"Depoliticizing the Weather Forecasters

Comment #10

konane — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 04:50:26 GMT

I wonder if that (applied over several years) contributed to drought the south east suffered from for about 10 years. Have never seen summers so dry and hot. We lost many trees due to those conditions. We've been in a noticeable cooler and wetter cycle for about the past 3 years with more days of sustained winds than normally occur.

Comment #9

Delta Draw — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:54:17 GMT

The chemtrails move in the air with the currents. During the day they partially reflect the sun's rays, depending on the variables of how well they are applied and disbursed. So during the day they reflect infra-red radiation -heat. They also trap reflected heat from where they are. When the sun goes down everything cools, If the chemtrails move over an area that was in full sunlight during the day while it is dark, the chemtrails trap some of the heat trying to escape. Now the chemtrails are u... [ More ]

Comment #8

konane — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:33:03 GMT

Thanks Delta Draw! Wonder if any of this has to do with cloud seeding? Have read that is done to bring about rain.

Comment #7

Delta Draw — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 04:31:56 GMT

There are Youtube vids showing both in one screen so the difference can be seen. The hazy skies are an new event. Contrails NEVER did that. Besides think about it, what would allow condensate from a contrail to continue to dispurse across the sky for hundreds of miles? And one more thing, the contrails are visible by enhanced infra-red satellites. The patterns are not consistant with normal air traffic routs. It could easliy be dismissed as normal traffic, but then there were the chemtrails obse... [ More ]

Comment #6

konane — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 02:28:55 GMT

Thanks Delta Draw! Very interesting thoughts, again that I'd not considered. Always believe contrails to be condensate from jet exhaust although I've seen chemtrails discussed otherwise. Plenty to think about, appreciate your commentary on the subject.

Comment #5

Delta Draw — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 09:35:00 GMT

It was the last remark that got my attention. You see, the patent awarded to Hughs is directly intended to affect climate. No question. After nearly two decades we can see more clearly the tie being made to economics and weather. This is international economics. Antother thing i remember in the past news was the contracts awarded for new refueling tankers. There are Nato refuelers too. It would make sense that a NATO tanker could fly almost anywhere it wants to. Just before this recen... [ More ]

Comment #4

konane — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 16:51:24 GMT

Your comment ......."The Chemtrails are to reflect IR solar radiation, but they also trap them. Weather is made." ...... is one I've not read before. Many conspiracies theories exist around them but this is the first time I've seen it put exactly that way.

Comment #3

Delta Draw — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 08:12:44 GMT

Some good points about things, I guess the crooks and thieves in Governmnet don't like any competition. The state liquior store and the state never pay for the booze inventory until it is sold. They don't have to insure it. And all the Finns who had stills were shut down because you-know-who didn't like the competition. Same for tobacco, they may as well legalize everything else they don't have a corner on, tax us at every turn like they want to make us all liable for climate ch... [ More ]

Comment #2

konane — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 03:21:23 GMT

Thanks Rick! Climategate happened at the most perfect time. Life is good!

Comment #1

Rick G — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 02:00:39 GMT

Glad the IPCC is being exposed. They are an "end-run" world govt. structure hidden behind an innocuous name and waiting in the wings to proclaim edicts. Climate-gate was a much needed blessing for the world. It opened many more eyes to the devious nature of the cabal we are dealing with.

Original Blog Entry: "Depoliticizing the Weather Forecasters

konane — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 20:46:38 GMT

Depoliticizing the Weather Forecasters

By Dr. Tim Ball

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Source Canada Free Press

Bureaucracy, the rule of no one, has become the modern form of despotism. Mary McCarthy

Exploitation by governments of global warming as a vehicle to take control requires drastic reaction. As climate became a political issue, bureaucrats in all countries expanded their role, became political and excluded independent experts.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was set up for the political purpose of proving human CO2 emanating from developed nations was causing global warming. It continued as a political process as one of the leaked emails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) from Mike Hulme to Phil Jones on April 22, 2002 notes, All these decisions about IPCC chairs and co-chairs are deeply political (witness DEFRA s support of Martin Parry for getting the WGII nomination). We must eliminate the IPCC as the most corrupt, and then urge all countries to reduce weather agencies to data collection only. Any weather or climate related government agency must be reduced to a single function, the accurate collection, storage, and accessibility of data for citizens. Weather forecasting is so unreliable and inadequate nobody would suffer from its loss. If forecasting is essential companies can do it themselves or see a business opportunity. Piers Corbyn, a British climatologist consistently produces accurate weather forecasts months in advance for all regions of the world.

There are three main components to the CO2 deceptions

People are beginning to understand the level of the corruption; most of it related to CO2. There are three main components to the CO2 deceptions. First, the pre-industrial level, which they manipulated to show was lower than today.

Second the false assumption that CO2 increase preceded temperature increase. Third, the claim that increases in atmospheric CO2 was due to humans. Mann outlined the objectives when he joined CRU with an email on June 17, 1998, I remain committed to doing this with you guys, and to explore applications to synthetic data sets with manufactured biases/etc remains high priority. We now know how far they went.

They Only Learn To Protect Themselves Better

The IPCC made changes as people found flaws, but only to cover up, not improve. The most recent example is in the 2007 IPCC Report where they changed the definition of climate change. Here is the complete quote; Climate change in IPCC usage refers to a change in the state of the climate that can be identified (e.g. using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties, and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer. It refers to any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity. This usage differs from that in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), where climate change refers to a change of climate that is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and that is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods. This acknowledges criticism that you can t determine human causes of change if you don t know how much it changes naturally. However, it is another deception.

The Report then ignores major natural causes of temperature change and continues to focus on greenhouse gases specifically CO2. Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely (90%) due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations. It is likely that there has been significant anthropogenic warming over the past 50 years averaged over each continent (except Antarctica). They don t mean greenhouse gases? They effectively ignore water vapor and claim, Global atmospheric concentrations of CO2, methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) have increased markedly as a result of human activities since 1750 and now far exceed pre-industrial values determined from ice cores spanning many thousands of years. This is an unsubstantiated and inaccurate comment especially when you don t know how much natural inputs and outputs change. We know they manipulated pre-industrial CO2 levels, but they ignore the fact methane levels have leveled and declined for 14 years. Atmospheric water vapor levels are difficult to measure with accuracies no better than 20%. In a January 2009 report, Professor Zondio concluded, Surprisingly little is known about water vapor because it has been really hard to measure in the upper atmosphere. The new data suggests that these plumes are happening at a scale we had not imagined. He s talking about water rising in great updrafts in the atmosphere.

The IPCC use water vapor only to cover a problem and bolster another false claim

The IPCC use water vapor only to cover a problem and bolster another false claim. Even if CO2 doubles or triples temperature can only increase a small amount. The amount currently in the atmosphere, 385 ppm is almost 100% effective in delaying heat escaping to space. Imagine the atmosphere is like a window and you use one coat of black paint to block light by about 97%. A second coat reduces light but now by less than 3%. The IPCC got around this problem by using a positive feedback. They claimed increasing human CO2 caused a temperature increase, which increased evaporation. More water vapor acting as a greenhouse gas led to higher temperatures. They built this positive feedback into their models. The trouble is it does not occur in reality.

The claim human CO2 is responsible for global warming of the last 50 years is a based on two assumptions now falsified. First, was the claim CO2 stayed in the atmosphere (residency time) for at least 100 years. We now know it is about 5 years. Second, they said the level of human sourced CO2 would accumulate in the atmosphere. This is wrong as Professor Knorr showed in his November 7, 2009 article titled Is the airborne fraction of anthropogenic CO2 emissions increasing? His finding, the trend in the airborne fraction since 1850 has been 0.7 1.4% per decade, i.e. close to and not significantly different from zero.

All data manipulation is not covered by the leaked emails. They claim CO2 from human sources rose from 6.5 gigatons of carbon (GtC) in their 2001 Report to 7.5 GtC in the 2007 Report. Trouble is the IPCC are the source of these numbers. In a segment titled, Source of National Inventories they write, Utilizing IPCC procedures, nominated experts from around the world draft the reports that are then extensively reviewed twice before approval by the IPCC.

In 2008 I wrote, They define the rules, determine who the nominated experts are, and have the final say in the numbers used. This is in keeping with their process of control and determination to prove their dictated goal of finding a human source of global warming. Now the public knows the extent of the deceptions. We are dangerously close to what happened in the Soviet Union in the 1950s when, Under Lysenko s guidance, science was guided not by the most likely theories, backed by appropriately controlled experiments, but by the desired ideology. Science was practiced in the service of the State, or more precisely, in the service of ideology. We can shut down national and international government run weather and climate bureaucracies except as data collection agencies.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/18703

... [ More ]