Category Archives: Climate Change

Global Wheat Shortage / Hungersteine / Vegan Death Cult

From the appearance of “hunger stones” in the extreme drought conditions, to mainstream admission of the global wheat shortage, the signs of Peak Food are everywhere as the changes in our climate accelerate. Missouri regulates what you can call “meat.”‘ London’s first insect farm has opened. And the vegan death cult evidences itself to be equally venomous as the climate change cult. Christian breaks it down.

Advertisements

Before long, if you don’t agree with official climate change propaganda, you will be banned from YouTube, Google, Facebook and Twitter

Natural News
14 August 2018
Tracey Watson

(Natural News) Back in 2006, The Guardian published an article entitled, “A climate of censorship,” in which Brendan O’Neill warned that government officials in the U.K. were comparing climate change deniers to terrorists and arguing that both should be denied media air time. He warned that many such “deniers” were, in fact, scientists at respected British universities, and that no government official had the right to compare them to dangerous terrorists. He noted that there was an increasing push towards the censorship of free speech, including the right of such scientists and others to insist that man-made global warming does not exist.

O’Neill noted:

Increasingly, environmentalists are calling for the silencing of climate-change skeptics or deniers. The deniers’ words are so dangerous, we are told, that they must be censored for the good of humanity. Some have even claimed that in denying climate change, these individuals are committing a “crime against humanity” and should be put on trial.

I am not a scientist or an expert on climate change. But I am a free speech advocate. And this rising tide of intolerance and censoriousness in the debate about climate change should concern anyone who believes in free and open and rational debate.

A dozen years later, it is highly unlikely that The Guardian would even publish an opinion piece like O’Neill’s anymore. It has become commercially “dangerous” to suggest in any way, shape or form that man-made global warming might not be true – though these days you are more likely to encounter the term “climate change” than “global warming,” as temperatures have inconveniently refused to match up to the predicted highs of the so-called “experts.” In short, it would be financial suicide for any mainstream broadcaster or publication to give airtime to the evidence presented by anyone who denies global warming; their advertising dollars would simply disappear, and they would be mocked and decried as scientifically ignorant. (Related: Global warming debunked – NASA report verifies carbon dioxide cools atmosphere.)

YouTube censors any who dare to spread “climate misinformation”

BuzzFeed recently reported that the social media giant YouTube is now “fact-checking” any videos which dare to question climate change. The company has also taken the step of adding the following disclaimer to such videos:

Multiple lines of scientific evidence show that the climate system is warming.

Amazingly, this line is a direct quotation from a Wikipedia entry, as if Wikipedia can be referenced as an accurate source of scientific information!

Since March, YouTube has also been adding Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica entries next to “conspiracy theory” video clips, such as those claiming that the moon landing and Oklahoma City bombing never took place. By doing the same for climate change videos, they are directly censoring scientific information – in many cases presented by knowledgeable experts – and lumping it together in the public mind with completely unbelievable and historically unsound clips. (Related: The “global warming hoax – 30 years of failed predictions that never came true.)

There are respected scientists who insist global warming does not exist

What YouTube is doing would be acceptable if all the world’s most respected scientists were in agreement about the climate change theory. Nothing could be further from the truth, however, as was recently illustrated when the highly respected, retired German climatologist Dr. Werner Kirstein addressed the annual Anti-Censorship Conference.

In reference to global warming, Kirstein warned: “[T]he science has been seriously compromised by politics, power-hungry bureaucrats and politically motivated organizations, such as the WMO, IPCC and The World Bank. It all comes down to funding. It’s sad, but that’s how it works.” He added, “Climate science is totally politicized.”

So much for Wikipedia and its “Multiple lines of scientific evidence.”

Of course, YouTube’s actions mimic those of all the other social media platforms, all of which have been actively censoring the information they have access to. Pretty soon, censorship won’t be enough, and anyone who admits to skepticism regarding the mainstream global warming narrative will likely be denied access to these platforms.

Discover the uncensored real truth about climate change at Real.video.

Sources include:

Who is Watching the Watchers & Fact Checking the Fact Checkers

With YouTube beginning the new “service” of providing a Wikipedia Link under videos it deems conspiratorial or wrong, I thought I would investigate the Wikipedia page that was linked under my video about climate change based on repeating cycles of solar activity ,not CO2. I found glaring inconsistencies between peer reviewed science and what is listed as fact in the Wikipedia Global Warming page.

After banning Alex Jones, tech giants now pushed to ban all “climate deniers,” targeting those who recognize the junk science of global warming

Natural News
10 August 2018
Vicki Batts

(Natural News) The great social media purge of 2018 is showing no signs of slowing down: Now that Alex Jones has been banned, the left-wing is on a power trip — and they’re already demanding more censorship. Media Matters, a left-wing organization funded by George Soros, has already stepped up to the soapbox, calling out Facebook for allowing “climate deniers” to have space on the network.

Writing for The Guardian, Dana Nuccitelli also recently called out the social media giant, with a headline declaring, “Facebook video spreads climate denial misinformation to 5 million users.” She goes on to argue that fake news is still running amok at Facebook. The call to silence anyone who presents opposing information is strong, and it’s coming from a variety of fronts.

Climate science is far from settled

The truth is that there is plenty of science to support the notion that global warming as we’ve come to know it is a hoax. Earlier this year, a pair of climate experts re-assessed simulations carried out by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The team ultimately found the future impact of climate change was overstated by up to 45 percent.

In 2017, a shocking report revealed that climate scientists had been fudging temperature data to make climate change look more pronounced. The science on climate change is far from a settled matter. Multiple reports have shown that much of the science surrounding climate change has been tampered with in one way or another.

Science that contradicts previously held beliefs is not automatically “fake news.” If that were the case, we’d all still believe the Earth is flat. It is wrong to silence every point of view that doesn’t align with left-wing dogma. These are important studies and people have the right to know about them. People have the right to hear and see divergent opinions: It encourages critical thinking and independent thought.

More censorship coming down the pike

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg stated in a recent interview that he does not support flat-out banning “climate denial” or similar ideas. He reportedly commented, “Our goal with fake news is not to prevent anyone from saying something untrue — but to stop fake news and misinformation spreading across our services. If something is spreading and is rated false by fact checkers, it would lose the vast majority of its distribution in News Feed.”

Zuckerberg espoused similar sentiments regarding InfoWars before banning him from the site. How long will it take for the Zuck to cave into the pressure from Democrats and left-wing organizations this time remains to be seen. But one thing is for sure: The Left  doesn’t want conservatives to have any space to voice their opinions, at all.

As Media Matters writes, “Combating fake news is key to combating climate change. As an editorial in the journal Nature Communications argued last year, ‘Successfully inoculating society against fake news is arguably essential’ if major climate initiatives are to succeed. Facebook could be a big part of the solution.”

They go on to accuse Facebook of “kowtowing” to conservatives; it would seem the Left won’t be happy until the conservative voice has been erased from the internet entirely. The notion of inoculating society against certain points of view is particularly troublesome — it’s as if the Left is admitting they want to control what people think.

The censorship of Alex Jones was just the beginning. Now liberals want to censor climate science — what will come next, censoring pro-liberty speech?

See coverage of real climate news at ClimateScienceNews.com.

Sources for this article include:

Dr. Tim Ball and the Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science – The Inconvenient Truth

We had a little trouble connecting in the beginning jump to 10 minutes to heat Dr. Tim Ball. BOOM Dr. Tim Ball joins us on a journey that uncovers the heart of the globalist deception – Global Warming/Climate Change. In this first part of the Tim Ball interview your eyes will be opened to the TRUTH about the deception. It is not your fault. The hypocrisy that the developed nations used fossil fuels to improve the length and quality of life and are now denying that opportunity to other nations is egregious. What makes it worse is that we know that the development the environmentalists oppose is the best way to reduce population and the pressures it brings. I wrote about what is called the demographic transition here. This hypocrisy is throughout all the environmentalist’s actions as they live the good life while telling others to live in poverty or at best reduced opportunity. Dr. Tim Ball exposes the malicious misuse of climate science as it was distorted by dishonest brokers to advance the political aspirations of the progressive left https://www.amazon.com/Deliberate-Cor… This book examines the claims of human induced global warming made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) using proper journalistic and investigative techniques. It explains how it was a premeditated, orchestrated deception, using science to impose a political agenda. It fooled a majority including most scientists. They assumed that other scientists would not produce science for a political agenda. German Physicist and meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls finally decided to look for himself. Here is what he discovered. Ten years ago I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data—first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements. To this day I still feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it.…scientifically it is sheer absurdity to think we can get a nice climate by turning a CO2 adjustment knob. This book uses the same approach used in investigative journalism. It examines the Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How.https://www.amazon.com/Human-Caused-G… Dr. Tim Ball’s Curriculum Vitae http://drtimball.com/_files/dr-tim-ba…

Sierra Club says you’re RACIST if you don’t agree with “climate change” mythology

Natural News
24 June 2018
Isabelle Z

(Natural News) Climate change alarmists can’t really fight against science, so they’ve stooped to some old-fashioned name-calling instead. Now, if you don’t believe the climate change mythology, it must mean you’re racist, according to the Sierra Club.

Yes, you read that correctly. The long-standing environmental group has been latching onto a study that claims there is a strong correlation between “reduced agreement with the scientific consensus on climate change” and “high levels of racial resentment.”

The study, which was carried out by DePauw University’s Salil D. Benegal, used public opinion data from surveys like the American National Election Studies (ANES) and Pew to imply that racial prejudices and identification were correlated with climate change opinions during Obama’s presidency.

Specifically, Benegal said that Republicans who had high “racial resentment scores” were 84 percent likely to dispute the notion of manmade climate change. Moreover, Republicans with higher scores for racial resentment were found to be three times as likely to disagree with the sentiment that climate change was real than those white Republicans who scored lower on the racism scale.

Just how is “racial resentment” assessed? ANES has been interviewing national samples of voters both before and after every presidential election in the country since the 1960s. To determine racial resentment against African Americans, it asks people how much they agree or disagree, on a scale from one to five, with a series of statements like, “If Blacks would only try harder, they could be just as well off as whites,” or “Irish, Italians, Jewish and many other minorities overcame prejudice and worked their way up. Blacks should do the same without any special favors.”

Backlash against climate change related to anti-Obama sentiment?

The Sierra Club sent out a provocative tweet saying, “The percentage of white Americans who said that they believed climate change is a very serious problem declined during the Obama administration. Why?”

Somehow, Benegal has decided that Obama’s skin color drove people’s skepticism of climate change. Of course, the rising doubt would have nothing to do with the growing body of evidence against the idea that global warming is caused by human activity, right? That’s far less sensational and requires them to admit that the science isn’t really backing their idea. When all else fails, the left can always just accuse people of being racist!

After all, it’s an approach that worked for Al Gore, as the Daily Caller points out. He has compared the global warming crusade to the civil rights and abolitionist movements, drawing sharp criticism from many groups.

Conservative Black Leadership’s Horace Cooper said at the time: “When Al Gore, Jr. associates these moral movements of history with one grounded in questionable data, he gives climate change activists unearned moral credibility they haven’t earned and don’t deserve.”

The facts are the real reason people doubt climate change

In recent years, research has shown that climate change predictions were completely exaggerated, overestimating the impact to the tune of as much as 45 percent. It has also come to light that “climate scientists” have been faking their data, altering recorded surface temperatures to make it look like warming occurred when it didn’t. They’ve also been “adjusting” tidal gauge data to support the climate change narrative. If people have been moving away from the idea that human activity is causing global warming, it has nothing to do with race and everything to do with the growing body of evidence that it’s little more than a hoax.

See Climate.news for more news coverage of real climate science.

Sources for this article include:

DailyCaller.com

DailyCaller.com

Metro.co.uk

NaturalNews.com

My Conclusion: I’m guess I’m Racist because don’t believe in the lie Al Gore tell us that we are blamed for global warming and climate change. We all know that the sun the main driver of climate change not Carbon Dioxide (CO2), not humans. People do not give into the lie that left are willing to throw at us; even if they’re going call us names, cyber bullying us on the internet just because we refuse to believe into their lies. Thing is it’s not just because we refuse to believe; we just think for ourselves; do our research to decide if it is true of false. I know thinking for ourselves may seen uncomfortable for many but at the end it’s worth it and it’s a win win.

New Study Finds Climate Change Alarmists Are LESS Eco-Friendly Than Skeptics

infowars
Paul Joseph Watson
9 May 2018

Skeptics more likely to recycle & use public transport than hypocrite leftists

A new study has once again exposed how leftists value virtue signaling over action by revealing that people who express the most alarm about climate change are less likely to be eco-friendly than global warming skeptics.

The study, published in the April edition of the Journal of Environmental Psychology, separated 600 participants into three groups based on their level of concern about climate change: “highly concerned,” “cautiously worried,” and “skeptical.”

Cornell and the University of Michigan researchers “found that those “highly concerned” about climate change were less likely to engage in recycling and other eco-friendly behaviors than global-warming skeptics,” reports the Washington Times.

While those who expressed high concern about global warming were the most vocal cheerleaders of government intervention, they were least likely to report their own individual actions.

On the other hand, climate change skeptics who rail against taxation and other onerous government programs were more likely to engage in individual eco-friendly activities such as recycling and conserving fossil fuels by using public transport.

“Sorry, I didn’t have time to recycle—I was busy watching a documentary about the crumbling Antarctic ice shelf,” jokes blogger Tom Jacobs.

“Regarding climate change skeptics, remember that conservatism prizes individual action over collective efforts. So while they may assert disbelief in order to stave off coercive (in their view) actions by the government, many could take pride in doing what they can do on a personal basis,” he adds.

The study speaks to stereotypes about celebrities, which tend to be true, about them living lavish lifestyles, flying private and enjoying luxury yachts while lecturing the rest of us about how we need to restrict our energy consumption.

The results also emphasize how leftists are predominantly concerned with virtue signaling and that when it comes to actually living the lifestyle they preach, they’re complete hypocrites.

One finds a similar situation when it comes to giving to charity.

A 2014 study by the Philanthropy Chronicle found that conservatives in red states were more generous compared to wealthy liberals.

“Less well-off families from red states donate a relatively higher – and growing – proportion of their money to charity, while those at the top have been giving a smaller share as their income has increased,” the study found.

Underscoring how conservatives believe in personal responsibility, 17 of the most generous states voted Republican in 2012, while 15 of the 17 least generous ones voted Democrat.

Overall, both studies confirm that while leftists are the loudest when it comes to signaling their virtue and humanitarianism, when it actually comes to following through, conservatives consistently come out on top.

The oncoming solar minimum

Eco Liberty
4 April 2018
Matthew Miller

The solar activity in a decline which that lead cooler climate on earth as well throughout the solar system the chart show the decline from solar cycle 22 to this current solar cycle 24; which has been the lowest a in century since solar cycle 14 which occur between March 1902 to June 1913. You can find out more on Wikipedia List of Solar Cycles Sun do goes thought cycles and there times when the sun be more active (more sunspots; resulting in warming throughout the solar system) and times when sun is less active (little to no sunspot; resulting cooling throughout the solar system).

Through history humans face times of Climate Optimum (eg Medieval Warm Period, Roman Warm Period, Holocene climatic optimum) they thrive because the climate is more favorable and able to grow crops and have great harvest; able to have society of health and growth.

When humans facing global cooling which that occurs when the solar activity is low (eg Wolf Minimum, Sporer Minimum, Maunder Minimum, Dalton Minimum which they occur during the little ice age) they face hardship like famine, disease and malnutrition because growing crops became more difficult or near impossible in most area because the climate is too cold and wet; that can affect the economy negativity that why empire and dynasty do collapse because cooling climate create hardships and the emperor is unable support his own empire. The chart below show the raise and fall of Chinese Dynasties. Which I got this image below form Ice age now website.

With the solar activity declining since solar cycle 21 we could be facing anther solar minimum which will result in cooling. The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) will not be predict that but instead keep us the dark as well as keeping us form knowing the truth. If we are enter in new solar minimum we will need to prepared. when solar cycle 24 coming to a close. The planet is already the affect of the oncoming solar minimum like crop loss and crop failure; that is the sign that solar minimum is near. The good that we have the technology that would help thrive during the solar minimum that is hydroponics and aqauponics which you can grow your plants indoor all year round free the elements.  The video below from Ice Age farmer is worth watching and I recommended that you watch it get some information.

Want to know more about the oncoming solar minimum and the little ice age I recommend subscribing to on You Tube

There would be more You Tubers cover the oncoming solar minimum and little ice age I let you decide on that one.

And now on; stay strong

Sources