of emissions, would be reducing its emissions of 25 years ago in only 3%. It is a shameful mockery of the world public opinion.

The Cuban foreign minister, speaking on behalf of a group of ALBA member countries, defended China, India, Brazil, South Africa and other important emerging-economies states. He stressed the concept adopted in Kyoto that “common but differentiated responsibilities mean that the responsibility of the historical accumulators and the developed countries, who are the culprits of this catastrophe, differs from that of the small island states and the South countries, above all the least developed...”

“Responsibility means financing; responsibility means technology transfer on adequate terms. But, at this point, Obama resorts to a game of words and instead of talking of common but differentiated responsibilities, he speaks of ‘common but differentiated responses.’”

“...he then leaves the plenary hall without taking the trouble of listening to anybody; he had neither listened to anybody before taking the floor.”

In a subsequent press conference, before departing from the Danish capital, Obama had said: “There has been a meaningful and unprecedented breakthrough here in Copenhagen. For the first time in history, the largest economies have come to jointly accept responsibilities.”

In his clear and irrefutable presentation, our Foreign Minister said: “What does it mean that ‘the largest economies have come to jointly accept responsibilities’? It means that they are placing a large part of the burden of financing the relief and adaptation of countries, mostly the South countries, to climate change on China, Brazil, India and South Africa. Because it must be said that in Copenhagen we witnessed an assault, a holdup against China, Brazil, India and South Africa, and against every other euphemistically called developing country.”

These were the resounding and undeniable words used by our Foreign Minister to describe what happened in Copenhagen.

I must add that, when at 10:00 a.m. on December 19 our Vicepresident Esteban Lazo and the Cuban Foreign Minister had already left, a belated attempt was made to resurrect the Copenhagen cadaver as a Summit Accord. At that moment, practically every head of State had left and there was hardly any minister around. Again, the denunciation by the remaining members of the delegations from Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and other countries could defeat the maneuver. That was the end of the inglorious Summit.

Another fact that should not be overlooked is that at the most critical moment of that day, in the wee small hours, the Cuban Foreign Minister, together with the delegations waging the honorable battle, offered UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon their cooperation in the ever harder struggle being fought as well as in future efforts necessary to preserve the life of our species.

The environmental group Wild World Fund has warned that if emissions are not drastically reduced climate change will go unchecked in the next 5 to 10 years.

But there is no need to prove the substance of what is said here that Obama did.

The US President stated on Wednesday, December 23, that people are justified in being disappointed about the outcome of the Summit on Climate Change. In an interview with the CBS television network, the President said that “instead of a total collapse if nothing had been done, which would have been a huge step backward; at least we could remain more or less where we were...”

According to the press dispatch, Obama is the target of most criticism from the countries that nearly unanimously feel that the result of the Summit was disastrous.

Now, the UN is in a quandary since many countries would find it humiliating to ask others to adhere to the arrogant and antidemocratic accord.

To carry on with the battle and to claim in every meeting, particularly in those of Bonn and Mexico, humanity’s right to life, with the morale and the strength that truth provides, is in my opinion the only way to proceed.

Fidel Castro Ruz - December 26, 2009 - 8:15 p.m.

No Rise of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Fraction in Past 160 Years, New Research Finds

ScienceDaily
December 31, 2009

Most of the carbon dioxide emitted by human activity does not remain in the atmosphere, but is instead absorbed by the oceans and terrestrial ecosystems. In fact, only about 45 percent of emitted carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere.

However, some studies have suggested that the ability of oceans and plants to absorb carbon dioxide recently may have begun to decline and that the airborne fraction of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions is therefore beginning to increase.

Many climate models also assume that the airborne fraction will increase. Because understanding of the airborne fraction of carbon dioxide is important for predicting future climate change, it is essential to have accurate knowledge of whether that fraction is changing or will change as emissions increase.

Read entire article

Research related links

1. Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
2. EPA expected to act in regulating carbon dioxide
3. Obama Years Ago Helped Fund Carbon Program He Is Now Pushing Through Congress
4. French court throws out Sarkozy’s carbon tax
5. Carbon traders deny sub-prime crisis brewing
6. Irish Government Moves to Impose Carbon Tax
7. New Yorkers Subjected to “Carbon Clock” at Penn Station
8. NASA Shows Quiet Sun Means Cooling of Earth’s Upper Atmosphere
9. UK Company Offers “Carbon Credit” Gift Packs
10. Climate pact in jeopardy as China refuses to cut carbon emissions
11. Hansen: Obama ‘has four years to save Earth’
12. San Francisco Sets Precedent, Imposes Carbon Tax on Business

EcoSnoop – Rat On Your Neighbors and “Save The Planet”

Watts Up With That
Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Now, you can rat on your neighbors, your company, even your friends and family. Thanks to EcoSnoop, there’s an app for that.

EcoSnoop – Rat On Your Neighbors and “Save The Planet”

Watts Up With That
Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Now, you can rat on your neighbors, your company, even your friends and family. Thanks to EcoSnoop, there’s an app for that.

This can also be useful for catching those who talk the talk, but don’t walk the walk. This might just backfire on more than a few people. But since the green movement started this Stasi-esque information gathering campaign on “eco-offenders” [their word], that makes it OK to snap photos of green activists too, right? I could see some examples. Bill McKibben leaves lights on after leaving a room? Joe Romm takes his car instead of the bus? Monbiot lets his car idle at a stoplight? Jim Hansen uses electricity generated by coal? William Connolley leaves his computer on after a frenzied all-nighter of Wikipedia editing? Gore uses the elevator to his penthouse suite in SFO rather than take the stairs? Lots of opportunity there.

Now before the usual suspects get up in arms about my satire, let me say that I’m a fan of energy conservation. As many readers know, I walk the walk with my own energy saving measures. In fact just last week I upgraded part of my office to LED lighting, and I’m so impressed with it I’m going to showcase the product here. I’m not, however, going to turn in my neighbor because he left his porch light on one night or forgot to turn off his sprinkler when it rains. Yet you’ll find examples like that on the EcoSnoop web page.

Here’s what they say about the iPhone app campaign:

EcoSnoop.- Sustainability through Activism EcoSnoop for iPhone is an activism tool that allows green-aware users to assist and encourage corporate green initiatives. What’s the big deal?

It has been estimated that as much as 30% of the energy consumed in office buildings is wasted.
This suggests a significant opportunity for energy use reduction, cost savings, and the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions through cost-effective energy efficiency opportunities.

To help identify the best opportunities, both from the perspective of the building owner and the utility, it is important to examine how, where, and when energy is used and the savings are likely to occur. (Excerpt taken from the National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency Sector Collaborative on Energy Efficiency Office Building Energy Use Profile)

Q: How can I help using my iPhone?
A: Users locate and report on eco-offenders by submitting pictures and descriptions of blatant abuse and misuse issues.

Q: What happens with my pictures?
A:The EcoSnoop website and iPhone applications are a centralized repository of environmental awareness and a tool for actively promoting energy conservancy and green awareness. By using the EcoSnoop iPhone application, the user becomes an important link in the chain of helping to report and mediate green waste (energy, pollution, etc.). Additionally, by going yourself and encouraging friends to utilize the website to add as much information as possible about the picture (address information, responsible party information, etc.) you are giving the EcoSnoop community the tools to encourage positive change!

EcoSnoop: We need your help saving the world…1 picture at a time.

Online: EcoSnoop.com
Twitter: @EcoSnoop

*An Appency Press Video Promo Reel - www.theappencypress.com*

h/t to WUWT reader Steve Keohane

“EcoSnoop” iPhone App Designed for Ratting Out Neighbors

Max Linsky
Take Part
December 29, 2009

Listen up, all you eco-warriors: Your days of griping in vain about neighborhood energy waste may be coming to an end. Finally, there’s a tool that we normal folks can use to report environmentally negligent behavior. Ladies and gentlemen, say hello to EcoSnoop.

The EcoSnoop app lets individuals report on wastage of water, energy, trash or toxic pollutants. You can view cases filed near you via GPS and add documentation using photos and commentary. You can create your own complaints if, for example, your grocery store is leaving the parking lot lights on during the day or your neighbor is dumping oil down the drain.

“ It’s an interesting idea. Some reports say as much as 30 percent of total electricity is wasted, and certainly we have all witnessed examples of this in our own communities. Crowdsourcing may be one of the best tactics for identifying such waste, but it’s not clear how these complaints will ever make their way to the property owners responsible. ”

Research related links

1. British Councils Hire Snoops as Young as Seven to Spy on Neighbors
2. Traditional lightbulbs banned by EU
3. Snoops to Get £500 to Spy On Neighbors
4. New York Mayor Bloomberg Wants Tax On Plastic Bags
5. Celebration Of Americans Turning In Their Neighbors, Family Members
6. Critics Deride Bill Designed to Keep Weapons Out of Terrorists’ Hands
7. Neighbors Want Colombia Punished
8. The System is designed to exert Total Control over the Lives of Individuals
9. Brit Bureaucrats to Switch Off Street Lights to “Reduce CO2 Emissions”
10. Iraq blames neighbors for water shortage
11. ‘White vigilantes’ shot black neighbors without consequences in Katrina aftermath
12. The U.S. Economy: Designed to Fail

Population control called key to deal

China Daily

By Li Xing (China Daily)
Updated: 2009-12-10 07:37

COPENHAGEN: Population and climate change are intertwined but the population issue has remained a blind spot when countries discuss ways to mitigate climate change and slow down global warming, according to Zhao Baige, vice-minister of National Population and Family Planning Commission of China (NPFPC) .

"Dealing with climate change is not simply an issue of CO2 emission reduction but a comprehensive challenge involving political, economic, social, cultural and ecological issues, and the population concern fits right into the picture," said Zhao, who is a member of the Chinese government delegation.

Many studies link population growth with emissions and the effect of climate change.

"Calculations of the contribution of population growth to emissions growth globally produce a consistent finding that most of past population growth has been responsible for between 40 per cent and 60 percent of emissions growth," so stated by the 2009 State of World Population, released earlier by the UN Population Fund.

Although China's family planning policy has received criticism over the past three decades, Zhao said that China's population program has made a great historic contribution to the well-being of society.

As a result of the family planning policy, China has seen 400 million fewer births, which has resulted in 18 million fewer tons of CO2 emissions a year, Zhao said.

The UN report projected that if the global population would remain 8 billion by the year 2050 instead of a little more than 9 billion according to medium-growth scenario, "it might result in 1 billion to 2 billion fewer tons of carbon emissions".

Meanwhile, she said studies have also shown that family planning programs are more efficient in helping cut emissions, citing research by Thomas Wire of London School of Economics that states: "Each $7 spent on basic family planning would reduce CO2 emissions by more than one ton" whereas it would cost $13 for reduced deforestation, $24 to use wind technology, $51 for solar power, $93 for introducing hybrid cars and $131 electric vehicles.

She admitted that China's population program is not without consequences, as the country is entering the aging society fast and facing the problem of gender imbalance.

"I'm not saying that what we have done is 100 percent right, but I'm sure we are going in the right direction and now 1.3 billion people have benefited," she said.

She said some 85 percent of the Chinese women in reproductive age use contraceptives, the highest rate in the world. This has been achieved largely through education and improvement of people's lives, she said.

This holistic approach that integrates policy on population and development, a strategy promoting sustainable development of population, resources and environment should serve as a model for integrating population programs into the framework of climate change adaptation, she said.

Carbon Trading Scam In Big Trouble After Copenhagen Failure

Green billionaires take a hit as markets nosedive

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, December 21, 2009

Global warming con men hoping to bag windfall profits from the climate change scam are wincing today after carbon trading markets nose dived following the failure at Copenhagen to secure legally binding targets on restricting CO2 emissions.

Barclays Capital director Trevor Sikorski labeled the Copenhagen result “very disappointing” and said that the outlook for the global carbon market was bearish.

European Union carbon markets dropped by nearly 9 percent this morning before stabilizing.

One dealer described the market as like “a falling knife,” reports the Financial Times.

“UN-backed certified emissions reductions for December 2010 delivery fell 6.6 per cent to €11.05 a tonne, their lowest level since June 23.”

With carbon prices set to drop as low as 10 euros a tonne in the first quarter of 2010, analysts are saying that only a Senate approval of the U.S. cap and trade bill will rescue the market.

As we have documented, Maurice Strong, who is regularly credited as founding father of the modern environmental movement, serves on the board of directors of The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX). Strong was a leading initiate of the Earth Summit in the early 90s, where the theory of global warming caused by CO2 generated by human activity was most notably advanced.

By using his considerable wealth and influence to lobby for cap and trade and a tax on CO2 emissions, Strong stood to enrich his company’s coffers to the tune of trillions if a binding agreement on carbon dioxide had been formulated in Copenhagen.

Strong and his close ally Al Gore come from a stable of elite groups that have long sought touse the environmental movement to advance their financial agenda.

Strong, who was groomed by David Rockefeller to eventually serve as Director of the Rockefeller Foundation, is also a member of the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Club of Rome, the organization who infamously proposed in their 1991 report, The First Global Revolution, that fears about the environment should be exploited in order to usher in a global government.