Genetically Engineered Food, Bacteria/Virus Warning and Action

Genetically Engineered Food--Bacteria/Virus Warning
Global Action Plan: Section 2 of 3

To: gentech@gen.free.de
Subject: Food Bacteria/Virus Warning and Action: Section 2 of 3
From: pmligotti@earthlink.net (Peter M. Ligotti)
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 07:48:47 -0800 (PST)

AVOIDING DANGEROUS FOODS
___________________________________________________________________

ELIMINATING FRANKENFOODS: WHAT CAN I DO?
1. Learn all you can about the dangers of genetically engineered foods.
2. Learn how to shop to avoid these foods. Boycott companies using
   these foods.
3. Tell all of your friends, family, and loved ones about this problem,
   both on-line and off-line. Your job is not done until they change
   their eating habits and they teach their loved ones to do the same.
4. Start or join consumer groups to label and ban genetically
   engineered foods.
5. Send letters to your political leaders and representatives.
6. Write and send letters to the organic food companies,
   distributors, media, writers, editors, networkers.
7. Forward this communication to influential people all over the world.
8. Take a leadership role. Contact the sources at the end of part
   three of this communication.
9. Request parts one and three of this three-part communication from your
   Leader, who should be listed at the end of this section.

HOW TO SHOP TO AVOID GENETICALLY ENGINEERED FOODS:
FOODS TO AVOID OR BOYCOTT:
SPECIFIC BRAND NAME PRODUCTS TO BOYCOTT:
THESE COMPANIES USE GENETICALLY ENGINEERED INGREDIENTS IN
SOME OR ALL OF THEIR PRODUCTS:
Coca Cola (corn syrup and/or Aspartame), Fritos (corn),
Green Giant Harvest Burgers (soy), McDonald's French
Fries (potatoes), Nestle's chocolates (soy), Karo Corn
Syrup (corn), NutraSweet (Aspartame), Kraft Salad Dressings
(canola oil), Fleishmann's margarine (soy), Similac
Infant Formula (soy), Land o Lakes butter (rBGH),
Cabot Creamery Butter (rBGH).

AVOID ALL OTHER CONVENTIONAL (NOT CERTIFIED-ORGANIC) TOMATOES,
POTATOES, CORN, SOY, CANOLA OIL, COTTON SEED OIL, AND
YELLOW CROOK-NECK SQUASH:
TOMATOES: Genetically engineered with bacteria-derived
kanamycin resistance genes, Antisense backwards DNA,
antibiotic marker genes, viruses, and DNA of flounder
and North Atlantic shellfish. This and the following
genetically engineered foods have antibiotic marker genes
used to facilitate the genetic engineering process.
They can cause allergies and autoimmune disease.

POTATOES: Genetically engineered with wax moth insect
DNA; genetically engineered to produce its own pesticide
internally with the DNA of bacillus thuringiensis bacteria.

CORN: Genetically engineered to tolerate high quantities
of the chemical pesticide glufosinate, and genetically
engineered with a virus and the DNA of the bacteria
bacillus thuringiensis.

SOY: Genetically engineered and DNA-altered by Monsanto
with bacteria; capable of tolerating heavy doses of
Monsanto's Roundup brand chemical pesticide (glyphosate).

YELLOW CROOK NECK SQUASH: Gene-spliced with two experimental
viruses and arbitrary marker genes, capable of causing
unpredictable and unexpected effects.

CANOLA OIL: Genetically engineered and DNA-altered with
California bay turnip and various viruses and bacterium
in order to produce high quantities of lauric acid.

PAPAYA: Genetically engineered with bacteria and/or viruses.

RADICCHIO: Genetically engineered with bacteria and/or viruses.

COTTON SEED OIL: Genetically engineered and DNA-altered
with Arabidopsis bacterium, and viruses to be able to
withstand large applications of the chemical pesticide bromoxynil.
Bromoxynil causes birth defects in human beings.

AVOID ALL PRODUCTS DERIVED FROM THE ABOVE
NON-ORGANIC ITEMS
As of the beginning of 1997, these products will have been
genetically engineered and on the market as a percentage
of the total conventional food supply.  Since they are sold
unlabeled in the conventional market, there is no way to tell
specifically which tomatoes, potatoes, corn, soy, etc. have been
actually genetically engineered. If you live in a nation
which may receive imports from the U.S. and Canada, you
should also avoid these non-organic foods as a safety precaution.
Your own nation or another exporting to yours may be doing
genetic engineering. Eat only organic food if possible.
Even if you buy seeds to grow your own food, buy only organic seeds.

AVOID EATING IN NON-ORGANIC RESTAURANTS
Unless the restaurant management makes it clear in writing
that they are committed to using only non-genetically
engineered foods and products, avoid eating out as much as
possible. Since genetically engineered foods are not labeled,
they also have no idea which of their tomato, potato, corn,
soy, canola, yellow-crook-neck squash products
may be genetically engineered.

READ LABELS CAREFULLY: BE CAREFUL WITH ALL PROCESSED FOODS
WATCH OUT FOR CONVENTIONAL, NON-ORGANIC CORN
AND SOY, BECAUSE THEY ARE IN SO MANY PRODUCTS:
Avoid corn syrup, fructose, and fructose corn syrup in almost all
beverages and sodas (even health food brands), and in almost all
sweet products, yogurt, and aspirin. Avoid corn oil, corn starch,
corn meal, baking soda, baking powder, glycose syrup; Avoid soy;
soy flour in baked goods; pizza, cookies, cakes, pasta; fillers in
meat products, (for example Big Macs) vegetarian meat substitutes,
(for example tofu, tofu burgers, tofu hot dogs) soy milk, infant formula,
baby foods; diet and protein shakes, protein bars; chocolate and
candy bars; margarine; ice cream; pet food; soy oil in salad dressings
& snack chips; soy sauce; lecithin and soy lecithin. In all, well
over 30,000 products!

AVOID rBGH MILK & DAIRY PRODUCTS (apologies to strict vegans):
Monsanto's genetically engineered bovine growth
hormone (rBGH), marketed through veterinarians and injected
into dairy cows, causes increased milk production and horrible
mastitis. These cows then require constant medical supervision
and continuous high doses of antibiotics. Their milk contains
high levels of pus. The cow's milk and dairy products made
from this milk also contain rBGH, bovine growth hormone.
This hormone increases cancer risk in human beings.

AVOID ASPARTAME:
This is known as the artificial sweetener
Equal or NutraSweet and is made up of three chemicals
and a genetically engineered enzyme. It has been implicated
in many diseases. It breaks down into formeldahyde in the
body.

EAT ONLY ORGANIC RENNETLESS CHEESE (apologies to strict vegans):
Most non-organic cheeses are made with a genetically engineered
rennet called chymosin.

AVOID DOUGH CONDITIONER:
This is a code word for a combination of genetically
engineered enzymes and other components, found in cheaper
breads and baked goods.

OTHER GENETICALLY ENGINEERED ADDITIVES AND ENZYMES
Avoid Amylase (used in making bread, flour, whole wheat flour,
cereals, starch), Catalase (used in making soft drinks,
egg whites, liquid whey) and Lactase.

FOODS TO FAVOR:
BUY AND EAT ONLY CERTIFIED ORGANIC FOODS:
Certified organic tomatoes, potatoes, corn, soy, canola oil,
cotton oil, and yellow-crook-neck squash are safe. Many other
genetically engineered products will be coming to market in
1997 and 1998 if the bio-tech industry has its way. By buying only
organic foods of every type, you will protect yourself and
your family from Frankenfoods. Almost everything that can be
found in your conventional food
market is also produced by the organic food industry. If you
buy a few carefully chosen conventional foods, keep up-to-date
on which few conventional foods are safe through the websites and
mailing lists at the end of this consumer report.

MEAT AND POULTRY (apologies to vegetarians)
Most livestock are being fed genetically altered feed, as well as
a disgusting mix of ground-up and often diseased and discarded animal
carcasses. The only safe beef and poultry will be those fed only
organically grown grain. Avoid commercially produced seafood.
Commercial pork has been genetically altered with DNA from
human beings. Great time to decide to be vegetarian.

FAVOR DAIRY PRODUCTS FROM COMPANIES THAT DO NOT USE
(rBGH) BOVINE GROWTH HORMONE (apologies to strict vegans)
Research and buy only from suppliers that promise on the
package or in other writing that their products are rBGH-free.
Be especially careful with butter. Buy only organic butter,
because even otherwise good companies buy cheap rBGH milk
to make butter, or else they buy their butter (rBGH) from
other companies.

DR. FRANKENFOOD WANTS TO DESTROY ORGANIC FOOD
If Dr. Frankenfood was in charge, he would create biological warfare
crops that would destroy organic foods, destroy the competition. Just
as the evil genius would have hoped, the USDA has allowed genetically
altered foods into the conventional market which threaten organic farmers.
Scientists of virtually every persuasion realize that Bt soy, corn and
potatoes predictably will create Bt resistant insects. Organic farmers
use Bt as their main line of defense against insects. Bt resistant
insects could wipe out organic crops and organic farming. Destroying the
competition just makes good business sense, reasons Dr. Frankenfood.

CONSIDER STOCKING UP ON SAFE FOODS
Frank Ford, in his book, "The Coming Food Crisis," says that
events are pointing to a food crisis of unbelievable proportions.
With genetic engineering of the food supply, only a relatively
small part of the total food supply can be known to be safe.
Since 95% of the food supply contains conventional corn or soy,
the rules of supply and demand show that there could possibly be
a shortage of safe food over the next several years. You may consider
taking advice from Frank Ford's book. He advises stocking up on
organic or safe conventional dry foods that are low in oil
content--wheat, beans, lentils, grains, dried fruits. If possible,
stock enough for yourself, your family, and if possible your friends
to live comfortably for two or three years. Create local food
co-ops so you can pool resources and make large bulk orders,
saving everyone money.

PLS CLICK THE SOURCE LINK TO GET THE REST OF THE ARTICLE SECTION

Source:

http://www.gene.ch/gentech/1999/Jan-Feb/msg00091.html

The Book of Enoch Banned from The Bible Reveals Shocking Secrets Of Hidden History

The Book of Enoch Banned from The Bible Reveals Shocking Secrets Of Hidden History!

Source: 5thkind https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcHA7u6X9pM

Why Was This Suppressed From The Bible for 2000 Years? The Book Of Enoch | Fallen Angels & Demons FREE Newsletter : https://5thkind.tv Paul's Book "Escaping from Eden"

Greenland's Melting Ice Sheets Hoax!

Greenland's Melting Ice Sheets Will Raise Sea Level 23 Feet?

 Genesis 8:22, “While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.”

Written by Science and Public Policy Institute via RightSideNews |July 30, 2008

tidal_wave_1.jpgTHE SCARE: An article in the New York Times in late July 2008 by an author promoting a forthcoming book about "global warming" calls the Greenland ice-sheet "one of 'global warming's' most disturbing threats. The article says: "The vast expanses of glaciers - massed, on average, 1.6 miles deep - contain enough water to raise sea levels worldwide by 23 feet. Should they melt or otherwise slip into the ocean, they would flood coastal capitals, submerge tropical islands and generally redraw the world’s atlases. The infusion of fresh water could slow or shut down the ocean’s currents, plunging Europe into bitter winter.”

The article continues that ocean warming eats the ice sheet from beneath, causing glaciers to calve and melt faster, changing patterns of migration and hence of hunting, which, it says, has a positive effect: warm-water cod have returned, and shops can now offer locally-grown vegetables. Recession of ice along the shore has exposed pockets of lead, zinc, and bauxite. More than 30 billion barrels of oil may also be reachable if there is further melting. Yet the thrust of the article is Apocalyptic.

THE TRUTH: The “Greenland is melting” scare is an old one, and long discredited. It was first given widespread currency by Al Gore, not a climatologist, in his sci-fi comedy horror movie about the climate – a movie that is now an international joke for serious, serial, scientific inaccuracy. In October 2007, a UK High Court Judge ordered the Department of Education to issue a disclaimer about several inaccuracies in the movie before innocent schoolchildren could be exposed to it. The learned Judge’s finding about Gore’s claim that sea level would imminently rise by 20 ft was blunt:

“This is distinctly alarmist and part of Mr. Gore’s ‘wake-up call’. It is common ground that if Greenland melted it would release this amount of water, but only after, and over, millennia, so that the Armageddon scenario he depicts is not based on any scientific view.”

The UN’s climate panel, the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), also fueled the scare when its bureaucrats, after the scientists had submitted the final draft of its 2007 report, inserted a table that had not been in the scientists’ draft, in which they had ingeniously right-shifted four decimal points so as to exaggerate tenfold the supposed contribution of melting ice-sheets and glaciers to sea-level rise:

Metres per century 1961-2003 1993-2003

Thermosteric expansion 0.042 0.160

Glaciers and ice-caps 0.050 0.077

Greenland ice-sheets 0.050 0.210

Antarctic ice-sheets 0.140 0.210

IPCC's sum of lines 1-4: 0.110 0.280

The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley earned his share of the Nobel Peace Prize by writing to the IPCC on the morning of publication, demanding - and getting - a correction of this maladroit and unscientific attempt to lend support to the unscientific fantasies of Gore.

Al Gore's movie said...

Gore: "Two canaries in the coal mine. The first one is in the Arctic. Of course the Arctic Ocean has a floating ice cap, Greenland on its side there. I say canary in the coal mine because the Arctic is one part of the world that is experiencing faster impact from global warming. This is the largest ice shelf in the Arctic, the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf. It just cracked in half a year ago. The scientists were astonished."

But what do the scientific studies and the peer-reviewed scientific literature (as opposed to the layman Gore or the error-prone IPCC) have to say about Greenland, and about sea level generally? ...

"Temperature records show that the Arctic was in fact warmer in the 1930s and 1940s than it is today"

"Northern Hemisphere snow cover reached a new record in 2001" 

"A new record in 2001 for Northern Hemisphere winter snow cover"

But this new record was easily surpassed in 2007, when, for the first time since satellite records began 30 years ago, winter sea ice extent at both Poles reached record highs. Somehow most of the media that had mentioned the record loss of summer sea-ice in the Arctic in 2007 failed to mention the record growth of winter sea ice at both Poles that very winter.

The ice cap at the North Pole has certainly been thinning ever since US nuclear submarines took the first measurements in the 1950s. However, a paper by NASA scientists last year says the reason has nothing to do with "global warming". The warmer Arctic has been caused by the current warming phase of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, driving warm tropical waters poleward and also causing winds to take a more southerly direction.

Also, a very recent paper has shown considerable and hitherto-unsuspected undersea volcanic activity at 73 degrees North latitude on the mid-Atlantic ridge in the Greenland-Iceland gap, with temperatures at the outlets of the volcanic vents at 570 degrees F.

Among the many facts that the article in the New York Times is careful not to mention is one central fact: that in the early 1940s it was warmer in the Arctic than it is today.

Chylek et al. (2004) confirm that temperatures along Greenland's coasts are about 1 degree Celsius below their 1940 levels, despite half a century of "global warming". They say -

"Current coastal temperatures are about 1°C below their 1940 values." Furthermore, "at the summit of the Greenland ice sheet the summer average temperature has decreased at the rate of 2.2°C per decade since the beginning of the measurements in 1987." Ocean currents and volcanic activity are not the only natural influences on Arctic temperatures. The apparently random fluctuations in Arctic temperatures in the past 125 years are more closely correlated with changes in solar activity than with the ever-upward increases in atmospheric CO2 concentrations. It is scientifically perverse to make an unqualified attribution of the observed thinning of the Arctic ice-cap to anthropogenic "global warming" when, compared with the early 20th century, the Arctic has been cooling. One story that did not make it into the New York Times article - sealers were trapped in Arctic ice in April 2007 -

The total extent of summer Arctic sea-ice has been declining, and there has been much alarm about it in the media, but the decline has in fact been modest -

Total extent of Arctic sea-ice, 1978 to 2004 (National Snow and Ice Data Center)

Even if the entire Arctic ice-cap were to melt, as it probably did in the Bronze Age, Roman and Mediaeval warm periods, not a single millimeter of sea-level rise would result. However, between 1982 and 1999, in winter, there was an unpredicted cooling trend over the Arctic ocean -

Winter surface cooling of the Arctic ocean, 1982-1999 (Wang & Key, 2003) The Arctic climate is and has always been highly variable, as the two pictures from Beechey Island in the 1850s show. The illustrations are of scenes at the same season of the year, just three years apart -

Beechey Island shows strong climate variability. Above: 5 September 1850. Below: 21 August 1853.

Greenland has, in fact, been warmer than the present for most of the past 10,000 years -

Mean temperature at the summit of the Greenland ice-sheet (thousands of years before present)

One of the most careful surveys of the thickness of the Greenland ice-sheet was conducted by Johannesen et al. (2005). Their conclusion (not reported by most of the mainstream media) was that the mean increase - yes, increase - in the thickness of the entire, vast ice-sheet that covers the interior of Greenland was an impressive 5.4 cm (>2 in) per year in the decade 1992-2003:

"Colors indicate ice-sheet elevation change rate in cm/year ... from ... satellite altimeter data, 1992-2003. The spatially averaged increase is 5.4 ± 0.2 cm/year." Source: Johannesen et al., 2005

There has also been considerable discussion on the well-funded alarmist blogs about "Warming Island" - an icy peninsula that became an island a few years ago, allegedly because of "global warming". The inconvenient truth, however, is that an explorer in the late 1950s drew a map of the relevant stretch of the Greenland coast as it then was, clearly showing "Warming Island" as an island.

Natural changes had caused the ice to disappear in the 1940s, to re-form in the 1960s, and to disappear again recently. The emergence of "Warming Island" as evidence of "global warming" is in fact evidence of natural climate variability, and nothing more.

The article in the New York Times repeats one of the most misleading canards currently circulating among alarmists - to the effect that the Greenland ice sheet might be melted from beneath, lubricated by meltwater plunging through "moulins" from the surface, so that it might suddenly reach a "tipping-point" and slide into the sea. However, the vast majority of the Greenland ice-sheet is ringed by coastal mountains. Even if there were anything new about summer meltwater passing down through the ice (a long-established phenomenon), the imagined "lubrication" would not and could not allow the entire ice-sheet to slip into the sea, because the mountains are in the way.

Finally, it is necessary to dispose of the article's repetition of a long-outdated theory that somehow the thermohaline circulation - the great current that incorporates the Gulf Stream and gives Europe a milder climate than its northerly latitude would otherwise allow - might stop flowing if ice from Greenland were to melt at an accelerated rate. Setting aside the fact that there is little sign of such acceleration (indeed, the Viking burial-ground at Hvalsey in the south-west is still under permafrost, indicating that temperatures in Greenland today are cooler than they were in the mediaeval warm period), there is no danger of a cessation in the thermohaline circulation. As Professor Carl Wunsch of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has put it -

"Shut-off would imply repeal of the law of conservation of angular momentum. ... Widely disseminated and grossly oversimplified pictures showing the ocean as a ‘conveyor belt' have misled people into thinking ocean circulation is driven by a sinking motion at high latitudes."

Al Gore, and the New York Times, please note. End of scare.  

Article in Public Domain/Permission: By David J. Stewart

Junk Science

Science “Falsely So Called”

"O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called." —1st Timothy 6:20

“I am telling you Global Warming is a nonevent, a manufactured crisis and a total scam… It is all a scam, the result of bad science.” —John Coleman, Weather channel founder and lifelong meteorologist

John Coleman, founder of the weather channel and lifelong meteorologist.Science is trustworthy, right? Science is supposed to be reliable, based upon fact, unprejudiced, and trustworthy, isn’t it?  Well, think again.  A lot of what passes for science these days is utter nonsense, pseudo-science (i.e., false science), and a lot of scientific fact is hidden from public view because it’s not politically correct. It is absurdly comical what is commonly mislabeled as “science” these days.

The “Discovery” channel recently produced a laughable documentary on Greenland's alleged “melting glaciers.” Oh boy! Here we go again with Global Warming. It's really a comedy. A team was flown in by helicopter to actually install special plastic covers over a 2-acre area to reflect the sun’s rays and help prevent the glacier from melting. They spent 3-days in 60 M.P.H. gusts of frigid wind, in chill factors well below zero, with millions of dollars worth of equipment and materials, to cover a mere 2-acres of the glacier. That’s like covering one grain of sand on the biggest beach in the world. They said it would cost $186,000,000,000 just to cover a small fraction of Greenland’s glaciers to combat the effects of Global Warming. Their major concern was that such a project would also require 21,000,000 helicopter trips, which would dump enormous amounts of Carbon Dioxide (i.e. greenhouse gases) into the atmosphere. The whole idea of preventing a glacier from melting is insane!

If indeed the earth’s glaciers are melting, attempting to stop them from melting by covering them with reflective material wouldn’t work. According to Global Warming proponents the earth’s temperature is increasing. So what good would it do to cover the glaciers? The sun’s rays are not the problem. This just shows the fallacy of Global Warming. One minute they claim that the earth’s temperature is rising, and then they set out to protect Greenland’s glaciers from the sun’s rays. Well, which is it, the sun’s rays or the higher temperatures on earth? If, as Global Warming proponents claim, the earth’s temperatures are rising, then protecting glaciers from the sun’s rays is a complete waste of time and money.

I’ve been reading about a “global warming tax” for some time now and I think this is the ultimate goal of all this scare-mongering… an international global warming tax! If you want the truth behind any agenda… follow the money. It's just a matter of time. Our taxes shouldn't be wasted on junk science.

You know, why didn’t we hear about Global Warming 30-years ago? Has planet earth changed that much in just a few decades? No! One violent volcanic eruption emits more gases and pollution into the earth’s atmosphere than all the cars and industries in America combined in just a single year. The sun itself generates enough radiation to penetrate the earth’s crust and maintain a molten core of lava. Who’s kidding who? How did mankind survive for Millenniums without combating the Global Warming boogie man?

Even the founder of the Weather channel and a lifelong meteorologist, John Coleman, has candidly stated publicly that Global Warming is a big scam. I’ve quoted the entire article here because it’s something that everyone needs to read…

It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM.

Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data back in the late 1990's to create an allusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental wacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the "research" to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.

Environmental extremist, notable politicians among them then teamed up with movie, media and other liberal, environmentalist journalists to create this wild "scientific" scenario of the civilization threatening environmental consequences from Global Warming unless we adhere to their radical agenda.

Now their ridicules manipulated science has been accepted as fact and become a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, the Democratic Political Party, the Governor of California, school teachers and, in many cases, well informed but very gullible environmental conscientious citizens. Only one reporter at ABC has been allowed to counter the Global Warming frenzy with one 15 minutes documentary segment.

I do not oppose environmentalism. I do not oppose the political positions of either party.

However, Global Warming, i.e. Climate Change, is not about environmentalism or politics. It is not a religion. It is not something you "believe in." It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise. And I am telling you Global Warming is a nonevent, a manufactured crisis and a total scam. I say this knowing you probably won't believe me, a mere TV weatherman, challenging a Nobel Prize, Academy Award and Emmy Award winning former Vice President of United States. So be it.

I suspect you might like to say to me, "John, look the research that supports the case for global warming was done by research scientists; people with PH D's in Meteorology. They are employed by major universities and important research institutions. Their work has been reviewed by other scientists with PH D's. They have to know a lot more about it than you do. Come on, John, get with it. The experts say our pollution has created an strong and increasing greenhouse effect and a rapid, out of control global warming is underway that will sky rocket temperatures, destroy agriculture, melt the ice caps, flood the coastlines and end life as we know it. How can you dissent from this crisis? You must be a bit nutty.

Allow me, please, to explain how I think this all came about. Our universities have become somewhat isolated from the rest of us. There is a culture and attitudes and values and pressures on campus that are very different. I know this group well. My father and my older brother were both PHD-University types. I was raised in the university culture. Any person who spends a decade at a university obtaining a PHD in Meteorology and become a research scientist, more likely than not, becomes a part of that single minded culture. They all look askance at the rest of us, certain of their superiority. They respect government and disrespect business, particularly big business. They are environmentalists above all else.

And, there is something else. These scientists know that if they do research and results are in no way alarming, their research will gather dust on the shelf and their research careers will languish. But if they do research that sounds alarms, they will become well known and respected and receive scholarly awards and, very importantly, more research dollars will come flooding their way.

So when these researchers did climate change studies in the late 90's they were eager to produce findings that would be important and be widely noticed and trigger more research funding. It was easy for them to manipulate the data to come up with the results they wanted to make headlines and at the same time drive their environmental agendas. Then their like minded PHD colleagues reviewed their work and hastened to endorse it without question.

There were a few who didn't fit the mold. They did ask questions and raised objections. They did research with contradictory results. The environmental elitists berated them brushed their studies aside.

I have learned since the Ice Age is coming scare in the 1970's to always be a skeptic about research. In the case of global warming, I didn't accept media accounts. Instead I read dozens of the scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct when I assure you there is no run away climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. It is all a scam, the result of bad science.

I am not alone in this assessment. There are hundreds of other meteorologists, many of them PH D's, who are as certain as I am that this global warming frenzy is based on bad science and is not valid.

I am incensed by the incredible media glamour, the politically correct silliness and rude dismal of counter arguments by the high priest of Global Warming.

In time, a decade or two, the outrageous scam will be obvious. As the temperature rises, polar ice cap melting, coastal flooding and super storm pattern all fail to occur as predicted everyone will come to realize we have been duped.

The sky is not falling. And, natural cycles and drifts in climate are as much if not more responsible for any climate changes underway.

I strongly believe that the next twenty years are equally as likely to see a cooling trend as they are to see a warming trend.

SOURCE: http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/comments_about_global_warming/

Science has been politicized—not by the Right; but by the Left, which sees global warming, Darwinism, stem cell research, and innumerable other issues as tools to advance its agenda (and in many cases expand the reach of government). When liberals parade out scientists with white coats, debate is supposed to be silenced.  But many of the high priests of science have something to hide—from blind intolerance of Biblical claims to greedy guarding of their federally financed research budgets. What a waste of tax-payer money!

"Science" means "the study of" something. Therefore, to qualify as legitimate science, there MUST be something to study. Evolution is a perfect example of FALSE science. There is nothing to study in evolution. Evolution CANNOT be studied!  It CANNOT be tested? It CANNOT be monitored or examined? In fact, all available scientific evidence shows that evolution is NOT true in the least.

In the same manner, Global Warming is bad science, i.e., there are NO solid scientific research findings to support their doomsday scenario. The “evidence” at best is far-fetched and purely circumstantial. I remember hearing Al Gore claim several years back that massive flooding in China was caused by Global Warming. Such alleged “evidence” of Global Warming is ridiculous. Suspiciously, Gore and other Global Warming proponents have remained silent concerning record-breaking cold temperatures in recent years. For example: In 2007 New York City set an all-time low record of 59 degrees for the month of August. In January of 2004, Boston's Logan International Airport recorded a low of 3 below zero, two degrees chillier than the previous record for January 10, set in 1875. It was the city's coldest day since January 16, 1994, when thermometers registered 4 below. Meanwhile, on that day in New York City, Al Gore was giving a speech about the effects of global warming! In 2007, Chicago experienced the 6th coldest February on record since 1871 and the coldest February in nearly three decades. Global Warming? You decide!

Historical climate records clearly evidence that there are normal “cycles” of short-term and long-term weather patterns. Thus such terms as “El Nino” (warmer) and “La Nina” (cooler) are used to identify the normal temperature change patterns in the ocean. It is sad that many people are gullible enough to believe Global Warming exists simply because someone shows them a video of water flowing from a glacier. I remember as a kid seeing snow melting on the rooftop of the house and draining into the guitars, even though it was close to zero degrees outside. I noticed that big icicles dripped from the heat of sun, even though it was only 10 degrees outside. So why should it be surprising that water should flow from a glacier when the sun shines upon it? It is normal.

I saw a bumper sticker the other day which read... "I believe the Big Bang Theory... God spoke and BANG, it happened." I thought that was pretty good, and it is certainly Biblical. It is far more reasonable to believe the Bible; than it is to believe the hocus-pocus nonsense of a bunch of whacko scientists. Just as Evolution, Global Warming is a scam—a cleverly devised invention of greedy and dishonest people.

Article in Public Domain: By David J. Stewart