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

Bill Gates Calls for Population Reduction

Stephen P. Fuller
Infowars.com
February 22, 2010

In a recent TED Talk, Bill Gates has put forward the theory that mankind can reach zero carbon emissions by reducing our population, services, energy and carbon output. And yes, he’s even suggested a trendy, yet totally absurd, equation to legitimatize his eugenicist viewpoint. All I can say is, “What a crackpot!” Maybe it’s because he hasn’t noticed the systematic fraud exposed in the climate-gate debacle or maybe it’s because the mathematics of his equation are so blatantly imbecilic but I can’t help myself from truncated laughter. This guy is a genius? Really?

	Bill Gates is suggesting tried and tested Malthusian population manipulation to achieve the new world order’s nominal depopulation agenda.

First and foremost, the summation equation is immeasurably misleading. No one, and especially not a world renowned computer programmer, should make the mistake of multiplying the variables of a summation. And even if you could overlook that magnitude of an inaccuracy, the number of variables that lead to a reasonable projection of a true change in any chaotic system are far more varied and complex than the four presented by Mr. Gates’ second grade presentation. Yet in typical fashion one TED attendee, Laura Trice, stated, “Bills Gates reduced the environmental CO2 issue to a simple math equation I could understand.”

So, assuming you are among the lemurs that have bought into the CO2 bogeyman storyline (during a carbon starved period of history); you still must concede that anything times zero is zero and therefore Bill Gates, even if inadvertently, called for zero human population. And though one could try to fool themselves into believing that he wouldn’t call for the expansion of the depopulation agenda, you didn’t need to wait very long to hear that directly from his own mouth. Soon into his talk he states that the world’s population is rapidly heading toward a staggering 9 billion and that, “if we do a good job on new vaccines, healthcare, and reproductive health services we could lower that by 10-15%.” Yes, you guessed it; Bill Gates is suggesting tried and tested Malthusian population manipulation to achieve the new world order’s nominal depopulation agenda.

He later states that if they can’t achieve the kind of carbon reduction necessary by their standards; then they will consider using current “geo-engineering” methods to change weather patterns and extend their timeline. But the ultimate fumble of the speech came when Gates was asked what he would say to “climate deniers”. After clumsily attempting to make a point for what seems like an eternity, Gates exclaims, “if we can make the alternatives cheaper then they won’t care anymore.” Well I for one disagree with Mr. Gates’ assertations. For one, reproductive health services is an obvious code phrase for sterilization and abortion services, as so cunningly detailed by Obama Science Czar John Holdren in his government eugenics handbook “Ecoscience”. And secondly, I refuse to take anyone serious that still considers CO2 emission standardization to be anything less than the introduction of a new highly mercenary financial exchange instrument.

However, in the typical fashion of a seasoned professional pitchman, Bill Gates does deliver one singular great point that struggles to lend credibility to all of the previously presented non-sense. The productive use of depleted uranium in a newly designed slow-burn reactor is an idea that has been long overdue. After the egregious use of DU on the battle fields of Iraq, it almost sounds like a fairytale to have the potential to steer the toxic psychosis permeated elite war mongers towards a use for DU that may actually benefit mankind. And once the perpetrators of similar War and State crimes (illegal wiretaps, illegal preemptive war, torture, etc) have been tried and sentenced; DU reactors are surly at the top of the to-do-list.

Yes, WHO Faked a Swine Flu Pandemic and is Now Lying About It

Michael Fumento
Opposing Views
Posted February 15, 2010

The World Health Organization has suddenly gone from crying “The sky is falling!” like a cackling Chicken Little to squealing like a stuck pig. The reason: charges that the agency deliberately fomented swine flu hysteria. “The world is going through a real pandemic. The description of it as a fake is wrong and irresponsible,” the agency claims on its Web site.

But I’ve been documenting the hoax since before a pandemic was declared, back when the WHO was just posturing about a proclamation.

I first showed that swine flu was exceptionally mild, when by definition flu pandemics had to be severe. I later showed that the WHO changed the definition to match swine flu, which required it to eliminate severity as a factor. That in turn makes the definition of “flu pandemic” absolutely worthless.

I also explained why the WHO did it. That it wasn’t mere bureaucratic turf-enlarging, but rather first an effort to cover up yet another WHO hysteria, over avian flu, and then an attempt to bring “social justice” to the world and redistribute wealth between nations. That from the very mouth of its secretary general!

Now with a European watchdog group calling hearings on what it’s labeled a “false pandemic,” the WHO is claiming 1) that it didn’t change the definition, and 2) that there was never a definition that required severity.

These are incredibly bold lies, given that you can find the old definition on the Web and people like me tell you right where to go to find it. Like here.

READ FULL ARTICLE

Aspartame: Sweet Misery A Poisoned World

Google Video
Thursday, January 8th, 2010

This is the movie that Pepsi and Coca Cola don’t want you to see.

Aspartame can be found in thousands of products such as:

instant breakfasts
breath mints
cereals
sugar-free chewing gum
cocoa mixes
coffee beverages
frozen desserts
gelatin desserts
juice beverages
laxatives
multivitamins
milk drinks
pharmaceuticals and supplements, including over-the-counter medicines
shake mixes
soft drinks
tabletop sweeteners
tea beverages
instant teas and coffees
topping mixes
wine coolers
yogurt

Source: Mercola.com

Research related links

1. BPA Found In Soft Drink Cans
2. Oil Tycoon: Our Troops Died … We’re “Entitled” to Sweet Contracts in Iraq!
3. Aspartame Study: 67% of Female Rats Developed Visible Tumors
4. Horses Poisoned by Fluoridated Water
5. Orange drinks with 300 times more pesticide than tap water
6. Fluoride and Aspartame Make You Stupid
7. Fully invested in your misery
8. A rising tide of social misery
9. FDA Declares Form of Vitamin B6 a Drug
10. Bank of England: Get Ready for Increased Misery
11. Leading economist fears decade of misery, unemployment
12. McCain: Commoners Must Accept Globalization, Increasing Misery

Comic Superheroes help CDC pitch vaccines to kids

Aaron Dykes
JonesReport.com
December 29, 2009

http://www.bam.gov/sub_diseases/diseases_immuneplatoon.html

The CDC has created an online destination for kids known as ‘BAM! Body and Mind.’ Its main focus, along with advice for dealing with stress and bullies, is an attempt to glamorize vaccines to children ages 9-13.

BAM! Body and Mind is an online destination for kids created by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), an agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Designed for kids 9-13 years old, BAM! Body and Mind gives them the information they need to make healthy lifestyle choices. The site focuses on topics that kids told us are important to them — such as stress and physical fitness — using kid-friendly lingo, games, quizzes, and other interactive features.

By creating comic-book superheroes and “using kid-friendly lingo“, they portray vaccines as a boost to immune systems that can fight disease.

According to BAM!, vaccines “train” the immune system on how to fight ‘real villains.’ The “Immune Platoon” do the real heroics, but not without the dummy diseases in the vaccines.

The CDC fantasy claims that vaccines ‘possess no “super-powers” that can harm your body’s good health.‘

“Because of the way they were created,” the BAM! propaganda message claims, “can’t cause any real harm. These vaccines are injected into your body to train your Immune Platoon how to fight the real villains.“

The CDC’s flashy and ‘cool’ take on vaccines misinforms children about real vaccine dangers, as does its FAQs directed at adult audiences.

Vaccines are anthropomorphized as being literally “weak” versions of disease antigens. The CDC’s BAM! misinforms children that vaccines “can’t cause any real harm” because they “possess no ’super-powers’ that can harm your body’s good health.”

Instead vaccines are anthropomorphized as being literally “weak” versions of disease antigens (see right) that cannot cause ‘any real harm.’

Try telling that to victims of Guillain-Barré syndrome, those who have auto-immune responses or those affected by the mercury contained in the Thimerosal preservative used in vaccines.

The CDC’s claim that no harm can come from vaccines– falsely reassuring naive children that it is safe, normal and good to be inoculated– is just not true. However one weighs the benefits of the greater good, vaccines can and do harm.

See more CDC BAM! propaganda in the full-sized images below or at their website.

Why do our ‘trusted’ institutions push vaccination as a common good from the top-down, when actual vaccine inserts warn against its potential to cause Guillain-Barré syndrome and other ‘harmful’ reactions?

Flu Vaccines have been found to contain mercury at levels hundreds of times higher than the CDC’s listed ’safe’ level. Every year, people do die [cached] or suffer paralysis from seasonal flu shots, H1N1, Gardasil and other inoculations.

Shockingly, some 12,000 U.S. children were used as guinea pigs in 2009 swine flu vaccine trials, as reported by the Oklahoman and Infowars.com.

SEE ALSO:

Mercury in Childhood Vaccines: What Did the Government Know?

Tamiflu Vaccine Linked With Convulsions, Delirium and Bizarre Deaths

Gardasil Causes 400 Percent More Deaths than Other Common Vaccine

Doctor says FLU VACCINE will cause 60,000 deaths in France alone

The Truth about the Flu Shot

PRISONPLANET.COM ARCHIVE RESOURCES: Vaccines - The Deadly Cure

Click for larger image

Click for larger image

Click for larger image

Top Scientists Predict Widespread Sterilization

Bryan Appleyard
Times Online
December 28, 2009

Nothing much is going to happen in the next 10 years. Of course, that’s not counting the diesel-excreting bacteria, the sequencing of your entire genome for $1,000, massive banks of frozen human eggs, space tourism, the identification of dark matter, widespread sterilisation of young adults, telepathy, supercomputer models of our brains, the discovery of life’s origins, maybe the disappearance of Bangladesh and certainly the loss of 247m acres of tropical forest.

As I said, just another decade really.

These days, “just another decade” always means 10 years of future shock. Science, technology and the contemporary mania for change combine to stun the imagination. It is the way we live now, in a condition of permanent technological revolution.

Read entire article

Research related links

1. Judge Arranges Sterilization in Probation of Woman in Marijuana Case
2. Experts Push “Peak Oil” Scam to Predict $15 a Gallon Gas Prices
3. Swine flu peaks out before vaccines even make it into widespread distribution
4. Experts Predict Obama Supporters May Feel Let Down If He Wins
5. Magazine Promotes Sterilization For Women In Their 20’s
6. “Financial Wizards” Look Into “Crystal Ball” and Predict End of “Recession”
7. List of Dead Scientists
8. Scientists Debunk UN “Global Warming”
9. Covert video surveillance becomes widespread in Russian offices
10. Dean: DNC Uses Credit Card Data to Predict Votes
11. NSA Analyst: Spying Far More Widespread than Previously Believed
12. European Union Plans Widespread IPv6 Deployment by 2010

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.

Polish National TV Helps To Expose The Pandemic Fraud - Examples

The Flu Case.com
Last Updated on Saturday, 26 December 2009 12:25
Saturday, 26 December 2009 11:55


Polish PM Donald Tusk Press Conference on 06.11.2009. He's sceptical regarding swine flu vaccines despite pushing announcement made by European Comminssion.


"Tomasz Lis live" 23 Nov 2009. Biggest politics TV show in Poland, around 3 million viewers. Polish Vice-Health Minister ask reasonable questions about WHO, pharmaceutical companies, pandemic announcement etc. This is more like the Minister talking rather than the debate and I didn't balance this video on purpose for a few reasons:
1) There's enough of other view in media all around the world.
2) I titled this "Minister talking on AH1N1" rather than "talk" or "debate". The arguments of the other guy were as usual, at least here in Poland:
a) we got kicked out of the queue for the vaccine because of our Health Ministry's doubts. This is rubbish since many countries are willing to sell some of their vaccines since not much people want to take shots.
b) another argument is that EMEA and WHO recommended the vaccine so it just must be good for us and anyone who says otherwise is mad conspiration theorist. No comment on this one.
c) the last argument: OK, no pandemic at the moment but we don't know what will happen in the next few months. Well Health authorities said clearly that not much really will happen, plus it looks like they would exchange this new flu for the seasonal one since AH1N1 is much milder and easier to go through without complications than regular seasonal flu. Hope this makes sense :) We're one! (this is actually scientifically proven now, search YT for Nassim Haramein or Gregg Braden)

WHO Massages Data To Exaggerate Swine Flu Deaths

The Flu Case.com

Wednesday, 23 December 2009 11:05

After the Scottish government was caught reclassifying all seasonal flu deaths as swine flu deaths to exaggerate the danger of the pandemic, WHO has issued a press briefing maintaining that the swine flu is more severe than the seasonal flu in spite of causing fewer deaths and in spite of the fact that most lab tests -- if performed at all -- have proved negative for swine flu in the US and UK.

"Accurate assessments of mortality and mortality rates will likely be possible only one to two years after the pandemic has peaked, and will rely on methods similar to those used to calculate excess mortality during seasonal influenza epidemics," says WHO, admitting it has no basis for its figures.


Comparing deaths from pandemic and seasonal influenza

Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 briefing note 20

22 DECEMBER 2009 | GENEVA -- Efforts to assess the severity of the H1N1 influenza pandemic sometimes compare numbers of confirmed deaths with those estimated for seasonal influenza, either nationally or worldwide. Such comparisons are not reliable for several reasons and can be misleading.

Numbers of deaths for seasonal influenza are estimates. They use statistical models designed to calculate so-called excess mortality that occurs during the period when influenza viruses are circulating widely in a given population.

Estimates using all-cause mortality

The models use data, as recorded in death certificates and medical records, indicating mortality from all causes, and compare the number of deaths during epidemics of seasonal influenza with baseline data on deaths during the rest of the year. The assumption is that infections with influenza viruses contribute to the “excess mortality” observed during the influenza season.

During epidemics of seasonal influenza, around 90% of deaths occur in the frail elderly, who often suffer from one or more chronic medical conditions. Although influenza can worsen these conditions and contribute to death, testing for influenza viruses is not done in most cases, and deaths are usually attributed to an underlying medical condition.

Methods for estimating excess mortality were introduced in the 19th century to capture these influenza-associated deaths that would otherwise be missed. Such estimates have helped counter assumptions that influenza is a mild illness that rarely kills.

Laboratory-confirmed deaths

In contrast, numbers of deaths from pandemic influenza, as notified by national authorities and tabulated by WHO, are laboratory-confirmed deaths, not estimates. For several reasons, these numbers do not give a true picture of mortality during the pandemic, which is unquestionably higher than indicated by laboratory-confirmed cases.

As pandemic influenza mimics the signs and symptoms of many common infectious diseases, doctors often do not suspect H1N1 infection and do not test. This is especially true in developing countries, where deaths from respiratory diseases, including pneumonia, are common occurrences. Moreover, routine testing for pandemic influenza is costly and demanding, and beyond the reach of most countries.

When testing confirms H1N1 infection in patients with underlying medical conditions, many doctors record these deaths as due to the medical condition, and not to the pandemic virus. These cases are also missed in official statistics.

As recent studies have shown, some tests for H1N1 infection are not entirely reliable, and false-negative results are a frequent problem. Accurate test results further depend on how and when samples were taken. Even in the best-equipped hospitals, doctors have reported seeing patients with distinctive and virtually identical disease profiles, yet only some have positive test results.

Moreover, in a large number of developing countries, systems for vital registration are either weak or non-existent, meaning that most deaths are neither investigated nor certified in terms of the cause.

Younger age groups

Comparisons of deaths from pandemic and seasonal influenza do not accurately measure the impact of the pandemic for another reason. Compared with seasonal influenza, the H1N1 virus affects a much younger age group in all categories – those most frequently infected, hospitalized, requiring intensive care, and dying.

WHO continues to assess the impact of the influenza pandemic as moderate. Accurate assessments of mortality and mortality rates will likely be possible only one to two years after the pandemic has peaked, and will rely on methods similar to those used to calculate excess mortality during seasonal influenza epidemics.

There’ll be nowhere to run from the new world government

Janet Daley
London Telegraph
Monday December 21, 2009

There is scope for debate – and innumerable newspaper quizzes – about who was the most influential public figure of the year, or which the most significant event. But there can be little doubt which word won the prize for most important adjective. 2009 was the year in which “global” swept the rest of the political lexicon into obscurity. There were “global crises” and “global challenges”, the only possible resolution to which lay in “global solutions” necessitating “global agreements”. Gordon Brown actually suggested something called a “global alliance” in response to climate change. (Would this be an alliance against the Axis of Extra-Terrestrials?)

Some of this was sheer hokum: when uttered by Gordon Brown, the word “global”, as in “global economic crisis”, meant: “It’s not my fault”. To the extent that the word had intelligible meaning, it also had political ramifications that were scarcely examined by those who bandied it about with such ponderous self-importance. The mere utterance of it was assumed to sweep away any consideration of what was once assumed to be the most basic principle of modern democracy: that elected national governments are responsible to their own people – that the right to govern derives from the consent of the electorate.

The dangerous idea that the democratic accountability of national governments should simply be dispensed with in favour of “global agreements” reached after closed negotiations between world leaders never, so far as I recall, entered into the arena of public discussion. Except in the United States, where it became a very contentious talking point, the US still holding firmly to the 18th-century idea that power should lie with the will of the people.

Nor was much consideration given to the logical conclusion of all this grandiose talk of global consensus as unquestionably desirable: if there was no popular choice about approving supranational “legally binding agreements”, what would happen to dissenters who did not accept their premises (on climate change, for example) when there was no possibility of fleeing to another country in protest? Was this to be regarded as the emergence of world government? And would it have powers of policing and enforcement that would supersede the authority of elected national governments? In effect, this was the infamous “democratic deficit” of the European Union elevated on to a planetary scale. And if the EU model is anything to go by, then the agencies of global authority will involve vast tracts of power being handed to unelected officials. Forget the relatively petty irritations of Euro‑bureaucracy: welcome to the era of Earth-bureaucracy, when there will be literally nowhere to run.

Full article here

Copenhagen climate summit: plan for EU to police countries’ emissions

James Kirkup, and Louise Gray
London Telegraph
Monday, Dec 21st, 2009

Gordon Brown is drawing up plans for the European Union to become a global warming “policeman”, monitoring individual countries’ compliance with carbon-cutting targets.

The plan emerged from the chaotic Copenhagen conference on climate change, which ended in acrimony and mistrust between world leaders.

The summit was unable to reach a substantive deal on cutting greenhouse gases because of a row over how countries would prove that they are honouring promises to cut their carbon emissions. China in particular objected to any external monitoring of its actions.

Mr Brown and French President Nicholas Sarkozy now are working proposals for a “European monitoring organisation” that will oversee every country’s actions on emissions.

Full article here

Climategate: ‘It’s all lies!’ lies Pachauri (again)

James Delingpole
London Telegraph
Monday, Dec 21st, 2009

Surely not even an organisation as a corrupt and dishonest as the IPCC can afford to keep Dr Rajendra Pachauri on as its chairman after the weekend’s damning revelations by Christopher Booker and Richard North?

But Pachauri – with all the chutzpah we have come to expect of our favourite jetsetting, millionaire, troll-impersonating railway engineer - is not going down without a fight. Just as he did after Climategate, Pachauri has produced his classic ‘nothing to see here’ ‘Big Brother knows best’ defence.

In an interview with the Times of India he says:

‘‘These are a pack of lies from people who are getting desperate. They want to go after the guy whose voice is being heard. I haven’t pocketed a single penny from my association with companies and institutes. All honoraria that I get goes to TERI and to its Light a Billion Lives campaign for reaching solar power to people without electricity. All my dealings are totally above board.’’

Richard North, however, is not convinced. There is, he suggests, a very good reason why those “honoraria” are funneled through TERI (The Energy and Resources Institute; formerly Tata Energy Resources Institute), the mysterious company he heads but which doesn’t publish its annual accounts, let alone his salary.

Full article here

Final Copenhagen Text Includes Global Transaction Tax

Obama set to bypass Congress and approve massive transfer of wealth to world government

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, December 18, 2009

The final Copenhagen draft agreement which was hammered out in the early hours of Friday morning includes provisions for a global tax on financial transactions that will be paid directly to the World Bank, as President Obama prepares to bypass Congress by approving a massive transfer of wealth from America into globalist hands.

As Lord Monckton, Alex Jones and others warned, the notion that the globalists would achieve nothing at Copenhagen has likely been a ruse all along. The elite look set to ram through the lion’s share of their agenda, which would include a massive global government tax at a cost of at least $3,000 a year for American families already laboring under a devastating recession, double digit unemployment and a reduction in living standards.

Hillary Clinton arrived yesterday to rally global leaders around a resolution and Barack Obama is set to be portrayed as the savior of the world by rescuing what was pitched all along as a conference doomed to fail.

“The summit “hangs in the balance,” said Obama this morning. “We are running out of time. The time for talk is over. It is better for us to act than to talk. The question is whether we move forward together or split apart.”

The final agreement may not force countries to meet CO2 emission targets, but it will grease the skids for the biggest tax hike in human history, a fact that establishment media outlets have completely failed to emphasize.

Monckton told the Alex Jones Show last week that the initial secretive draft version of the Copenhagen agreement represented a global government power grab on an “unimaginable scale,” and mandated the creation of 700 new bureaucracies as well as a colossal raft of new taxes including 2 percent levies on both GDP and every international financial transaction.

Monckton said that the new world government outlined in the treaty would be handed powers to, “Tax the American economy to the extent of 2 percent GDP, to impose a further tax of 2 percent on every financial transaction….and to close down effectively the economies of the west, transfer your jobs to third world countries.”

As the leak of the Danish text outlined, such taxes, earmarked as “climate financing,” will go straight into the coffers of the IMF and the World Bank. These funds will be used to bankroll the imposition of global governance that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon promised would be achieved at Copenhagen.

According to the latest news out of Copenhagen, the taxes that were included in the initial text are still in the final agreement which is set to be passed later today or in the early hours of Saturday morning.

The Sydney Morning Herald reports that the final text, “Proposes a range of innovative mechanisms for raising the money, ranging from a tax on air and sea transports fuels to a tax on financial transfers.”

This would form part of an initial commitment of $US10 billion a year from 2010 to 2012, climbing to $US50 billion annually by 2015 and $US100 billion by 2020, although these figures will inevitably increase if the UN ramps up its climate fearmongering as it has done at each successive climate conference since the Rio Earth Summit in 1992.

The treaty outlines, “Penalties or fines for non-compliance,” in developed countries and the creation of an international police force to “enforce its will by imposing unlimited financial penalties on any countries whose performance under this treaty they don’t like,” Monckton told the Alex Jones Show, saying that it amounted to a total global government takeover on an “unimaginable scale”.

“We’re looking at a grab for absolute power and absolute financial control worldwide by the UN and its associated bureaucracies and 700 new bureaucratic bodies,” said Monckton, adding that if the agreement was signed by Obama, the U.S. would be losing its freedom to a “sinister dictatorship” being formed under the contrived pretext of global warming.

Watch Monckton’s latest interview with the Alex Jones Show below.

Maurice Strong Pushes Incremental, Radical Action to Achieve Global Government

Jurriaan Maessen
Infowars.com
December 19, 2009

MaximsNewsNetwork, a UN news outlet posted an interview with Maurice Strong on October 14, 2009, in which power-behind-the-throne chieftain and current Chinese national Maurice Strong talks about the Copenhagen conference. In the interview Strong stated- among other things- that “What is necessary is a global system of governance through which the nations of the world cooperate to address issues which none can deal with alone.”

	Maurice Strong: The climate change and economic crisis require a degree of international cooperation that has only been achieved on a limited basis in wartime and never on the global scale.

In a spectacular example of doublethink, Strong proves himself a master-conjurer: after stating that “Global government is neither necessary nor practical” he actually says: “(…) the role of global government would be to provide the framework of principles and contexts required to facilitate actions which can be best taken at the local, national or regional levels.”

Here is the fragment in full:

Fred Dubee & Marisha Wojciechowska-Shibuya: Can the international community and our governments really meet the challenge?

Maurice Strong: The climate change and economic crisis require a degree of international cooperation that has only been achieved on a limited basis in wartime and never on the global scale.

Global government is neither necessary nor practical.

What is necessary is a global system of governance through which the nations of the world cooperate to address issues which none can deal with alone.

Highest priority must be given to those issues which affect the security, sustainability and survival of all humanity.

This is certainly true of both climate change and the related needs for fundamental changes in our current economic system.

I believe in the principle of subsidiary that all actions should be dealt with at the levels closest to the people concerned.

On this basis, the role of global government would be to provide the framework of principles and context required to facilitate actions which can be best taken at the local, national or regional levels.

Global government. First it’s “neither necessary nor practical”, and then it provides “the framework of principles and context”. Now it’s there, now it’s gone.

• A D V E R T I S E M E N T
• 

Although Strong is apparently hiding out in China, he is still being interviewed in matters of “global governance”. It seems his words are still being listened to by his former employer. During a preparatory meeting in Switzerland back in July of this year, Strong also advocated “radical things” to be undertaken by all participating nations to make Copenhagen a success for the global elite.

“Copenhagen”, Strong said, “is very very important. I have to say that so far we have not seen real evidence that the governments are prepared to do radical things that they must to in Copenhagen. If we just patch up the existing system, it will not work. It will come back and bite us even more strongly.”

What radical things must governments be prepared to do according to Maurice Strong?

“The climate change issue and the economic issue come from the same roots. And that is the gross inequity and the inadequacy of our economic model. We now know that we have to change that model. We cannot do all of this in one stroke. But we have to design a process that would produce agreement at a much more radical level.”

How convenient then, that the economic recession occurred not long before. A financial crisis coupled to a fabricated environmental one are key ingredients for the world government as envisioned by Strong and company. What’s absolutely key is the concept of incrementalism- a gradual process as opposed to a radical one.

“Hopefully”, says Strong, “Copenhagen will move us forward. I think it is too much to expect that the conference will produce the kind of agreements necessary. But the conference can produce some important agreements that it can provide the foundation for a continuing process.”

The concept of incrementalism is well understood by the big boys. The President’s chief science adviser and notorious eugenicist John P. Holdren stated yesterday on the last day of Copenhagen:

“I think”, Holdren stated, “we ought to get what we can now. Start on the 450ppm trajectory now, and as more evidence appears about the harm caused by climate change, as more experience develops about how well we can do reducing emissions affordably, my guess is that these targets and this timetable will continually be revisited, and they may well become more aggressive over time.”

Although many useful idiots outside the Copenhagen conference halls have naively called for “Climate Action Now!” (while standing in an ice-cold raging blizzard), the people inside understand that their desired global government is a step by step process, aiming to incrementally implement their age-old plan for world domination.

Alex Jones: Copenhagen births World Gov’t framework despite fallout over science fraud

Aaron Dykes
Infowars
December 19, 2009

IN HIS THIRD EXCLUSIVE EXPOSÉ OF THE CLIMATEGATE FALLOUT, Alex Jones breaks down the conclusion of the Copenhagen United Nations Conference on Climate Change (UNFCC), including the foundations of a new era of Global Governance– as evidenced by quotes directly from the mouths of Al Gore, UN Head Ban Ki-Moon and bankster heir David de Rothschild.

Though new taxes have been levied and mechanisms for world regulation have been laid down, the Climate Change agenda has taken a lot of political damage. The beginnings of Climategate with the East Anglia CRU email leaks were just the beginning of a chain reaction of revelations that has fueled anger, doubt, denial and speculation worldwide. Compromised calculations or deliberately-fudged data have been exposed worldwide from research centers in Russia, New Zealand, Australia and beyond– casting serious doubt by even mainline commentators upon the so-called “settled-science” and ‘peer-reviewed’ scientific “consensus” of man-made global warming.

Further, many leaders from Third World nations became angered at the ‘Danish text leak’ revealing plans to burden lesser-developed nations with greater emissions cuts and plans to levy a proposed $100 Billion in ‘green’ debt upon poorer nations, to be paid back at interest, of course. George Soros has proved to be at the center of what has been critiqued as ‘Climate Colonialism’ and would prove deadly to populations at-risk for starvation in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe, etc. Already, taking over farmlands for ethanol production in the place of food has been blamed for millions of deaths in the LDCs.

Alex also breaks down revelations about the carbon trading and other green schemes. It’s not only players like Al Gore, the Rothschilds and George Soros who stand to make a killing. President Barack Obama– with a great conflict of interest– was a founding investment partner in theChicago Climate Exchange alongside Maurice Strong, a top Rockefeller agent and leading climate change schemer.Chicago Climate Exchange is written into the architecture of many of the proposals for alternative energy credits, carbon derivatives and other green financial products and stands to provide a worthwhile return on investment.

In the end, the forced-incrementalism towards total world government, with complete dominance over money, debt, food, energy and resources, paid a price in exposure at COP15. Many politicians, journalists and people in general are now well aware that a scam has been forced down upon them– and both their freedom and sovereignty are certainly at stake.