The Mainstream Media: In the Pocket of the Global Elite
However, I do not believe that man is a significant contributor to climate change, and I especially do not believe that there's anything we can do, at present, to reverse or control that change; nor do I believe we should attempt to without a surefire technique with 100% reliable results. Today, the absolute best technology and supposedly most brilliant minds in science do not possess that ability. So we probably shouldn't tamper with the only planet we've got, right?
Sorry to disappoint, but countries all over the world have been trying to "geoengineer" the global climate for years now, all the while knowing that the results of these experiments are totally unpredictable. Governments even admit in their own papers that they could actually exacerbate the problem. In a UK Parliament geoengineering document -- "The Regulation of Geoengineering" -- a memorandum from Dr. Jason Blackstock states that, "As the global risk of unabated climate change could prove far worse than the risk of geoengineering, expanded research into geoengineering as a possible recourse for limiting at least the most severe potential climate change impacts is recommended."
Hmm..."the global risk of unabated climate change could prove far worse than the risk of geoengineering (emphasis added)..."? Does that sound promising to you? Government's are never right? And their estimates are always way off! My hunch is that if they're saying unabated climate change could prove far worse than the risk of geoengineering, the truth will be quite the opposite.
All that said, the mainstream theory about Global Warming started out with some serious flaws in it. When Al Gore and the force of the global elite-owned mainstream media presented us with "An Inconvenient Truth," they wanted us all to believe that the world was just getting hotter and hotter because of all that gosh-darn CO2. But then, what about the fact that in some areas of the globe, it was getting colder? Like, way colder....like, record-breaking colder. Drudge Report headlines regularly proclaim how "Once In a Lifetime Cold Grips Ice-Bound UK" or "Ft. Lauderdale Breaks 169-year-old Cold Record." These sort of headlines are the kind of thing that make people ask questions...and the elite don't want that.
But what if we could be brainwashed into believing that those record cold temperatures were caused by global warming? What if we believed that absolutely anything weather-related was directly attributable to global warming? Then no one could again say things like,"Global Warming!? Then why has this been the coldest winter ever?" It seems this is actually the latest ploy being used by the mainstream media at the behest of the powers-that-be to pull the wool over the eyes of the sheeple (pun intended!). That way, dissenters (non-sheep) will seem like lunatics (to the sheep) for pointing out this obvious, logical flaw in the mainstream global warming argument: that global warming logically wouldn't cause global cooling.
What you and most other people out there may not know, is that there are many reports contradicting the mainstream argument that the planet is getting warmer. These other reports state that the planet may, in fact, be slightly cooling, or at the very least, the "warming" has halted (see here, here and here, and watch the following).
But if warming seems to have stopped, why is there still such a push to propagandize the masses into believing it's worsening? Maybe because there's so much money and power to be gained. And leave it to the propaganda-spewing, elite-owned New York Times to lead the charge for brainwashing. Judah Cohen, an Op-Ed contributor, posted an article on Christmas day entitled, "Bundle Up, It's Global Warming." In the article, he basically makes the claim that any temperature extreme, hot or cold, is directly caused by global warming. Sound absurd? Here's Cohen in his own words:
The earth continues to get warmer, yet it’s feeling a lot colder outside. Over the past few weeks, subzero temperatures in Poland claimed 66 lives; snow arrived in Seattle well before the winter solstice, and fell heavily enough in Minneapolis to make the roof of the Metrodome collapse; and last week blizzards closed Europe’s busiest airports in London and Frankfurt for days, stranding holiday travelers. The snow and record cold have invaded the Eastern United States, with more bad weather predicted.
All of this cold was met with perfect comic timing by the release of a World Meteorological Organization report showing that 2010 will probably be among the three warmest years on record, and 2001 through 2010 the warmest decade on record.
How can we reconcile this? The not-so-obvious short answer is that the overall warming of the atmosphere is actually creating cold-weather extremes.
Following that same line of reasoning, one could state that regardless of whether you're fat or skinny, you are that way because you eat too much. Too skinny? Too much food. Too fat? Too much food. Either way, too much food.
Does that logic work? No, there can be countless factors that cause a person to be skinny or fat. So why, then, does Cohen try to convince us of this same nonsensical line of reasoning with regard to the global climate scenario; a scenario far more complicated than the weight problems of a human being?
Simple. Because those who read the New York Times, as well as the average viewer of mainstream media, will gobble up this nonsense and take it as gospel. After all, if they say it's true, it must be. But even the statistics referenced in Cohen's piece are debatable at best, and certainly not fact. A December 5, 2010 MailOnline article entitled "What happened to the 'warmest year on record': The truth is global warming has halted" cites recent data released by the British Meteorological Office...and that data reveals the fact that, "for the past 15 years, global warming has stopped."
So who's right? Well, as they say, might makes right, and the global elite have all the resources at their disposal to sway the opinion of the general public. That means that in the eyes of the general public, global warming is our reality, and to believe otherwise is heresy. Well then I guess that makes me a heretic...
...and in more ways than one! Because I also stand against another of the global elite's plans: the genetic modification of the global food supply. GMO foods hold the key to massive amounts of profit, so there is plenty of disinformation out there, all provided by the powers-that-be. How else can the mainstream media convince the sheeple of the benefits of GMO foods? Disinformation is the key. Because if people knew the truth about GMOs (see here, here and here), that they harm us and not help us, they'd never accept them.
But the global elite are banking on the fact that, as is always the case, their might will equal right. The mainstream media has been singing the praises of genetically modified foods for years. They tell people how we can now grow foods bigger, more colorful, more tasty and more resistant to disease.
And now CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Obama Administration nominee for Surgeon General, is hopping onto the GMO bandwagon. An article on his blog states that, "Strawberries and chocolate go all too well together in fondue, cakes, and any other dessert you can imagine. Now, scientists are learning more than ever about the genetic makeup of both of these foods, and that knowledge could lead to genetically modified versions that are more nutritious and easier to grow."
As with geoengineering the climate, there's no mention of whether or not we should be tampering with such things. Should we change the genetic makeup of our foods? Maybe. Maybe one day we'll figure out how to make foods 100% more nutritious with absolutely no negative side-effects. But in the meantime, we shouldn't be eating those foods as we are today, most of the time unknowingly. Again, the analogy can be drawn to geoengineering: don't mess with the climate until we can be flawless in our execution. The climate is too precious to tamper with; we only get one. Our DNA is equally as precious, and GMO foods are proving to be DNA damaging.
Gupta's article continues: "The genome sequence for [the Criollio cacao] tree could help engineer more disease-resistant cacao, which would help local farmers in developing countries .... Similarly, the strawberry genome could lead to genetically modified fruits that would help strawberry farmers in the developing world..."
And that sounds great. But just because something sounds great, doesn't mean it is great. GMO foods are an imperfect science, as is geoengineering, and we're all the guinea pigs. Do you want to be a guinea pig?
I don't.
Be sure to read our many articles about the dangers of Genetically Modified foods.
VIEW VIDEO
Dec. 15, 2010