While the covert aerosol program has apparently failed to warm the climate to fit the failed IPCC models the corrupt political media has changed the conversation from “warming” to the nebulous and Orwellian label. “climate change”.
Despite the failure to warm the atmosphere to fit the IPCC model projections, global aerosol deployments, combined with electromagnetic (EME) eco-weapons can create weather disasters including, hurricane intensification, droughts, floods and relocation of warm air from one region to another as eco-terrorism. Another example would relocate warm air from southern latitudes into arctic regions in order to create suitable conditions for expanded arctic navigation, oil drilling and secret space weapons strategies.
Many historical documents track the effort to deliberately warm the arctic and global climate with geoengineering projects dating back to around the time of Standard Oil in 1875 – a fact that points to the oil and energy industries as benefactors in a warmer planet. (Source)
Although these eco-weapons are having a minimal effect at producing a planetary alteration to “warm” the total energy budget, the greater danger lies in the accumulated chemical pollution that destroys the stability of the upper atmosphere then descends into the breathable air, water and soil.
A major peer-reviewed paper by four senior researchers has exposed grave errors in an earlier paper in a new and unknown journal that had claimed a 97.1% scientific consensus that Man had caused at least half the 0.7 Cº global warming since 1950.
A tweet in President Obama’s name had assumed that the earlier, flawed paper, by John Cook and others, showed 97% endorsement of the notion that climate change is dangerous:
“Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” [Emphasis added]
The new paper by the leading climatologist Dr David Legates and his colleagues, published in the respected Science and Education journal, now in its 21st year of publication, reveals that Cook had not considered whether scientists and their published papers had said climate change was “dangerous”.
The consensus Cook considered was the standard definition: that Man had caused most post-1950 warming. Even on this weaker definition the true consensus among published scientific papers is now demonstrated to be not 97.1%, as Cook had claimed, but only 0.3%.
Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate papers Cook examined explicitly stated that Man caused most of the warming since 1950. Cook himself had flagged just 64 papers as explicitly supporting that consensus, but 23 of the 64 had not in fact supported it.
This shock result comes scant weeks before the United Nations’ climate panel, the IPCC, issues its fifth five-yearly climate assessment, claiming “95% confidence” in the imagined – and, as the new paper shows, imaginary – consensus.
Source:
http://chemtrailsplanet.net/2015/10/18/scholars-debunk-global-warming-97-consensus-to-less-than-1/
Despite the failure to warm the atmosphere to fit the IPCC model projections, global aerosol deployments, combined with electromagnetic (EME) eco-weapons can create weather disasters including, hurricane intensification, droughts, floods and relocation of warm air from one region to another as eco-terrorism. Another example would relocate warm air from southern latitudes into arctic regions in order to create suitable conditions for expanded arctic navigation, oil drilling and secret space weapons strategies.
Many historical documents track the effort to deliberately warm the arctic and global climate with geoengineering projects dating back to around the time of Standard Oil in 1875 – a fact that points to the oil and energy industries as benefactors in a warmer planet. (Source)
Although these eco-weapons are having a minimal effect at producing a planetary alteration to “warm” the total energy budget, the greater danger lies in the accumulated chemical pollution that destroys the stability of the upper atmosphere then descends into the breathable air, water and soil.
A major peer-reviewed paper by four senior researchers has exposed grave errors in an earlier paper in a new and unknown journal that had claimed a 97.1% scientific consensus that Man had caused at least half the 0.7 Cº global warming since 1950.
A tweet in President Obama’s name had assumed that the earlier, flawed paper, by John Cook and others, showed 97% endorsement of the notion that climate change is dangerous:
“Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” [Emphasis added]
The new paper by the leading climatologist Dr David Legates and his colleagues, published in the respected Science and Education journal, now in its 21st year of publication, reveals that Cook had not considered whether scientists and their published papers had said climate change was “dangerous”.
The consensus Cook considered was the standard definition: that Man had caused most post-1950 warming. Even on this weaker definition the true consensus among published scientific papers is now demonstrated to be not 97.1%, as Cook had claimed, but only 0.3%.
Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate papers Cook examined explicitly stated that Man caused most of the warming since 1950. Cook himself had flagged just 64 papers as explicitly supporting that consensus, but 23 of the 64 had not in fact supported it.
This shock result comes scant weeks before the United Nations’ climate panel, the IPCC, issues its fifth five-yearly climate assessment, claiming “95% confidence” in the imagined – and, as the new paper shows, imaginary – consensus.
Source:
http://chemtrailsplanet.net/2015/10/18/scholars-debunk-global-warming-97-consensus-to-less-than-1/
No comments:
Post a Comment