The Northwest Report
Robert F. Beaudine
November 26, 2010
A PRIMER ON THE MYTH OF GLOBAL WARMING AND THE INTERNATIONAL FORCES BEHIND IT
In 1908, an amateur archaeologist discovered old bones in a gravel pit in England. In 1912, the scientific community trumpeted this evidence, called Piltdown man, as the missing link between man and apes, proving that Darwin’s theory of evolution was correct. This scientific fact lasted over forty years. That is, until the monopolized evidence became available for outside scrutiny.
In 1953, it was discovered that the bones had been chemically treated to appear older. It was further revealed that the jaw was from an orangutan, and the scull was from the fourteenth century AD. The missing link hoax was then established as fact.
Sometimes a scientific innovation eventually proves false. A new theory takes its place, and science goes forward. In this case, the science wasn’t merely false; it was also a fraud. Yet, the damage was done. Several generations were raised on this debased belief in their animal heritage. And the myth perpetuated – it is difficult to re-train the mind after being led for many years to believe a so-called certainty.
Before the scam was discovered, every resource reinforced the new theory’s popularity: the arts, the media, the educational establishment, and of course, the scientific community. Federal judges, and later, legislators helped perpetuate the myth. All, but a few insiders, were unaware of the fraud.
In 1925, there was the Scopes Monkey trial and the song, “You Can’t Make a Monkey Out of Me.” Even some churches succumbed as their pastors proudly proclaimed that they would not be like their forebears and fight against scientific fact. This left those congregations without an anchor. Their pastors now said that some Biblical stories were allegories, but no one was certain which was history and which was allegory. Some conjectured that maybe the entire Bible was an allegory.
For over forty years, the fraud was propagated. The debate for evolution was over. Generations raised white flags and accepted their animal ancestry, and humanity has become more animal-like ever since.
The Power of Propaganda
When propaganda is widespread throughout society, it is perverse enough. But when science is driven by an agenda and then hijacked to support a hoax, propaganda can turn myths into reality.
The Doom of Global Warming Edward Bernays, the master of public relations, wrote his seminal work, “Propaganda,” in 1928. He begins: “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate the unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.”
A little later, he wrote, “It remains a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics, or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons … who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world.”
A little further, he added, “As civilization has become more complex, and as the need for invisible government has been increasingly demonstrated, the technical means have been invented and developed by which opinion may be regimented.”
Not surprisingly, most Americans think it’s preposterous that anyone has manipulated their organized habits or their opinions. Yet, the world around us is replete with nations that censor the news and control thought by eliminating opposing views.
Americans have been raised on the belief that we are the home of the free and such atrocities don’t occur in our land. Perhaps America is unique in this respect, but world history reveals the rarity of that notion. Propaganda has been a staple of every major government throughout history. Libraries are filled with the histories of propaganda, from the earliest myths to the latest scams.
The early creation myths of ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia legitimized their kings as the representatives of the gods, or in the case of Egypt, as living gods. These myths helped stabilize their societies. In the beginning, words were used for good or for evil.
Today, more powerful techniques are available to regiment public opinion. Just look at the power of movies: Through the sensational cinematography in Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth,” our school children are well aware of the impending disasters from global warming.
Global Warming Doomed Polar Bear The Doom of Global Warming Even younger audiences are exposed to this coming catastrophe through animated features like “An Arctic Tale.” This early indoctrination, we are assured, is for the public good. Our youth must learn the truth, that the captains of industry are irresponsible and apathetic, that government must regulate industry for society’s good, and that everyone should develop a healthy fear of the approaching global calamity. After all, fear motivates change. The alternative, the status quo, sends us only closer to the edge.
But what if our true rulers are regimenting falsehoods? And traumatizing our children? Is it preposterous to think that propaganda might be pervasive in modern America?
If history were our guide, one of the first places to look for untruths would be in the lock boxes of monopolized science.
Hide the Science
Until recently, two climate scientists had suppressed the data and methodology behind their dire predictions of imminent and devastating worldwide warming.
For years, Michael Mann wouldn’t release his algorithms and computer model that helped him perpetuate his infamous hockey stick hoax, a temperature graph that completely eliminated the cyclical warming that occurred during the Medieval Warming Period, from 1000-1300 AD.
The graph showed the Little Ice Age that followed, which ended around 1850 AD. It showed that, since then, global temperatures have been on a warming trend. But the remarkable feature was the graph’s forecast – the “hockey blade” accelerated ominously to a hot conclusion.
Eventually, when exposed to independent scientific scrutiny, Dr. Mann’s deceptions were discovered. His fraudulent hiding of the Medieval Warming Period led to the lie that the current warming trend is unprecedented.
In addition, he had used primarily tree rings to estimate the unrecorded temperatures of the past. But the tree rings of the late twentieth century showed a cooling trend. So, he spliced in the actual thermometer recordings, without a note of explanation.
Even more sinister, as statistical analysis expert Steve McIntyre (and economist Ross McKitrick) discovered, Mann’s computer model was predisposed to produce a graph that would dramatically rise near the end of the data series, any data series.
The Attorney General of Virginia, Ken Cuccinelli, filed a lawsuit for fraud. Five grants helped fund Mann’s post “hockey stick” studies while at the University of Virginia from 1999-2005. These grants were predicated upon Mann’s prior sound science. The suspicion of manipulated data predicated the lawsuit.
Across the Atlantic in England, another climate scientist, Phil Jones, director of the world-renowned Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University, also denied access to his so-called science. That is, until Britain’s Freedom of Information Act was established in 2005. His frantic e-mails around that time betray his deception.
In February of 2005, Jones wrote to Mann, “The 2 MM’s (McIntyre and McKitrick) have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the U.K. I think I’ll delete the file rather than send it to anyone … we also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind. Tom Wigley has sent me a worried e-mail when he heard about it – thought people could ask him for his model code. He has retired officially from UEA so he can hide behind that.”
With all this hiding going on, fortunately a few independent-thinking skeptics were relentlessly seeking the truth. The sad truth was that they found more fraud.
Lost or Manipulated Data
They also found that on at least two occasions original source data had been lost. Last November, the CRU posted on their website: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenized) data.” Supposedly, they deleted the data to save space. But this prevents independent scientists from verifying their “value-added” data.
Phil Jones and his colleague, Wei Chyung Wang, also lost the histories of 49 out of 84 weather stations in China that were used in a definitive article in Nature 1990 that proved the urban heat island effect was negligible. Although the authors claimed to have chosen the most stable and reliable weather stations, at least 35 had moved, some multiple times. This certainly compromises the conclusion. It’s also rather suspicious that all 42 of the rural stations used in the study were among the 49 with lost location histories.
Rural areas are more moderate than urban centers because of the urban heat island effect, a phenomenon due to the heat-absorbing and heat-retaining materials used in constructing cities, which artificially raises the temperatures. Satellite temperature readings confirm that urban weather stations record abnormally higher temperatures.
Reliable satellite data has been available since 1978. Surprisingly, or perhaps not, satellite temperatures are rarely used by our prominent climate scientists.
These revelations might explain Phil Jones’ astonishing admission last February in a BBC interview that there’s been no significant warming over the past fifteen years and that global temperatures have been cooling for the past eight years. He sounded like a global warming skeptic. Or maybe he assumed his fraud would be exposed, and he sought to mollify his position.
Our scientific skeptics also discovered how to create global warming American-style – eliminate the weather stations in the cooler climates, but retain their past measurements. By 1990, our National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, (NOAA), one of the foremost repositories of temperature data, had eliminated over 75% of the 6000 weather stations they used in the past. Almost all those eliminated were in the northern regions, the higher altitudes, and the rural areas.
Reconstructions of historical temperatures use a variety of computer generated manipulations because they must be estimated using such things as tree rings, ice cores, boreholes, et cetera. Variables are introduced and assumptions made. The computer models can be very complex. If these models are unavailable for outside scrutiny, fraud can be easily hidden.
However, even modern temperatures are adjusted for anomalies. At least, that’s the story. Computer programming expert E. Michael Smith has discovered something more sinister occurring with our current temperature data. Our primary climate centers, NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies, (GISS) and the National Climatic Data Center, (NCDC) have been fraudulently manipulating the data to produce global warming.
Because of NOAA’s weather station reductions, they now use computers to help fill in the gaps. Take Bolivia, for example, which has the highest average altitude in South America. It now shows artificially higher temperatures, because all of their weather stations have been eliminated from NOAA’s database. Temperatures are interpolated from stations in other countries that are hundreds of miles away – on the coast at sea level or in the tropical forests of the Amazon.
Satellite temperatures confirm these deceptions. The more the data is manipulated, the more the satellite record diverges.
These manipulations are as global as their forecasted warming. Recently, New Zealand’s National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research has been sued for manipulating their temperature data to artificially create the impression of global warming. The raw data proves the opposite.
Perhaps it is time for a Congressional investigation of our own institutions. Then again, our politicians would probably whitewash the whole affair.
Lies, Propaganda, and More Lies
In an unscrupulous age, it seems fraudulent behavior thrives because the status quo doesn’t generate headlines. Acclaim is achieved when you prove something novel and create a sensation. Acclaim also brings in the grant money to generate more headlines, which brings more acclaim.
Al Gore taught us well. Lately, he remains awkwardly silent. But at one time, he was traveling the world and making a movie. In 2006, his documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth,” was acclaimed and widely endorsed. It was also filled with so many lies and cinematic tricks that the British government almost banned it from their schools. (The government is not the hero here. Rather, a concerned citizen had sued and demanded the truth be told.)
The lawsuit came up short of banishment, but Al Gore’s documentary cannot be shown in British schools without disclaimers. The teacher must explain that it is politically partisan, with exaggerations and eleven specific lies that must be addressed.
The British were lenient. Independent scientists have found over thirty lies.
Here in America, most viewers became convinced that we are doomed unless we immediately and radically change our ways. These fans were unaware that the science back then was far from settled. The movie portrayed global warming as an established scientific fact, while true science was beginning to prove otherwise.
Perhaps that motivated John Coleman, the founder of the Weather Channel, to declare that global warming was the greatest scam in history. This was two years before the Climategate scandal arose last November. And Climategate has only confirmed the worst fears of the skeptics. It seems every month there’s another revelation of climate fraud at another prestigious institution.
As of today, the undisputed facts have been established. The monopoly on climate science has been cracked open and exposed as a hoax. But the press has muted the facts, and the propaganda continues to churn.
Last June, Chicago’s venerable Field Museum opened its Climate Change Exhibit. Dr. Patrick Michaels, senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute, described the display as a “one-sided ad for the disaster lobby.” Its intent is evident – to create mass hysteria and drive forward environmental policy.
Two science historians recently published, “Merchants of Doubt.” The subtitle reveals their purpose: “How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming.” They marginalize by association. Global warming skeptics are coupled with the hired tobacco scientists who twisted the science to obscure the truth of that issue.
Last May, New Scientist had an article, “Living in Denial,” that demonizes those of us who “retreat from the real world into denial.” Skeptics are healthy and “willing to follow the facts wherever they lead.” But deniers approach science with preconceived notions and only look to validate their position. Deniers dismiss any data that doesn’t fit their pre-existing beliefs.
This lack of logic in a scientific journal raises a question about their agenda. A skeptic is simply in transition, while an acceptor or denier has analyzed the science and taken a position. Ironically, the author attributes to deniers the very methods that global warming scientists have used.
Investigations or Cover-ups?
Even the so-called independent investigations of Climategate have all been frauds. The Independent Climate Change E-Mails Review was independent in name only. It was actually commissioned and paid for by the University of East Anglia. Not surprisingly, Dr. Jones was exonerated as merely disorganized – losing valuable data is an undesirable character trait, not misconduct.
UEA and Penn State each conducted their own internal independent investigations of Phil Jones and Michael Mann respectively. “Internal” and “independent” generally aren’t used together unless you practice doublethink. If these universities had discovered any wrongdoing – and reported it – their reputations would have suffered, jeopardizing millions in grant money.
In a rush for adjournment, the British House of Commons Science and Technology Committee cleared both the CRU and Dr Jones of any wrongdoing with only a day of oral testimony. It seems their government is under the same pressure as ours from the international community to enact climate change legislation. There was no reason to waste any more time – their verdict was predetermined.
Although it’s scandalous that none of the investigations examined any of the science, many in the press reported that these investigations had vindicated the global warming science.
More tragic, our institutions of higher learning proclaim an open-mindedness, as they single-mindedly prevent any opposition to their liberal philosophy or any investigation of their beloved professors. The University of Virginia, thus far, has closed the door to the attorney general and kept its lock box shut. And both UEA and Penn State have lost more than money and reputation. They’ve lost their integrity.
The EPA and Cap and Trade
Amongst all this falsity, one fact remains. The amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere has increased. This has happened before, long before industrial smokestacks were invented. It can also be beneficial for the greening of the world, because most plant life build and thrive upon the carbon in carbon dioxide. And crop yields generally go up.
Some scientists claim that this increase leads to a corresponding rise in temperature. Yet, rising carbon dioxide levels have typically followed a warming trend, not preceded it. Water vapor and solar activity have a far greater effect on atmospheric temperatures. Yet, the plan of our current Administration is to regulate carbon and tax this cornerstone of organic chemistry.
In April 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency declared that this building block of life, carbon dioxide, is actually a pollutant that endangers public health and welfare. They followed up with an Endangerment Finding in December. Our modern press failed to report the ominous implications, but for the moment, the EPA had the power to regulate almost every aspect of human activity under the Clean Air Act.
This aroused a flurry of lawsuits against the EPA and their absurd science. The EPA has retreated for the moment, but earlier this year, it was used like a bludgeon to persuade our Senators to pass the lesser of two evils, Cap and Trade. The House had barely passed the Waxman-Markey bill in June 2009, but the Senate seemed in disarray.
This misguided tax scheme has the potential to destroy our economy. Fortunately, the amorphous tea parties and libertarian groups like Congressman Dr. Ron Paul’s Campaign For Liberty have actively opposed this chicanery. As a result of this exposure, “Cap and Trade” has been rebranded as “pollution reduction.”
There are rumors the Senate will try to pass this legislation during the upcoming lame duck session. More alarming, there’s renewed talk of a possible vote much earlier. Either way, it is incumbent upon every constitutional patriot to contact their Senators and voice their opposition.
As Senator Lindsey Graham tried to cobble together some legislation, he warned us last March, “They are going to regulate carbon.”
Last May, the National Academy of Science declared global warming an urgent threat and recommended a carbon tax on fossil fuels to curb greenhouse gases. Last July, NOAA followed up with their report, “State of the Climate 2009,” which concluded that global warming is unmistakable and due to greenhouse gases.
Who’s Behind the Curtains?
But why ruin our economy over a hoax? Who benefits here?
A few popular talk-show hosts have said that no one benefits, because it’s folly, and President Obama is naïve. One exception, Glenn Beck, continues to investigate the root causes and does not explain away bad policy as naivety or bipartisan bungling.
The other conservative hosts seem oblivious to these truths: that secret societies have been a staple throughout world history, that sometimes they grow powerful enough to hide their existence and thereby hide their crimes, that this massive worldwide fraud called global warming began long before the Obama Administration and was actually orchestrated by the United Nations.
You don’t read or hear much about the UN in our established news outlets. Our journalists divert us with the daily tragedies but rarely investigate the harsher realities, like who is driving this terrible science forward. When a hoax is discovered, the next step is to expose the perpetrators and hold them accountable.
The most fanatical promoter of man-made global warming is without question the United Nations. The UN has sought since its inception “to bind and guide the world.” They discovered the value of environmental issues under the obscure and able leadership of Maurice Strong.
In 1972, Strong organized the first worldwide environmental summit in Stockholm. Twenty years later, in 1992, he was appointed the secretary general of the UN’s Earth Summit in Rio.
That’s when Agenda 21 was introduced to the world, a blueprint that uses the policy of Sustainable Development to undermine the sovereignty of every signatory nation. Because this was soft law and not a treaty, President George HW Bush signed without the advice and consent of the Senate.
When President Clinton came to power the next year, he implemented the first plank when he created the President’s Council on Sustainable Development. Since then, Agenda 21 has increasingly dominated the policy of every cabinet agency in our Executive branch.
Today, Agenda 21 is pervasive. Its initiatives have been implemented by local governments across our nation and across the globe. The organization leading this effort is called the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, (ICLEI). This UN affiliate has been rebranded as “Local Governments for Sustainability.” In an attempt to hide their affiliation, ICLEI has been purging all UN references from their website.
Maurice Strong has been instrumental to their success. To date, over 600 cities and counties in the United States have contracts with ICLEI. Your local news team has probably neglected this news.
The Pseudo-Science of UN’s IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
Maurice Strong also helped create UN’s Environment Programme, (UNEP), which has supported ICLEI from the start. It also spawned the infamous Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (IPCC), in 1989. In 2007, UN’s IPCC issued its Fourth Assessment Report. This report has become notorious for its lack of scientific integrity.
It featured Michael Mann’s “hockey stick” graph. This is revealing, because in 1990, their first assessment report showcased a graph that included the Medieval Warming Period. Choosing Mann’s discredited graph reveals the IPCC’s developing agenda.
A jest by an Indian glaciologist became the science that forecasted the disappearance of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035. This wasn’t funny to the Indian government and caused an outcry, as well as some embarrassment when the IPCC discovered the ultimate source of their science.
Supposedly, the glaciers in the Alps were also rapidly melting. This science was based on anecdotal evidence from some hikers and has been proven false.
Most solar scientists cite solar activity as the most influential factor in determining the earth’s climate. But this influence – perhaps because it’s not manmade – was dismissed as irrelevant based on the consensus of one scientist, Judith Lean, and her one report. As world-renowned astrophysicists, Doug Hoyt and Richard C. Wilson have protested, the solar activity graphs she used were wrong and had been manipulated to prove her false assessment.
The report claimed that the Netherlands was in danger of being submerged by seawater, that 55% is already below sea level. But the real scientific figure is closer to 26%.
Pages could be devoted to the pseudo-science promoted by the UN. Yet, this is the science that is attempting to rule over our land. The EPA relied entirely on this flawed 2007 IPCC report for its science.
The Ultimate Evil
So, what’s the root of all this evil?
It was almost a century ago that the international bankers seized upon the missing link hoax as a means to destroy true religion and thereby facilitate the socialization of America, a necessary step before we could be merged into one-world government.
Today, the progeny of those international bankers are building up the UN and its international affiliates – again, with the same ultimate goal. But now, they’ve grown stronger and more blatant in their efforts to enslave the world.
That’s why those who claim the current Administration is naïve are themselves woefully naïve, or worse, a pawn of the power-elite. Obama’s agenda is revealed in his acts, and he has relentlessly pursued policies that will bankrupt our nation and bind us into one-world government. His Administration clutches at any crisis to further their agenda, regardless if the crisis is real or imagined.
Scare tactics predominate and are shilled by our media. Global warming will not destroy us, but the myth has the power to handcuff our liberty.
When both science and public opinion are monopolized in a concerted effort, the unknowing masses can be trained to believe whatever nonsense is convenient to their leaders. Propaganda, to be effective, must be concealed. That’s why public opinion is so devoid of reason. Our public is unaware of the widespread indoctrination – disseminated through our schools, propagated by our news, and immersed in our art.
The examples of propaganda in our modern press would fill a bookcase and speak volumes on the condition of modern journalism. That explains why myths thrive today. Our society as a whole has little time for reflection, little capacity for independent thought, and eyes too dim to see the invisible government that has enslaved our thinking.
What Can Be Done?
An enlightened society would not tolerate an uninformed citizenry in their voting booths because of the danger. Today, more than ever, it’s imperative that every patriotic citizen educate those less fortunate and misguided “acceptors.” Ask them: With all this glacial ice that’s been melting over the past twenty years, why haven’t sea levels risen?
Ask them: Are they aware of the dangers of Agenda 21? Have they even heard of Agenda 21? If not, perhaps it’s time to reevaluate the resources they use to stay abreast of current events. It’s also time they investigated their local city and county officials. There’s too much corruption going on across the globe behind the scenes. A few patriots cannot win a fight against an enemy that most citizens are unaware of.
And then we must comfort our children with the truth that the polar bears will be okay. Those cuddly creatures will not be forced to evolve into amphibians or gradually go extinct.
We might also reassure them that interspecies evolution is another hoax, another example of unsound science being driven forward by an evil agenda.
I expect my critics will call me some kind of endangered species and say I’ve retreated from the real world. After all, among many other things, I’m a global warming denier. That maligned word makes it sound like I’m a liar – to myself. I prefer the term “heretic.” Orthodoxy is for the crowds. When the mainstream is heading for the falls, why would anyone with eyesight join them?
(For more information on Sustainable Development, subscribe to the DeWeese Report. Tom DeWeese is a national expert on Agenda 21. Also, contact Sovereignty International, Inc. Dr. Henry Lamb and Dr. Michael Coffman have excellent resources for your education.)
Copyright 2010 – Robert F. Beaudine. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.