Global Media Fascism

by morton_h, the blogger

It is hard to actually believe for people. It is too big, therefore it cannot be. And please add this to the list of logical fallacies as Appeal to Bigness. 

Too big a toad to fathom.
Too big to feel - to big to fight?

Western Media on mainstream level is now a fulfilled monolithic corporate fascist entity, where everything is controlled by a network of global corporate deep state governance. That would mean a very few people owning a very few but very big feeding channels controlling 99% of mainstream online or printed media of the West. And the last 1% dare not go against it.

We have known that for some time now, and some have known it all along. But recently a significant proof of this being very real and not some too-big-to-fathom theory is the fact, that an article by Gilbert Doctorow in The Russia Insider as the only source titled: Russia's Had Enough – No More Business As Usual With The US, is quoting Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, giving a 3 hour long speech in the annual press conference from the ministry, which then has been totally ignored by all media in the West.

Mr. Lavrov said:

For Russia there wil be no more business as usual with the European Union or the United States. A new stage of developement is dawning, which can develop only on the basis of equal rights and all other principles of international law.

For a statement of such huge significance to be totally blacked out by Western media it takes a totalitarian structure named above as Global Media Fascism. The word fascism is not used here in the usual infantile sloppy-ignorant way that leftists and liberals use it meaning basically: anything they don't like. It is used in the strict techical term of a total merge of corporate and government entities into a totalitarien dictatorship. In that sense, the Sovjet State and the ideology of Socialism was – and is - nothing more than red or pink fascism.

As we have pointed out on this blog several times, it is most hillarious and bizarre that the Sovjet citizens never doubted, that the yellow press of the Sovjet state was lying to its teeth every single day and therefore never could be taken seriously, whereas citizens of Western countries to this day actually believe, that their corporate-fascist media is telling the truth!

Even during the Cold War a statement of such huge importance would have got at least some attention although with a critical edge. After all, those were the days of Sovjet grotesque and exagerated clichée propaganda statements. Which is another paradox, since Russian leaders telling the truth and/or making statements, that are meant to be taken seriously, apparently are regarded as far worse than leaders in those days just bragging and howling. Which again would take us down another rabbit hole with a story, of how the Sovjet state was created by the West in the first place.

So, the current blackout is deeply controlled as are all mainstream media, not just some but ALL! Some papers and stations may be too small to be able to have foreign correspondants actually going to foreign places. So they are dependant on downloading from the large bureaus and agencies. Which means, that they are controlled by the apparent lack of ressources, because these corporate mega-bureaus are 100% controlled by the media mongerers, moguls and mafiosi and their mongoloid, malevolent and mouth-shutting media maggots. Nothing escapes this monster machine, that has been bought up and taken over during the 20th century. Apparent lack of ressources, that is, because minor newsmedia have made a choice of not investigating and not questioning the official narrative, which makes them collaborateurs in the most active sense. In the serious section of the Alternative Media we can find more serious journalism produced by one man with the guts and brain to do so, than any one of those lazy, stupid and corrupt mainstream channels/papers with dozens or hundreds of employed. So it is not a question of ressources, but a deliberate choice. Therefore the Media are guilty in serious crimes against humanity for doing what theý do and not doing what they should! Without the Western Media spreading legs to the sinister forces of the World, no lies, no wars, no political crimes, no terrorism, no banking fraud, none of that would stand a chance.

Journalists of today are even taught in their training years, how to deal with conspiracy theorists. A person recently came across a paper, a manual from a Danish academy for journalism, showing how this is part of their training system! This means, that whenever someone or some information has been officially labelled, journalists are to treat is as not real, but as a crazy theory. This again means – and the blackout'ening of the statement of the Russian Foreign Minister is exactly such an act of politicized media filtering-out – that any part of the reality can be cast out, denied, distorted, ridiculed on top-down. demand. Journalists of today are trained to react to any news info with an either-or-filter. Either: the news info is harmless to theiremployers, and therefore theycan more or less tell the truth – as long as it sells of course, if not theyjust ignore it or angle it more sexed-up. Or: the news info has been classified as harmful to theiremployers, and therefore it is expected of themto either totally ignore it or lie about it. This shows on one side how emprisonedjournalism has become in the era of globalism and on the other hand how desperate the media of the West now is, knowing too well that its level of obsolescense is directly proportional with peoples knowledge of big chunks of reality, that is not reported in the media.

The Media is the enemy of Truth, and therefore the enemy of the people.

When Sergey Lavrov says on the basis of equal rights, he is referring to the right to sovereignty of the Nations of the World. This is the diametrically opposite to the both internal and foreign policy of the US and the EU. This is a total smack in the face of the whole globalist mega-project of the last 225 years, the revolutionary project of the Jesuits, the Sabbateans, the Masonic parasite, the Imperialists, the Industrialists, the Communists, the Zionists, the Cultural Marxists, the NeoCons, the Globalists, … which is: The destruction of Western heritage culture and the the Nation State. Do I hear a squeek about the Zionists wanting a national state? Yes you moron, for themselves, but for everyone else goy on the Planet there should be no nationaccording to them. Which is why Europe is now being destroyed by their organized mass emigration. 

National sovereignty is part of the Russian concept of a New World Order, which is a totally different order than THE nwo of the sick uni-polar world in the sick minds of the sick Western oligarks. A sovereign nation is a nation with permission to have its own opinion, its own domestic and foreign policy, its own economy, its own culture, its own language, its own population. And this is exactlywhat nations of the World have been increasingly denied for the same 225 years – that is since the French Revolution, where the World experienced the modern version of globalism and its ugly face for the first time. The death of national sovereignty and nation states was among the prime goals of the Jaccobin, Frankean, Jesuit-Illuminati agenda.

This is why nationalism has been declared the root of all eviland demonized in general by the globalists. Internationalism on the other hand has been praised as part of the new gospel found in Communism-Marxism-Leninism-Trotsyism. This is why it was called International Socialism. This is why National Socialism as a serious competitor was condemned and destroyed, since it protected a people and a nation in stead of destroying it like the Bolsjevik mass murderers – 147 millions in Russia alone! This is why the EU now destroys the sovereignty of its members transforming Europe into a dysfunctional Super State like the USA.

This is why Mr. Lavrov made his statement on behalf of the Russian Foreign Ministry and thereby Russia itself, and this is why all the corporate fascist media of the West were ordered not to tell about it, this being a total smack in the face of the overall globalist agenda that now – maybe for the first time since Napoleon or Hitler – like them or not – is facing serious opposition. I am willing to include Mahatma Gandhi, Emperor Hirohito and Moammar Gadaffi and a dozen of others to the list of anti-globalists, of which only Gandhi has been officially blue stamped due to his pacifism. He was regarded as a real saint, so they couldn't crush him, although they have tried, which many people don't know.

So Lavrov and the Russians are saying on the one hand, that it according to international law approved by most nations – including those states that constantly are spitting on these very laws, conventions and treaties – to intrude and intervene in a nation and deprive it of its sovereingty. It is illegal to force regime change in a nation just because you don't like the regime – meaning the regime being disobediant and non-subordinate to the demands of the Globalist Empire and its Central Banking System. Which we have recently seen in Libya, Syria and the Ukraine. But on the other hand and even more significantly they are saying, that they will not tolerate the West forcefully exporting its global-fascist concept of dissolution of nation states tothe countries of the World, especially to the neighbouring countries of Russia by whatever means: colored revolutions, corrupt NGO'ism, Gladio 2.0 terror-operations, simple bribe of leaders of states, military intervention, proxy wars by jihadist groups, diverse sinister operations by intelligence agencies, funding of groups of subversive elements … the means and tactics are endless.

Lavrov moreover states the folowing:

To the best of my knowledge not a single report of the event has appeared on major online American, French, British, German newspaper portals or on television channels.

This was not for the lack of substance or newsworthy soundbytes including the headline 'No Business As Usual'. As the sharp tongue, Russian commentor, Maria Sakharov pointed out not long ago due to a similar press briefing: What are all these accredited Western reporters doing in Moscow if nothing gets published abroad? Do they have some other occuption?

The answer is quite simple, though still surprising to most people. Socalled journalists of major Western Media are no longer journalists, but agents for the intelligence services. As the German editor of Frankfurter Allgemeine, the leading German newspaper, Udo Ulfkotte, has pointed out: Me and my colleagues during the Cold War and beyond have been used by the CIA to feed the German readers with their propaganda. Former chief editor of the leading Danish newspaper, Politiken, was a Mossad agent. So either: the appointed rapporters at the Moscow briefings were not real journalists at all, but agents of the intelligence services. Or: they were, in principle, journalists, but their rapports were never used as expected as news rapports meant for publishing, but as intelligence rapports meant for the Agency in the time of war, which we are in, which would be: The Theatre of Third World War.

The Russian Foreign Minister is exposing the hypocracy of the Western Media, that deliberately and on demand from the control center above is not rapporting on this major event and statement. So what happened just a week after the statement? 92 old mummyfied but apparent still fully operational former Foreign Secretary, Henry Kissinger, came to see Russian president Vladimir Putin. Many things can be said about this old man, none of which are very charming, but two thing you must remember to say is, that he is extremely intelligent and has been highly influential. Also remember, that the last 10 years have not been his era but the era of yet another geopolitical mummification, Zbignew Brzecinski, a man that hates everything connected to Russia down to his very guts. 

Apparently mr. Kissinger has had 10 informal conversations with mr. Putin during the reign of the Russian president. And informalon this level of politics does not mean chit-chatting and smalltalking. It is noteworthy, that Kissinger broke with the hardliner faction of US policy when part of the faction, the NeoCons, performed their neo-fascist/neo-nazi coup d'Etat in the Ukraine. He stated then, that USA needed a policy of coorporation and not confrontation with Russia. Kissinger in other words is not an Obama-supporter like Brzecinsky – supporter somehow being a misleading word, handler would be more apropriate, since no US president since the original coup d'Etat in 1876 has been elected by the American people, but been selected by the globalist oligarcy, that ever since have occupied the deep-state control room of the British Empire 2.0 aka The United States. For those of you, that do not know how the rightful and lawful election in 1876 was stolen by fraud from Samuel Tilden by general Rutherford B. Hayes, you may want to go and check it out.

Kissinger is a Zionist, and therefore we may expect many layers of cunningness when he arranges meetings like this. He probably foresees the total destruction of the state of Israel if the US confrontation policy continues. He sees that the Russian bear has been awoken and now is willing to strike back. The ISIS gangs in Syria and Iraq are now under heavy pressure and so are the Turkish scoundrels supporting them. And unlike during the Cold War, where the military power of the Sovjet Union was highly exagerated in order for the US war industry to maintain their enormous budget and profit, Russia now has real and modernized striking power.

The commentator at The Russia Insider describes Sergey Lavrov as extremely well prepared. He spoke for three full hours without any notes for support. He answers in detail to posed question. He used fewer diplomatic eufemisms than before, meaning that he was given green light from Putin to speak out with perfect clarity and not hold back. He is the longest serving member of the Russian governement and a man of high intellect, and unlike Kissingers Zionist shrewdness and willingness to lie, cheat and commit mass murder at will to serve some narrow interests. He is a real statesman, not just a political spindoktor and manipulator. He adressed all the main issues of Russian Foreign Policy including relationship to the USA and the EU, the latter mostly concerning the sanctions, that we all (?) know have been forced onto the Europeans by the Americans. Lavrov knows, that there is great frustration among the Europeans and that right now political powers – the Germans eg. - are working backstage to get out of the US stangulation grip.

Lavrov knows for sure, that the forced saparation of Germany and Russia was the main purpose of both First and Second World War. The natural cultural and ethnic unification of the Eurasian continuum was all the time worst nightmare for the Empire of Envy, the British-American Empire. This is why Poland has been used som many times to cut the bonds between the two countries. This is why NATO has ploughed its way into Eastern Europe by violating all its promises after the Cold War. This is why they have been pushing their policy of contingency trying to sorround Russia with military bases, organized terrorist movements, colored revolutions, proxy wars and corruption of regimes. It is classic geopolitics in the spirit of Halford Mackinder and his Seize of the Heart Land. It is classic imperialism with almost modern means – you can't help notizing that the imperial psychopaths tend to use the same old filthy methods as their forefathers did hundreds of years ago. Same human species to scare, plunder, rape and kill or enslave – same methods.

Lavrov was aksked at the press conference, whether a reset of the US-Russian relationsship was possible in the the last year of the Obama administration. His answer was:

We gave a rather constructive response to the reset. We said, that we appreciated the decision of the new administration to correct the errors iaggreements on various conflikt situations.

But somehow this suddently began to drop back to zero. Now, everyone including our American collegues told os: just fulfill the Minsk Accords on the Ukraine, and immediately everything will return to normal. We will immediately cancel the sanctions and the prospects of coorporation will open upen up between Russia and the United States over much more pleasant issues and not just in the management of crises. Right away a constructive partnership will take place.

That was Lavrov mimicking what they were told. He goes on to comment on it:

We are open to coorporation with everyone on an equally and mutually adventageous basis. We do not, of course, want anyone to build their policy based on the assumption, that Russia and not the Ukraine must fulfill the Minsk Accords. It is written there, who must fulfill them. I hope this is well know to the USA.

At least my lates contact with US secretary of state, John Kerry, the contacts with deputary secretary of state, Victoria Nuland, with assistance of the Russian president Sukrov indicates, that the US can sort out the Minsk Accords. Grosso Modo, so everyone understands everything.

He thus tossed the ball back into the United States, the land of double standards. Which is quite interesting to witness, that is: how the Russian strategy has been to use the Westen/American lies, broken promises and contempt for international treaties, conventions and aggreements and thereby severe and long lasting moral problem against themselves. We saw it at the Syrian crisis. Russia did not intervene militarily before there was an official pledge from the legal and elected – like him or not – president of Syria. We saw it, when mr. Kerry stood up a year ago and lied with his skull and his bones about Assad using sarin gas against his own people. We saw it in the Ukraine, then the only military intervention took place, when the neo-fascists (of which Victoria Nuland is one…) tried to snatch the whole Russian Black Sea base in Crimea, expecting Russia just to stand down and stare at it. These people are like little spoiled, psykopathic children pushing limits to see, when they get a response. The Russian reaction on the other hand has been amazingly restrained and mature.

And we see it in the Russian state television channel, rt.com, who's strategy is to fill the immense vacuum of non-information, non-conversation, non-mentioning and non-trustworthyness, that has been build up during the Cold war – the Second World War that never ended – and has gone full blown thereafter culmination today (hopefully). The strategy is actually telling the truth if possible, surprise-surprise, never tried that before in the West, since we according to our benevolent patrons can't handle the truth! Millions of people though around the World are sick and tired of being lied to by their fascist corporate media and seeks the real stuff. And although we should always be careful with state sponsored media, especially on certain issues of which one of them seem to be immigration and racism – rt.com doesn't really get that one – the strategy works and is being appreciated. 

This ties back into Lavrovs and Putins style of dealing with reality. Looking a weasel or a misbehaving dog right into its eyes will make it feel very uncomfortable and behave in a creeping-cowardly or a desperate aggressive fashion. We see both attitudes in the West. Lavrovs direct statements is of this kind, and we can learn from them, that the sanctions against Russia are simply not working. Remember – or understand, if not understood already - that economic and commercial sanctions are nothing else than an act of war morally justified by media villification of a foreign nation.

Lavrov goes on with a history lesson:

This all began when there was no Ukraine although they now try to blame it all on OSCE principles. Everything that is going on between Russia and the West is explained by the fact, that Russia did not fulfill its obligation, did not respect the Worĺd Order (.. which in a way is true, who's order are we talking about?), which was put together in the Helsinki Act.

This is all an excuse to find ways for a Policy of Containment, and this policy never ended.

So Lavrov says without any diplomatic veil, that Russia is not going to play ball with the same old Cold War politics any more. They've had it!

The Ukranian crisis was just a pretext. The Ukraine was linket not so much with justified concern over an alleged violation by Russia of the Helsinki Principles although everything began with Kosovo and with the bombing of Yugoslavia. This was an expression of irritation, that the coup d'Etat (in the Ukraine) did not lead to the results as expected by those who supported it.

Secondary commenator, Joseph P. Farrell, here reads between the lines, that it was a corporate take-over attempt. Remember again the technical definition of Fascism: half corporate, half government all in one basket. If you back a couple of years, you will see, that there were GMO agrobusiness giants buying themseles into an area, where they had been excluded till then. You will also see, that there were non-governmental organisation (NGO-fascism) there operation on behalf of US intelligence. The results did not work out as they were supposed to, so now they are blaming Russia.

I will tell you honestly, we do not hold a grudge. We have no such traditions in the relation between states. We understand that life is tougher that any ideal, romantic scheme like ”reset” or any similar such notion. We also understand, that this is a world of harsh clashes of interest, that come down to us from the age of the West's total domination. And it is amidst a period of transition to a more durable system in which there will not be neither one or two dominant poles. There will be several.

The transition period is long and painful, all habits die slowly, we all understand that.

Lavrov says, that the West is clinging to old Cold War habits, and that Russia has moved beyond that.

We understand, that the US is interested in having fewer competitors in regards to influence, military power and economy. We see this in the relationship between USA and China and how the USA works with the European Union trying to create a ring around it via the Trans Atlantic Partnership and to the east of Russia to create a Trans Pacific Partnership, which will not include Russia and China.

Russian president, Vladimir Putin, spoke about this in detail, when he analyzed the processes at work in the world economy. We all understand all of this.

To answer your question, I would like to advice the US simply to have a reset with the Whole World, so that the reset was general!

This is tough talk. He is dealing with the whole issue of Unipolarism, the main old issue of the Empire of Envy, not allowing any state in the World to have its own prosperity, its own rules, its own culture, its own economy, its own and rightful ressources, and regarding any state, that would attempt that, to be an offence to the Empire and therefore needs to be slain to the ground.

Then we could gather together our commitment to the UN Charter and the principles embodied in it including the non-interference with internal affairs, the respect for territorial integrity, the right for peoples self determination and the right for people to choose their own future without interference from outside.

Question two. At the Munich Conference at 2007 president Putin said to the West: You need us more than we need you. Is that still Russia's position?

Ideally we still need each other to face the challenges and threats.

If we read between the lines here, he is talking about international islamicist terrorism. And here he is being diplomatic again. A non diplomatic statement without velvet gloves would have been: Neither we nor the people of the Levantine or the people of Europe need to coorporate with those states that have created this terrorism, which would be the USA, Israel and the AngloZionists, the UK, Saudi Arabia and its cucksucking Emirates - and Turkey. And if we go back to the Libyan war, this would include France as well. So here we have the global terror-axis-of-evil. Lavrov didn't say that, but his boss, Putin, has stated something similar to that in the recent years. Remember again, that Russia has chosen to play by the book of international treaties and written-down rules of behaviour for states, which its hypocratic opponents are violating every time, they have a chance. Confront your enimy, don't become your enimy.

Reality is different (than what is said about it). The West comes to us for help much more often, than we come to the West. As a response to Western sanctions, we are striving now to be self sufficient and promote import substitutions.

We are not trying to cut ourselves off from the World, we are ready for coorporation as long as it is based on equality.

Meaning: the West will not be allowed to use the Ukraine as a stepping stone for Russia itself. May we remind ourselves of the history of the last 25 years. Since the Fall of the Wall and the Sovjet Union, the West – that is the USA and the banking cartels of Wall Street – has strived to redefine the Russian de-sovjetizedculture and deprive the Russian people their right to self-redefinition. This started with the era of vodka-addict and red nosed clown Boris Jeltsin. As former top investment banker, Mads Palsvig, brilliantly pointed out at his speech in Copenhagen jan. 26th, that the Western banksters and their puppet politicians in and outside Russia managed to make a perversion coup of the Russian constitution, forbidding Bank of Russia to buy bonds in Russian rubles! It is unheard-of monetarian imperialism that a sovereign country by its own constitution is not allowed to use its own currency! There is apparently a Fifth Column of Western infiltrators embedded deeply into Russian central banking system. In the years after the CIA-Jeltsin era, we saw a Russia still too weak to oppose the West and claim real sovereignty. Only when Vladimir Putin kicked the butt on Jeltsin, change started to happen. We also saw some severe butt-kicking on greedy oligarks and the emancipation of Russian oil- and gas companies from Western grip. Till then they had stolen all Russian oil without paying for it.

I am a banker. I would know.

So, apparently the capturing of the Russian 'national' bank – not unsurprisingly nothing like national but a Rothschild globalist vehicle like any other central bank in the world (including the Danish Nationalbanken) – is still continuing. Mr. Putin has tried several times to nationalize it, but the corrupt elements of the Duma has prevented it.

In that sense, the Ukraine take-over is a variation of the colored revolutions strategy of destabilisation and balkanisation (a Kissinger motto). A destabilised country is an easy drive-through for the Empire. When a country is eaten up from inside by internal ethnic, political, ideological conflicts, the tanksters and the banksters just roll in and through.

But both in the Ukraine and in Syria, Russia has been able to draw a line in the soil and the sand making a mockery of the Obama rhetoric using the same vocabularies. And the recent speech for Sergey Lavrov, blackout'ed and ignored by the Corporate Fascist Media of the entire West, points it out: No more business as usual.

Any state, super state, state system, organisation, federation, ideology, strategy ... whatever, that is unable to adapt to reality, has written its own death sentence and digged its own grave. Requiem Aeternam, may it rest in peace.

Klimaløgnen, bakspejlet og forruden

In English

af morton_h, the blogger

Historien om en politiseret videnskab
I 1988 kom meddelelsen: nu ville man løse klimaforandringernes gåde. Det var før, IPCC (FN's klimapanel) blev dannet. Naturlige klimaforandringer var og er og vil altid være af afgørende betydning for vores livsbetingelser, så det var tilsyneladende et vigtigt tiltag. Men da de første meldinger kom ud om agendaen, var denne allerede afsporet, da man annoncerede, at det kom til at dreje sig om menneskeskabt klimaforandring og dermed udelukkelsen af naturlig klimaforandring.

Det undrede en del forskere, for forskerverdenen var ved at blive klar over, at der i jordens historie havde fundet en række afgørende og til tider voldsomme klimaforandringer sted. Studier i bla. iskerner, havbundssedimenter og dendro-kronologi var begyndt at tale sammen og bekræfte hinanden eller spille op mod hinanden, Der var en livlig og produktiv/konstruktiv debat. I 80'erne trådte imidlertid en helt anden og ikke særlig videnskabelig agenda ind og blandede sig: politik. Og denne agenda førte sig frem på en så aggressiv måde, at den i løbet af et årti fuldstændig overtog arenaen.

Det forlød i årtiet før og omkring årtusindskiftet fra politisk hold, at debatten nu var omme, at det hele nu var afklaret, videnskaben var nu fuldstændig enige, at der var konsensus. Men problemet dengang og i dag er et meget markant problem: at debatten først lige er startet, at intet er afklaret, og at videnskaben er dybt uenig med sig selv. Videnskaben havde for 30 år siden og har i dag først lige taget hul på undersøgelsen og forståelsen af komplekset. Videnskaben afviste ikke, at mennesker havde en eller anden form for indflydelse på klimaet, men den forcerede og totalitære konsensus, der lige pludselig var opstået, var der på ingen måde tale om.

Emnet er temmelig uhåndterbart for folk, der ikke har skaffet sig en minimal indsigt i, hvad der skaber et så stort fænomen som klima. Vi kan godt forstå, at mennesker, der befinder sig i et lille lokale, hvor der sidder en ryger i det ene hjørne, en person med dårlig mave, der konstant fiser i det andet, en pande, der brænder på i det tredje og vinduer, der ikke kan åbnes i det fjerde, kan skabe et dårligt indeklima. Vi kan til nød forstå omfanget af smog og forurening i bymiljøer, da de er en slags afgrænsede rum, og da vi kan mærke problemet direkte. Men når det kommer til noget så gigantisk som et globalt klima, hvor aktørerne er verdenshave, umådelige tundraer, enorme regneskove og ufattelige vulkaner, så mister vi overblikket. Og helt, HELT galt går det, når man er nødt til at overveje jordens klima i en solar eller kosmisk sammenhæng.

Pengemændene
Midt dette spegede forståelsesfelt ankom der folk med temmelig mange penge i baglommen, som bestemt ikke var bange for at bruge dem. Der blev foretaget store investeringer. Videnskaben blev grundlæggende købt til at frembringe resultater og udsagn, der kunne støtte et i forvejen tilrettelagt facit: at det primært var mennesker, der styrede kosmos og klimaet! Et fuldstændig utroligt udsagn, hvis man tænker over det (det gør man sjældent)! Solsystemet blev parkeret i et kryptiseret og dermed irrelevant felt. De Forenede Nationers Konvent for Klimaforandring, der gik forud for IPCC, fremlagde deres plan: at nedsætte forskningsudvalg til studiet af menneskeskabt klima. Exit kosmos, exit naturen.

Der skete et meget smart og meget betændt skred. Folk, der tillod sig at fremføre det herefter ikke-politisk korrekte synspunkt, at der måske kunneog endog måske burde stilles spørgsmålstegn ved menneskers hovedansvar for det globale klima, blev nu udstillet som miljøsvin. Disse udsagn kom pludselig ud af munden på folk, som før havde fordømt al tale om miljø og forurening. Der opstod en helt særlig og underlig form for forvirring, hvor det hele flippede 180 grader rundt. Samtidig blev miljø og forurening udvasket af debatten og nu talte man stort set udelukkende om: klima. Mens man talte om klima, talte man i øvrigt vældig meget om emotionelle og moralske koncepter som skyld, skam, gæld og korrekthed. Den vågne lytter og læser vil måske her bemærke et mønster, der er set en hel del gange i historien. 'Styresystemet' indfandt sig. Videnskab var med et behændigt magisk kunstgreb blevet til religion, viden var blevet skyllet ud af karret, og tro var hældt i. Tro er mangel på viden og hengivelse til troens vakuum.

Indholdet af CO2 i atmosfæren er 0.3% af jordens atmosfære. I menneskets industrialiseringsperiode har vi øget koncentration med 80-90 milliontedele. Der er så forskere, der har tilladt sig at spørge, om dette er signifikant eller som hævdet oven i købet katastrofalt, men deres forsigtige spørgsmål blev kørt over med buldozerstyrke af IPCC, der også hævdede, at C02-indholdet i atmosfæren før industrialiseringen havde været stabilt i 100.000'er af år.

Konsensus - hvilket herligt ord! 
Nu er det bare sådan, at videnskab overhovedet ikke handler om konsensus. Videnskab er ikke demokratisk, det er ikke flertalsbestemt, der handler ikke om at udradere forskelle og nuancer. Det handler NETOP om fuld respekt for tvivl, forskelle, uløste problemer og nuancer. Videnskab handler om nysgerrighed. Jo flere, jo mere, jo bedre. Det er politik og religion, der handler om den slags. Videnskab handler om kritisk tænkning, og ordet konsensus er totalt meningsløst i den forbindelse.

IPCC, og det må man give dem, havde hidkaldt et enormt panel af videnskabsfolk, der beskæftigede sig med et kæmpe felt af emner, der hidrører klima. Men når man læser deres rapporter, er der uhyre lidt konsensus. Konsensus optræder derimod pludselig i de opsummeringer, der præsenteres for politikere og beslutningstagere, og som er tilrettelagt af bureaukrater. Her fremgår der, hvad der bør læses af dette, hvad der bør konkluderes og ekstraheres af dette - og hvad der derfor bør besluttes på baggrund af dette! Her sker det betændte skred. Det viste oven i købet før den seneste rapport, at de havde skrevet deres politiker-synopsis måneder før rapporten kom, og derefter forlangte, at rapporten skulle rettes ind efter den!

Denne form for præfabrikeret konsensus er et Agenda 21-koncept. Det kan anbefales at studere Agenda 21 og PolitiskKorrekthed. Uden en basalt stykke hjemmearbejde er det faktisk svært at fatte, hvad der foregår. NGO'ere spiller også en betydningsfuld rolle i dette mega-spinn. Agenda 21 er et meget omfattende og meget velforberedt stykke social-mental-ideologisk ingeniørkunst.

Mennesker sender hvert år 5.5 gigaton CO2 ind i atmosfæren. Det lyder som meget, men det skal sættes i forhold til, at jordoverfladen i sig selv leverer 1.500 gigaton CO2 hvert år, at atmosfæren i sig selv er der 750 gigaton CO2, at planteverdenen producerer 610 gigaton CO2, at havene lagrer 38.000 gigaton CO2, og at hav-sedimenterne gemmer omkring 100.000.000 !! gigaton CO2. Hvordan er så meget CO2 havnet der? Det skyldes, at vores tidsalder er unormal kold i forhold til tidligere perioder i jordens historie. Indholdet af CO2 i luften har været 10 gange så høj i perioder (Zenosoisk, Mesosoisk), hvor planteliv har været overvældende frodigt på jorden, hvilket studier af planter og deres segmenterede efterladenskaber har vist.

Der findes ekstremt detaljeret data for atmosfærens sammensætning for de sidste 200 år. Disse data er dokumenteret i solid pier-reviewed litteratur, der er fuldt tilgængelig. Da Al Gore som repræsentant for 'agendaen' kørte sit show 'Inconvenient Truth', blev ALLE disse data udelukket. Det førte bla. til en omfattende protest og et dokument med underskrift fra 31.000 videnskabsfolk for misbrug og forfalskning af videnskabelig data - en 'ubelejlig sandhed', der returnerede som en boomerang. Men ingen opdagede det, for medierne opsugede og kvalte historien. Medierne var medskyldige qua deres ejerskab. De samme, der 'ejer' videnskaben, 'ejer' medierne.

ClimateGate
Så kom hele affæren, altså det store læk i to omgange bestående af 1000vis af emails med rod i en kreds af forskere fra East Anglia University i England, der bekræftede, at data blev forvredet og videnskabsfolk og forskning blev manipuleret. Udsagnet om, at temperaturen i løbet af 10 år var steget på en måde, der var unik i 1000'er af år, afslørede en særdeles selektiv brug af data, der ikke er forenlig med egentlig videnskab.

Temperaturmålinger baserer sig på tre faktorer:

• jordbaserede målinger, meteorologiske stationer, lufthavne
• vejrballoner
• satteliter

De jordbaserede målinger viser en stigende temperatur over ca. 30 år. Sattelitmålingerne, der regnes for de mest præcise, viser ingen stigning. Derimod viser de en let afkøling i de sidste 10 år. Det amerikanske kontinent har fx. haft usædvanlig hårde vintre de sidste par år.

IPCC, klimapanelet, bygger deres udsagn om præ-industrielle målinger udelukkende på iskerneboringer og meget lidt på dendrokronologi og havbundssedimenter, og så bygger de ligeledes for størstedelens vedkommende på jordbaserede målinger efter industrialiseringen. Disse målinger har det hovedproblem, at de er udsat for mange former for forurening, især fra de urbane sites.

De ubelejligt lækkede mails fra East Anglia-universitetet viser en bevidst bestræbelse på at skjule, at klimaet ikke samarbejdede med forudsigelserne, nemlig at kurven ville stige katastrofalt, og at Dommedag herefter var i kikkerten. Landskabet teede sig ikke ifølge kortet. Alle forudsigelserne og fremdateringerne langt ind i det 21. århundrede baserede sig på, at denne kurve holdt. Men det gjorde den ikke. Der var imidlertid allerede truffet tunge politiske beslutninger, der var udskrevet skatter og afgifter, der var skabt job og karrierer. Toget var kørt og havde sin egen inerti. Det ville nu være et stort prestigetab at rette teorier og udsagn ind efter virkeligheden og matche landkortet med landskabet. Ja endnu værre end det. Det ville være en afsløring af, at man havde løjet og manipuleret med videnskaben, hvilket er en seriøs forbrydelse, der i alle de vestlige samfund regnes for strafbart. I mail'ene diskuterede gruppen af forskere fra East Anglia, hvordan de via statistik kunne skjule deres fejlberegninger. Eller deres prædefinerede resultater, for det er svært at sige helt nøjagtig, om det var ægget eller hønen, der først ankom her.

Især en person ved navn Phil Jones, der var en af de ledende klimaforskere ved East Anglia, og som forsynede IPCC med det meste af deres materiale, skinner igennem her. Uafhængige forskere, der ikke var under denne Phil Jones' opsyn og kontrol, havde i årevis efterlyst de rå data, som han og hans kreds baserede deres konklusioner på. Men forgæves, for de blev aldrig lagt frem. I universitetets interne mail diskuteredes der direkte, hvordan man kunne undgå loven om aktindsigt (Freedom of Information Act), og at andre forskere fik adgang til at se de rå data. Phil Jones sagde direkte i et interview: 'Hvorfor skulle jeg give mine data videre til nogen, der bare er ude på at modbevise, at jeg har ret?' Jamen er det ikke det, som hele begrebet 'pier review' og videnskabens hæderlighedskriterie går ud på?

Hele historien er pinlig for videnskaben. Folk, der det ene øjeblik hyler op om pier reviewing, når det stiver deres autoritet af, er, når det kommet til stykket, hunderædde for at blive pier reviewed. Og her bliver det for alvor pinligt: da Phil Jones og co. endelig var nødt til at slippe deres data, var disse data sørme forsvundet!

Vi kunne gå ud af strengen med alle de truede videnskabsfolk, alle lederne af afdelinger for klimaforskning, der blev fyret for at udtrykke tvivl, mere om de betændte mekanismer i akademia, men det er simpelthen for sørgeligt.

Hvor blev substansen af?
Der er dog et underligt fænomen i hele debatten, som vi er nødt til at observere. Når nogen, der bekymrer sig seriøst om sagen, forsøger at fremlægge noget, der har substans, altså noget der har at gøre med egentlig viden og facts, så sker der noget mærkeligt. Propagandisterne for menneskeskabt klima undgår fuldstændig at diskutere substans. De kører alle mulige forlorne argumenter frem om, at kritikerne er 'betalt af olieindustrien', at der 'er en konspiration', at de er 'mentalforstyrrede fantaster'. Al Gore har kaldt dem for 'en form for racister', han trak politisk-korrektheds-kortet. Altså alle de klassiske logiske fejlslutninger med ad Hominem som deres favorit. Dagbladet Informations klimapropagandist, Jørgen Steen Nielsen, sagde, da det andet store læk (these people don't get it, do they?) fra East Anglia slap ud, at 'modstanderne er meget velorganiserede i deres propaganda'. Han kalder dem for 'klimafornægtere' og andre politisk korrekte skældsord beregnet på at nedgøre dem, men substans tales der aldrig om. Den ene logiske fejlslutning efter den anden flyver gennem luften. Da statistikeren Bjørn Lomborg lagde sine omhyggelige og meget omfattende beregninger frem, blev der aldrig talt substans, for det turde især den politisk korrektheds-inficerede venstrefløj ikke. Man dæmoniserede og latterliggjorde ham for herved at undgå substansen, for 'fløjen' havde hverken brains eller nosser til andet. Det endte i den mest ondsindede form for populisme og lede rygklapperi, hvor man kunne høre den danske intelligentsia sidde og fyre selvfede sarkasmer af over deres rødvin. Lomborg blev syndebuk og blev oven i købet anklaget formelt for 'videnskabelig uvederhæftighed'. Da man måtte tilbagekalde anklagen, der i sig selv var uvederhæftig, var man til og med så feje, at man ikke gav ham ordentlig oprejsning, men lod en tvivl hænge.

Der fremføres, at der kommer 200 millioner dollar om året fra olieindustrien som støtte til klimaforskning. Fair nok, det giver grund til at kigge nærmere på, om forskningen holder sig til emnet. Det beviser ikke noget, men det siger, at man skal holde øje med evt. bias. Hvad derimod ikkeregnes for bias er, at der hvert år ankommer 30 milliarder fra regeringers side til klimaforskning (amerikanske tal, globalt er det langt større) regnes derimod ikke for årsag til at lede efter en agenda!? Og politikere har ellers rigeligt af den slags. Hvornår var det, at intelligente mennesker holdt op med at tænke?

Wonderful Copenhagen
16.000 delegerede fløj til den skønne stad i den lille stat, hvor der iflg. Shakespeare er noget galt. De ankom på 1. klasse og i private jetfly, tømte hele nationen for limousiner og kaviar. Og som en del af standarden i konceptet kogte asfalten også, og gadens parlament inklusive helt tilfældige forbipasserende blev kørt i fedtefade til det lokale Guantanamo i Valby. NSA tappede ind til alt, de kunne komme i nærheden af, ved vi nu. Hele sagen var og er så dybt politiseret, at det er til at brække sig over, og man kunne ønske sig et politisk detox, en ideologisk kold tyrker og så komme tilbage til egentlig videnskab. Global opvarmning, whatever that is, er i dag en kuppet videnskab.

CO2-handel er nu en derivat-industri - en afledt industri. Det er dybt lænket sammen med 'subprime-rente-industrien'. Den globale opvarmning er et finansindustrielt foretagende, en investering. De spytter en del af deres uendelige milliarder i handlen og høster det mangedobbelte. Glemte vi at sige, at de i øvrigt selv trykker deres milliarder (kvantiseret udjævning)? Den dag, de bliver afsløret, er de forsvundet fra jordens overflade og i færd med at fabrikere et nyt nummer. Mangel på vand, for eksempel, og det er allerede på vej. De ved, at de ikke bliver straffet, for de er 'too big to be prosecuted', ligesom bankerne er 'too big to fail'. CO2-predatorerne har skabt et marked, hvor man har skyld og gæld, hvis man rammer et vist loft. De har placeret sig som en gigantisk mellemhandler, der hiver 'grønne afgifter' ud af dette kunstigt påførte handelsfelt. Altså finansindustrien og bankernes hovedindtægt: pengeoverførsel. For hver lille overførsel hældes der noget over i spanden, der lige om lidt er et ... ocean.

Al Gore og co. har ligesom sub-prime-rentelåns-industrien skabt en malkemaskine, som ligesom denne industri ikke producerer noget som helst andet, end hvad en rutineret tryllekunstner producerer på scenen: illusion og forbløffelse. Konceptet er parasitisk. Finansindustri producerer intet, men fodrer sig på alle andre, der producerer noget. Det er en udspekuleret industriel cancer, en parasit, en vampyr. Disse folk bliver ufatteligt rige, men den klimaforandring, som de ævler om, finder ikke sted, for - og det er en af de aldrig omdiskuterede facts - CO2 skaber ikke klimaforandring. Klimaforandring og stigende temperatur skaber som bivirkning højere CO2-indhold i luften. Al Gore byttede med vilje rundt på kurverne, uden hvilket skyldkomplekset ikke ville kunne etableres.

Det 'stabile' klima
Udsagnet om, at klimaet har været bestandigt, men så lige pludselig har forandret sig - pga. mennesker - kan meget nemt afvises, helt kategorisk! Hvis man gerne vil se et eksempel på naturlig global opvarmning, så vil vi foreslå folk at studere det abrupte skift der skete, da den sidste istid ophørte. Her kan man saftsuseme tale om global opvarmning! I den tidlige middelalder er der endog så varmt i Europa, at man kan dyrke vin helt op til den skotske grænse. Et par hundrede år senere ser vi reminiscenser af istiden kaldet 'den lille istid', hvor mennesker spadserer over den Engelske Kanal. Den kæmpe CO2-prut, der blev spyet ud af Hekla for et par år siden, og som standsede flytrafikken i hele Nordeuropa, leverede mere CO2 end hele klodens samlede industri gør på 10 år! Set i lyset af disse benhårde facts, må man konstatere, at begrebet 'klimafornægtelse', som propagandisterne strør om sig med, får en ganske selvmåls-agtig betydning.

Slutningen af istiden viser voldsomme fluktuationer i temperatur. Den kunne stige med hele 15 grader i løbet af blot tre år, for så at falde igen, og stige igen, og falde, osv. Og det var næppe, fordi der sad en stak hulemænd nede i Midtitalien og stegte vildsvin over åben ild, mens de pruttede og bøvsede. Naturen er voldsom. Ankomsten af istiderne har været lige så abrupt. Iskerneboringerne på Grønland viser, at alle istider i de forløbne 250.000 år er ankommet i løbet af minimum 20 år, og nogle gange i løbet af tre år! Der findes endog eksempler på, at store dyr som fx. mammutter er blevet lynfrosset. Deres kroppe er fanget i bevægelse, de er ikke bare faldet om af alderdom. Nogle af dem står stadig op med mad i munden! Hvis man fryser langsomt, sker der celleforandringer og fordærv, men disse kroppe er så friske, at selv hundene æder dem, hvis de bliver fodret med dem. De blev simpelthen overrasket af en pludselig overisning kombineret med heftig vulkansk aktivitet *2. Varme og kulde har en nøje sammenhæng. Videnskaben paleo-klimatologi viser igen-og-igen-og-igen, at jordens klima har været ekstremt dynamisk. I de seneste 2.5 millioner år har jorden skiftet fra en næsten fuld overisning til et beboeligt klima omkring 40 gange. Vi gentager lige igen: 40 gange!

Vulkansk aktivitet på jorden er anerkendt af videnskaben i sit fulde omfang. Der findes et antal, ca. 20 såkaldte 'super-vulkaner' spredt over jorden. Hvis blot en af disse gik af, ville der opstå en stor istid i løbet af et par måneder. Altså vulkansk aktivitet, støv, lava, opvarmning ville dække for solen, og en istid ville opstå omgående. Endnu en grund til at ryste på hovedet over disse kommercielle fantasterier om CO2 og global opvarmning. Det forholder sig 100% stik modsat!

Aktiviteten af solpletter er i dag særdeles lav. At tale om, at solen ingen betydning har jordens klima, er så useriøst og junk-videnskabeligt, så det vil vi simpelthen se bort fra. Der findes et nøje link til aktiviteter på solen, og hvad der sker på jorden. Et istids-scenarie er langt mere sandsynligt end en varmeperiode. Og ingen af disse har noget med menneskets aktiviteter at gøre. Det skulle da lige være summen af de geo-ingeneering-projekter, vejrmodificering, som den samme klike, der har udbasuneret klimaløgnen, har gang i, og som trækker sære striber over himlen i disse dage fyldt med barium, strontium og alluminium. Arrangørerne af denne særlige form for bevidst menneskeskabt klima taler meget nødigt om det.

Der findes mange misforståelser om, hvad en istid er, og hvad der skaber den slags. De fleste tror, at det er noget med, at det blot er skidehamrende koldt. Det passer ikke. Der skal kun være omkring fem grader koldere i gennemsnit, før foråret bliver længere og efteråret kortere og der sker en opbygning af is. Der vil komme mere nedbør om vinteren, og den vil efterhånden blive liggende. Det katastrofale vil bla. bestå i, at landbruget ikke kan få frø i jorden om foråret, og at kulden sætter ind, før de kan nå at høste.

Set tilbage i civilisationens historie, har disse mini-istider, der sidste gang varede ca. 125 år, været ensbetydende med en civilisations undergang. Romerriget faldt ved sådan en mini-istid. Djengis Khan rykkede sig løs i en sådan tid. Sumer faldt sammen i sådan en tid. Hvad er det lige for et imperium, der falder sammen denne gang?

Hvor blev miljøet af?
Simultant med dette besynderlige røgslør, flyder verden med seriøse miljøproblemer. Floderne flyder med gift og lort. Luften er overfyldt med irrelevant stads. De krige i Mellemøsten, som stormagterne iværksætter, medfører store landområder, der flyder med afberiget uran (og nej, det kan man ikke høre om i fjernsynet...). Den mad vi spiser, indeholder tonsvis af irrelevante produkter fra den petrokemiske industri. Og hvad tales der om? Klima, CO2-forgiftning, global opvarmning, skyld, skam, gæld, afgifter, 'carbon-trade'. Det er blevet til en kæmpe afledningsmanøvre. Man sætter ikke så stort en spin-projekt i værk, uden at det er en flerstrenget manøvre. Og miljøbevægelserne opdagede ikke, at de blev forført. De omproriterede straks klimaforandring til deres førsteprioritet. Hvor smart var det ikke? Hvor belejligt var det ikke? Miljøbevægelserne lod sig villigt korrumpere og afvæbne. Exit miljødebat.

Hvad der er uhyre sørgeligt er, at emnet naturlig klimaforandring, som i hele menneskehedens historie har betydet ... ALT! for vores liv som mennesker på jorden, nu helt er forsvundet fra synsfeltet, så bliver vi totalt hjælpeløse, når og hvis den optræder. Eller rettere: ikke hvis, men når. Et bud vil være, at hvis trenden går en helt anden vej, og en ny istid starter, så vil industrialisterne begynde at ævle om, at det skyldes 'global opvarmning', og der vil fremkomme de sygeste pseudologikker til at bortforklarede. Faktisk er de allerede startet, tag en dyb indånding.

Hvis man skal beskrive en tilbageskrivning af livsbetingelserne for folk i Nordeuropa, Nordamerika, det meste af det nordlige Asien til for 13.000 år siden, så er den nærmeste sammenligning: Antarktis omkring Sydpolen. Altså tag den jordoverflade, du ser i dag med byer, træer, vandløb, skove og marker dækket af et islag på halvanden kilometer! I løbet af ca. 1000 år, som er lig intet i geologisk historie, var dette islag på den nordlige halvkugle fuldstændig forsvundet. Tal venligst om global opvarmning her!

Videnskaben er på ingen måde, som politikerne stupidt og arrogant hævder, enige om, hvad der skabte disse voldsomme klimaforandringer. Udfordring: hvis du eller nogen tilhører den gruppe, der har trukket den hord af mennesker med sig, der bekender sig til klimareligionen, så hiv 2-3 måneder ud af dit liv til seriøst og fordomsfrit at studere, hvad videnskaben har fundet ud af i de sidste 30 år om jordens klima, og lad os derefter høre, hvor selvsikre og dogmesikre, du eller de er. Det vil vise sig, at problemstillingen er langt mere kompleks, end mainstream-medierne har fremlagt det.

Ovenstående tager sit udgangspunkt i et interview med Stephen Thomas fra RealitySandwich.com og Randall Carlson *1:
ClimateChangeInterview_01
ClimateChangeInterview_02
ClimateChangeInterview_03
ClimateChangeInterview_04

*1
Undertegnede blogger er personlig elev af Randall Carlson.
Jeg har omhyggeligt valgt ham pga. af hans enorme og ubestikkelige viden om det, han udtaler sig om. Et andet godt bud vil være at lytte til Robert Felix. Begge 'renegate'-forskere er i øvrigt arkitekter. Undertegnede blogger har selv arbejdet for arkitektfirmaer som CAD-tegner. Husk i den forbindelse ikke at falde i religionsgrøften på den anden side af vejen. Følg sporene, følg linkene, krydstjek, verificér, tænk-tænk-tænk! Du vil finde masser af henvisninger her til de tunge drenge indenfor seriøs klimaforskning.

*2
Undertegnede blogger har som flash-designer haft et to-årigt professionelt samarbejde med Center for Is & Klima på Niels Bohr Instituttet, hvor jeg har programmeret og visualiseret det omfattende videns-site isarkiv.dk i samarbejde med især en yngre forsker og centerkoordinator på afdelingen og daværende Dansk Polarcenter. Da agendaen med global opvarmning ankom, spurgte jeg direkte, hvad Niels Bohr Instituttets holdning var, og de svarede: 'Vi ønsker ikke at udtale os. Vi laver forskning, ikke politik, og vi ønsker ikke, at vores udtalelser bliver misbrugt'.

Klima - hedder det ikke miljø? 
Facts om global opvarmning 

PS! en strøtanke:
Mens alle er afledt at tanken om global opvarmning, er der faktisk en ny istid på trapperne. Hvad betyder den slags for indtjeningen hos olieselskaberne?
Desværre er det for disse, som manden der tissede i bukserne for at holde varmen om vinteren: først blev det dejlig varmt, og siden blev det temmelig koldt ...