Climate Change Alarmists Leading the World Toward Global Governance

Climate Change Alarmists Leading the World Toward Global Governance















Climate change alarmists are hard at work, pushing their agenda of
man-made global warming which ultimately leads to global carbon taxing
through the governance of the UN.

Daniel Sarewitz, professor of science and society and co-director of the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University, asserts that:


<blockquote class="tr_bq">There is not any serious debate about
whether anthropogenic climate change is happening. Scientists are
certain about that, and it is unfortunate that the national debate is
lagging so far behind.</blockquote>The move toward convincing the
general public that man-made CO2 is responsible for global warming
partially stems from a study from 2000 which was co-authored by James
Hansen, a prominent eco-fascist. Hansen’s team admits that, "rapid
warming in recent decades has been driven mainly by non-CO2 greenhouse
gases . . . not by the products of fossil fuel burning, CO2 and
aerosols.” And then admonishes that the method of controlling emissions
output should “focus on air pollution has practical benefits that unite
the interests of developed and developing countries. However,
assessment of ongoing and future climate change requires
composition-specific long-term global monitoring of aerosol
properties.”

As Hansen states that global warming is not man-made, he still desires
to see global governance over emissions regulation and carbon taxation
mandated by international law to reduce this imaginary problem.

The debate over climate change originated with the 2007 report of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
The IPCC emphatically concluded without empirical scientific data, but
rather projected conjecture used to create computer models that
claimed human activity was the sole cause of the earth’s rising
temperature.

The IPCC is concerned about the world’s governments not cutting carbon
emmissions enough to reduce the CO2 output into the atmosphere.

John Reilly, co-director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s (MIT) Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change and
an expert on climate economic models believes this is the crux of the
problem. Reilly blames the governments and their leaders for failing to
take the appropriate steps to reduce emissions; in particular China
and the US.

He claims that the European Union has rising greenhouse emissions that they have failed to deal with “properly”.

In 2009, Reilly and colleges from MIT collaborated with researchers from
Penn State, the Marine Biological Institute in Massachusetts and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. They decided to create computer
models for climate change projections with the same major flaw that the
IPCC made in their models; they did not account for the erratic weather
patterns indicative to earth.

Their findings were published,
which claimed that large amounts of greenhouse gases would cause the
median global temperature to rise over 5 degrees Celsius by 2100. This
was a dramatic difference from the IPCC’s assertion that the rise in
global temperature would be 3.5 degrees Celsius.

The study also falsely asserted that:

• The Arctic would warm up 3 times as predicted by the IPCC
  
• Severe weather patterns would emerge
  
• Ocean levels would rise dramatically
  
• The oceans would endure acidification
  

Reilly proudly touted:
<blockquote class="tr_bq">The
IPCC suite of scenarios provide … a bit too rosy of a picture. Our study
shows that without action, there is virtually no chance that we won’t
enter very dangerous territory.</blockquote>This year, MIT conducted another “projection”
that warned if countries did not achieve emissions cuts, as they
promised the UN, then the world’s temperature would rise by over 4
degrees.

Quite a scare tactic.

John Christy ,
atmospheric scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, IPCC
author in 2001 and a well-known skeptic of human-caused climate
change, said: <blockquote class="tr_bq">I’m surprised there are
those who think the IPCC is too conservative. I think the simple
evidence is very clear—the IPCC models overestimate the warming of the
climate system.</blockquote>The IPCC has not commented on their erroneous climate change models.

The IPCC’s task was not to create accurate predictions about how the
earth would be affected by man’s influence on the biosphere. Their
purpose was to engage the world’s governments in a game of control and
relinquish of power to the UN over an assumption that could not be
verified.

Or so they thought.

Through the use of geo-engineering (chemtrails) governments have been dumping massive amounts of pollutants into
the upper atmosphere that has caused the thunderclouds to trap heat
which has had a dramatic effect on the surface temperature.

After spending more than a decade observing the glaciers in Greenland, scientists have concluded that they are not melting with the veracity that climate change alarmists would have us believe.

This means that the warning of several feet of rising seas that was conveyed by Al Gore in his film An Inconvenient Truth, will actually only be a rise by inches.

According to a study published in the journal Nature, plants are flowering up to 8 times faster than were projected. The authors of the study admit that their previous summations were incorrect and based on erroneous information provided by the IPCC.

Data from NASA satellite, Terra, showed that the earth is naturally expelling heat out
into space from the upper atmosphere. This cracks the crux of the
climate change alarmist’s theory that the earth’s temperatures are
rising because the heat is trapped.

However, to counter this natural phenomenon, the excessive use of
chemtrails has been deployed by governments of industrialized nations to
“cause the problem” they claim is the fault of man’s CO2 emission.

The UN’s agenda, through the IPCC, globalist colleges like MIT and Penn
State, and those scientists that have been bought off to assist in
peddling false data as empirical scientific research are scaring both
world leaders and the general public into buying their climate change
nightmare for the purpose of usurping international control over
sovereign nations.

So far, unfortunately, they have been quite successful.






Source:-
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/06/climate-change-alarmists-leading-world.html