Global Warming – fact or fiction – and the connection to Climate Engineering
Having investigated the current Climate Engineering programs in great detail for the last 3 years, we now believe that trials may have started as far back as 1985. Many think the programs started in earnest in the early 1990s, and have been increasing steadily in frequency, distribution and sheer volume ever since. The earliest reports from the UK seem to date to about 1997, though that is not to say they weren’t happening before then. The reality now is that any location on any given day will be under a sky consisting of mostly fake or induced clouds as a direct result of aerial spraying programs.
Even the most uninformed person on the street is now becoming aware of the mess in our skies, but because of the extraordinarily gradual introduction of these programs most seem to just accept this destruction of our weather and atmosphere as simply a normal by-product of air traffic. We have written about why that is in other articles, but this one focuses on the link to Global Warming and its re-branded name Climate Change. It is clear that the aerial spraying programs we see at the moment are what could be described as ‘in full swing’, with our weather being dominated almost entirely by trails and haze left from air traffic.
So let’s move on to the connection between the Global Warming/Climate Change (GW/CC) movement and Climate Engineering. In essence, to be able to spray ‘stuff’ into our sky there must be a really big reason. The sun and the air we breath are utterly fundamental, not only to our existence, but also to our health and enjoyment of life generally. We (the public) are not likely to agree to anything that large, risky and detrimental to our lives, unless there was a really serious and urgent reason to do so, but also not unless there were absolutely no alternative. This was identified many decades ago when the idea of Global Warming was first conceived by the Club Of Rome, an organisation of globalist billionaires:
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…”
Club of Rome, an elite think-tank working with the UN.
Read more about how the idea Global Warming was conceived here.
So this plan seems to have existed for many years, and has been a co-ordinated effort to try to create a situation whereby there was sufficient fear and concern to allow governments (which nowadays means corporations and their representative politicians) to “save us” from this perceived threat. All clever stuff, so they thought, and everything was bouncing along swimmingly, until about 6 years ago when the first climate skeptics were heard in the media (there had been much doubt before this but not widely reported) stating that the figures did not add up, and suggesting that the entire Global Warming mindset was grossly exaggerated at best, or possibly even completely fictitious at worst. Climategate was the first really widely publicised example of large numbers of people doubting the whole Global Warming story.
Look-Up.org.uk actually had no reason to doubt any of the Global Warming propaganda until late in 2013 when we attended a lecture at the Royal Society. We went there to listen for clues that might allude to current Climate Engineering programs, but by the end of the day we were utterly convinced that something very odd was going on, and that what we had just witnessed was an elaborate exercise in subterfuge by a collection of very nervous scientists. This was a total shock to us, and was one of the turning points in understanding this complex situation in much more detail.
The day is summarised here in perfect detail by the amazing Piers Corbyn of climateaction.com.
Now is probably the right time to mention that Global Warming had to be re-branded Climate Change following the IPCC’s rather embarrassing admission that surface temperatures had not warmed for 17 (now 18) years. This was hilarious for those who had been trying to warn us about this for some time. You would think that the IPCC would fess up at this point, but no.. the think tank went away and gargled some very expensive red wine and came up with a new ‘theory’: deep oceanic warming! Yes folks, the world hadn’t warmed at all for nearly 20 years, but don’t stop panicking, because the oceans were absorbing all the heat and they would, of course, release it all in a fury of vengeance a few years down the line. This is perhaps the smoking gun for us. By that we mean it is SO ludicrous it is almost conclusive evidence that what we are dealing with is not science at all, but what amounts to badly hashed together excuses made up by a bunch of increasingly desperate, so-called scientists on corporate payrolls who are being told to proclaim increasingly unbelievable information in ever-increasingly dramatic terms.
So the IPCC quickly hashed some feeble story about the oceans absorbing the heat for the last 18 years, only to unleash it on us later on, but nobody is fooled by this alarmist, last-ditch attempt to save face. We raised this point at the CEC-14 conference in Berlin and received a predictably incoherent stream of nonsense as the justification for this sudden new theory. We also took great delight in asking the room how we can have any confidence in the IPCC when they have essentially been completely wrong about all of the major factors in the warming debate for nearly 20 years.
1. No warming, firstly, despite repeated drastic warnings. All of the climate modelling to date, which predicted the current situation would be temperature rises of 2-4 Celsius, were wrong.
2. How did they suddenly discover the oceans had supposedly absorbed all that heat for so long, and why did they only just realise that recently after having to admit to no surface warming?
3. CO2 has risen 20pm (approx) in the last 20 years, and yet no warming has occurred, so how can they continue to claim that warming due to CO2, which is now the only thing the entire global climate catastrophe prediction is resting on, is even real.
4. CO2 has been shown to be being introduced into our atmosphere in massive quantities with our smokers video, and yet scientists are still relying on CO2 modelling to claim a potential climate catastrophe.
5. Weather extremes have not materialised
6. Polar ice caps have not melted
7. Sea levels have not risen significantly
The whole thing is fast falling apart, and as it does the rhetoric becomes ever more extreme as the people behind the alarmist soap opera become more desperate to keep it alive and force-feed it to the people. The entire scenario has become farcical.
During the Climate Engineering Conference 2014 we attended a lecture on the role of the oceans in the warming equations. Justifiably skeptical, we were not disappointed and were confronted with a barrage of lame and shoddy science, and assorted other feeble attempts to reason that the oceans had absorbed all the heat, and are going to release it one day with catastrophic results. When we first heard this latest workaround we were so amused we likened it to another similar attempt at misleading the public: our government seems hell-bent on convincing us that most of our children are overweight.
The following analogy came to mind though:
Govt. All our children are obese.
GPs – but on average they are no bigger than they were 20 years ago
Govt – ah, but that’s because their intestines have absorbed all the fat so you just can’t see it, and they will release all that fat, causing massive and sudden weight gain and cardiac problems, when they are teenagers.
As most parents will know this is not actually true, and only a small percentage of children are noticeably overweight. Even the mainstream media have recently had to admit that fat, and indeed being fat, is not actually harmful at all except in extreme cases, so we see yet another monumental reversal, or more accurately, undermining of and eventually admission that a widely disseminated public (govt. promoted) ‘fact‘ was completely wrong. Furthermore this was no accident at all. A recent study by Edinburgh university analysed all the scientific data at the time the first reports of fat being bad for us were created by government scientific advisers. They concluded that even the evidence at the time did not support in any way the theory that fat was bad for us, affected life expectancy, or was the provable cause of any illnesses, so we see here an example of what we can only describe as subterfuge. The reason we bring this up is so as to demonstrate that not only can governments be wrong about really big fundamental issues, we now know they can simply make stuff up on a grand scale so as to move society in a particular direction for whatever reason.
Are we there yet?
By now it should seem obvious to most that there is something going on. Even if one is not able to join all the dots, things seem suspiciously manipulated, so as to further an agenda, whether it be health, climate or any other topic that leads us to fall into line with what is convenient for the government at any particular time, so it really isn’t too much of a leap to come to the realisation that the entire Global Warming / Climate Change story has been carefully crafted to push us all into a corner, so that we accept something… the solution or the cure… Climate Engineering !
Before we summarise this article here is a rather amusing video which highlights some of the glaringly obvious problems with the alarmist stance.
Joking aside, this is a monumentally important point in our history. As we suggest in other parts of this website, we feel the climate alarmism that we are being subjected to is more than a poli-comm (political/financial) ruse to foster a multibillion dollar industry that has been built up around it, but is in fact far more sinister than that and one which we ignore at our collective peril. We have been attending Climate Engineering conferences around the UK and Europe for a couple of years now and the same consistent themes seem to be running through ALL of them and they are essentially:
If we don’t do something to reverse global warming, we face climate catastrophe and runaway warming.
Mitigation is not a viable option as it will simply slow the damage and not reverse it.
All SRM methods except A.A.I. – Atmospheric Aerosol Injection – are useless so A.A.I. is our only hope.
Despite the glaring lack of any solid evidence of this threat, either immediate or long term, the small clique of global, corporate-backed climate scientists seem hell-bent on ignoring the science and pushing ahead with ever more dramatic predictions and increasingly urgent calls for action.
Notably, at the same time we hear of climate summits failing to reach agreement, CO2 levels reaching record highs, extreme weather events becoming ever more frequent (all of which are either untrue or not at all dangerous, by the way). So why all this hysteria, I hear you ask. Why would all these people be so determined to fear-monger. The answer has taken us some time to uncover, but our attendance at the global Climate Engineering Conference in Berlin (CEC-14) in August 2014 was a true penny-drop moment. Within a couple of days of being there we started to realise what was really going on behind all this rhetoric.
Climate Emergency and Global Governance
There were repeated references to both of these terms throughout the entire event, with the pro argument for both coming from the organisers and the usual clique of scientists they are allied to, and the objections, protestations and cynicism of both of these things coming from individuals from the independent scientific community. We deal with both in more detail in other parts of the site but essentially we feel that climate emergency is being fostered deliberately though GW/CC fear-mongering, so as to lead us into what can only be described as a ‘climate emergency’. This will allow governments to either introduce a state of emergency, or introduce climate engineering – specifically A.A.I. (spraying stuff into the sky) – without trials or public approval, on the grounds that if they wait for trials or public debate we could miss our chance to save the world from the catastrophic climate chaos that they predict. It is important to clarify that they are the only people who are predicting this climate chaos and most genuine scientists do not agree with this scenario at all.
The second point is one of global governance. We heard repeatedly at CEC14 that any climate engineering programs that would be needed to save us from climate catastrophe would have to be global. We also heard the same people bang on about the problems and risks associated with setting up and managing such systems. The message was clear – some form of global governance system would be needed to oversee such a vast operation. If you accept that the current climate engineering programs are, as we claim in this website, truly global then we already have a system of infrastructure that delivers aerosols to almost every corner of the globe, so what further measures would be needed to manage such a program? Indeed we put this question to the entire audience at the CEC-14 event on the very first day after they mentioned global governance 17 times in one day.
We will post the audio from this ASAP but essentially the question was what further level of governance could be needed when we have the UN, and with all the world’s airlines essentially now merged into 3 airline alliances. The response, rather predictably, was that this was not about world government and no world government was being alluded to. The speakers also stated that the nuclear industry tried to initiate a global governance system decades ago and that it had not worked.
So, we have been here before. Just because it did not work the first time with nuclear power how does that mean that they, whoever they are, are not trying again with a new, improved ruse?
We remain very suspicious of the intentions behind the global cabal of alarmists, their determination to spray stuff into the sky to save us from a threat that most scientists do not even consider to be real.
– There is no real threat to our climate or environment other than the damage caused by current Climate Engineering programs.
– Even if such a threat were real there is a system of infrastructure more than capable of managing a global program of aerosol spraying already in place.
– Any further systems of global governance could very soon morph into a proto world government from which it would prove almost impossible to come back from, especially if the emergency situation were used to install it, as governments can act with impunity to introduce any draconian measure they see fit.
We think that exposes the deep, red flesh of what lies at the core of the global alarmist movement. I’m sure someone who specialises in investigation would also not take very long to find links between the small cabal of alarmist scientists and the globalist billionaires who seem to be the organisation behind most of what is going on related to GW/CC and CE debates.
Here is the poster we displayed at the recent Cambridge event which summarises the current situation quite well, we feel.
Further reading and notes:
The Global Warming Policy Foundation – http://www.thegwpf.org
The real science can be found at the NIPCC website – http://www.nipccreport.org/
The IPCC claims its reports are signed by hundreds of scientists. Untrue – only 6 real climate scientists apparently signed the 5th Assessment. (reference?)
Claims that climate sceptics are funded by the oil industry are ludicrous and a sign of desperation. Most anti-climate engineering activists who now realise and promote the Global Warming Hoax are what might be described as environmentally friendly people, and about as far from supporters of the oil industry as one could possibly imagine.
Royal Society members rebellion and totally skewed science / post recordings of seminars
New Scientist refuse to publish any article that casts doubt of the ‘official line’ of global warming/ climate catastrophe.
Royal Society representatives doing rounds to convince all and sundry that runaway warming will occur unless drastic measures are put in place, and surprise, surprise, the only viable method to stop warming is to spray the skies with ‘stuff’. – post John Shepherd lecture.
David Keith seminar – same message as above.
Other examples of even mainstream press starting to officially doubt Climate Change hysteria.
Other unfounded scare stories – Himalayan ice melt. Polar ice melt. Propaganda examples – Inconvenient truth.
Education indoctrination – universities – OLP (Oxford Learning Program) – schools – books – BBC
BBC endless referencing to climate change, carbon reduction, climate warming scare stories. (coffee doc)
Politician quote “those who doubt climate change should just shut up”
Prince Charles – climate sceptics headless chickens (Canadian elections psychological analysis BBC)
*sunny days seem to be rare now with fibres saturating our air on almost any given day. When we think we see a blue sky, it is often just a milky white and hazy sky. Due to the very slow change we simply have not noticed the change.