I realize there is a war between the so-called “climate deniers” and the ‘global climate change’ enthusiasts and that both sides are trying to defend their positions with science. I am also trying to get my head around this science and following both sides of the argument and it is a heated argument indeed.
What makes me curious is why does such a complicated argument only seem to have two sides. Already this is a red flag for me. No complex issue has only two sides. If the Empire is using an ‘either/or’, it’s black or it’s white, it’s right or it’s left, they are trying to frame the conversation and stir up oppositional debate that is a diversion from the real issues. Climate change is real or climate change is a hoax, that’s the limits of the discussion. You are for, or you are against. You are with us, or you are with the terrorists. The entire public conversation is rife with fallacies and emotional triggers on both sides.
Lord Monckton calls himself “an outsider” in climate science, though he’s been publishing on the topic since 2011. He says he has made a breakthrough, a simple arithmetic error, that will prove once and for all we have nothing to worry about climate change at all. Poof! A simple math problem in the models! We’ve been throwing money and expertise at this problem for decades based on a simple math error. Oh well. We can move on now, thank heavens. Isn’t science wonderful! He makes sure to sprinkle in some good digs for those who are sure to disagree with his refined models, those “bed wetters” and “profiteers of doom.”
What’s left out of the various infomercials-called-interviews he gives, like this one with Stefan Molyneux, is the most important part, the context. In fact, the essence, the very relevance for us average Joes and Janes.
What’s most to fear is Environmental Totalitarianism, he cries! What he leaves out is that this is what both sides want, they just have differing ways of taking us there. The real problem, he declares, is those who haven’t learned logic and critical thinking. He repeatedly insists the scientists are following party lines, then proceeds to make all the science about politics. For or against. Color inside the lines, citizen-cum-consumer.
What about the spraying campaigns, Your Lordship? When can we expect the Solar Radiation Management programs, and the Stratospheric Aerosol Injection procedures, and the other various Weather as Force Multiplier missions the military has been cooking up globally for over a decade, when might we expect those to end based on your new models? You know which ones I’m referring to, surely!
I can imagine Lord Monckton’s reply. “No, you are quite mistaken, those are only proposed projects.”
And I am Alice in Wonderland fallen into a time warp, apparently.
All the now well-documented programs the scientific community keeps saying are a conspiracy theory, while the data compiled by now hundreds of thousands of “average” folks around the globe more than suggests otherwise.
It sounds to me, your Lordship, like you might be suggesting they’ve been experimenting with our weather for decades for no good reason at all! And that maybe the major global corporations like Weathermodification, Inc., will soon be going out of business? Could it be?! Do you suppose their vast number of global clients know this yet? What about the curious spike in aluminum futures, might that have something to do with your new findings?
“Weather modification is not the same as climate engineering,” the good Lord might stammer.
What the scientists and the Empire want us to do is ignore our own sensory data. Ignore what your eyes are seeing, ignore what your ears are hearing, and stop saying anything we don’t want you to say. It’s all hoaxes and conspiracy theories, if and until we say otherwise.
As I committed in part two, I will take no man at his word, still some men I trust more than others. I especially tend to trust more the ones who repeat continually, ‘don’t listen to me, do your own research!‘ Like Dane Wiggington at Geoengineeringwatch.org. I follow-up on his claims, I’ve studied his site, clicked on some of the patent links, and listened to every one of his presentations and weekly radio shows. I do not take him at his word, but I listen and I see where it aligns with my own sense data.
What do I know, beyond what anyone tells me, beyond any guru, beyond any faith, beyond any miracles of science or gods, news reports or military propaganda?
These observations did not take any formal training in logic or critical thinking, go figure!
–the weather in my area has gotten warmer over the last five years, based on my own records, and there are more days with 40-50 degree temperature shifts within very short periods.
—winter has gotten shorter and more mild in my area, based on my own experience. The leaves are not falling off the trees as much, but rather dying while still on the branches, this is not typical here.
—the weather FEELS hotter, to my body. The thermometer reads higher temperatures consistently by 20 or 30 degrees compared to normal the last couple years, and rather than building fires in the woodstove this time of year, I have all the windows open and the fans on, and I’m still hot. Due to the fact that the thermometer corroborates my feelings, I do not think this to be the onset of menopause.
–the pond is not full as often and the creek is lower and floods the banks less often, according to the input of my two eyeballs.
–the plants are not well-adapted to these shifts or something else happening in tandem. Gardening over the last few years has become more unpredictable. Many of the plants that normally thrive this time of year look “scalded” or something, which became worse after the last rain. It seems to me the plants do not look happy. (omg, so unscientific!)
–the clouds are very different sometimes, they look different and don’t behave as the clouds of my youth (NASA brags about some of them as brilliant man-made clouds, I think they are gross, but that’s just my preference).
–there is SIGNIFICANTLY more air traffic over our rural area on certain days and in certain seasons. By significantly I mean from zero flights for many days and suddenly flights non-stop for days. This is based on auditory and sometimes visual data of my own mind-body.
–the “contrails” of some of this air traffic do not look or behave as normal contrails, they do not dissipate, rather they expand, and eventually turn the sky a milky or hazy shade of very pale blue or silvery-white, occassionally turning irridescent in spots. I have taken many photos and they look like the photos I see online that “conspiracy theorists” are calling “chemtrails.” When I respond with my direct experiences, what I see and hear above my own head, I’m often told I’m crazy and/or irrational.
They don’t “believe” in chemtrails or geo-engineering. They equate it with saying one has seen Bigfoot. Why? Because science says they do not exist. They are contrails, period, end of story. Stop being irrational!
The reason I, and many of us trying to find out the truth, become so passionate and often excessively agitated when we discuss this topic is because many scientists and loads of average folks blindly following them are asking us to ignore our own sensory data. They want us to turn a blind eye to our own knowing and believe what the scientists and media are telling us, or that science will save us, and that the truth will prevail, that we should all have faith in the scientific method.
Isn’t empirical evidence supposed to mean data gathered by one’s own senses? And yet, unless the Empire is the one dishing out such evidence it’s not really empirical evidence at all, it would seem.
Climate science sounds remarkably like religion, so it should be expected that there are those of us who will continue to address it with a certain fervor.
The Monckton-Molyneux infomercial noted above ends with these prophetic words, further cementing the “us vs them” social programming:
“It’s very difficult to get the truth out. Am I gloomy? No! Because we have the one thing they haven’t got . . .We have the truth and if we have the truth we have everything and they have nothing, and in due course the truth will assert itself as it always does.”
Molyneux replies with enthusiastic vows to do his very best and concludes, . . .to get more of the Lord’s work, visit . . .”
And I’m Alice in Wonderland again.
This week’s breadcrumbs:
Scientific American mag: geoengineering-could-turn-skies-white: “Efforts to reflect away the sun’s rays might also make the sky whiter, one of many reasons some distrust such geoengineering schemes.” By Lauren Morello, ClimateWire on June 1, 2012
Rosalind Peterson: The Chemtrail Cover-up
Geoengineering watch weekly podcast
Any physics experts out there who might help us make heads or tails of this paper?
How do we get our “experts” to speak publically about the real issues we’re facing, like a vastly growing number of us are damn sick of being treated like Guinea pigs?
This is why I will continue to say science is failing us, and I will continue to do so until I can prove otherwise.
One thought on “Science Fraud and Fantasy (part 3)”