payne1000

Paul Craig Roberts

Climate change is a controversy. What appear to be independent scientists say that the climate is warming due to greenhouse gases produced by human activity. This warming, apparently measurable, has many impacts on sea levels, and on plant, animal, sea, and bird life, as well as food supply for a heavily populated earth.

Readers, accustomed to me telling them the truth about issues on which I am competent, ask me about the climate problem. Is it real or not?

As far as I can tell the polluting corporations have sufficient think tanks and research institutes to neutralize the independent scientists. If one is not a climate expert, which I am not, one doesn’t really know. However, I have learned in my many years that an independent voice is far more reliable than a paid voice.

Over the years I have come to appreciate Dahr Jamail’s reporting. Here is his report on the situation: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/31089-imminent-collapse-of-the-antarctic-ice-shelf-and-a-new-era-in-the-arctic

Possibly climate change is occurring because of solar activity or because of activity inside the earth itself. The attention should not be on the cause but on the fact. First establish the fact, then look for the cause.

My view of this is that life depends on climate, and it doesn’t take a lot of change in one direction or the other to create problems for life. This fact makes climate change an important issue, and corporations should stop paying people to lie about it.

Climate change, if real, is clearly a much greater threat than Muslim terrorists or alleged Chinese and Russian hegemonic aspirations. Therefore, Washington should spend some of the one trillion dollars Washington blows on the military/security complex on arriving at the best conclusion about climate change and its remedies, if any.

The United States is a strange country. The population accepts the destruction of privacy and civil liberty out of fear of essentially non-existent terrorists created by propaganda, but ignores the threat of climate change presented by independent scientists, a threat amplified by the ongoing multi-year drought in California and the western US.

It seems very strange to me that with Lake Mead drying up and California left with only one year’s water supply that the US government is focused on gratuitous but expensive wars and in turning over environmental decisions to polluting corporations via TTIP.

Whatever this is, it is not leadership.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/06/01/climate-change-paul-craig-roberts/

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Those corporations which fund ( so called, but totally inaccurate ) think tanks, also own politicians ambitions, through political donations and lobbying "gifts" and own the political process outright - by outbidding the American citizen.

These corporations also own the major media outlets, either through direct purchase, gentlemen's agreements made on the country club fairways, or by force of ad purchasing space. The ownership of or influencing of, the major media outlets, allows them to tailor ALL news and information, to support the narratives created in their respective "think tanks". The ordinary citizen is inundated with propaganda disguised as "science news".

Only those who view such information with skepticism and actively seek independent corroboration or refutation of said information - will find anything remotely like the truth. The problem with the common sense idea of simply accepting that there IS a problem with climate changes - is that the current narratives being used by the above mentioned corporations - is that "nothing's wrong, everything's fine, these are just periodic seasonal changes that will go away on their own". Americans love a happy ending - even if it's totally "make believe".

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

payne1000

When you realize who owns all U.S. mainstream media and who owns Capitol Hill, then it's apparent who is suppressing accurate information about climate change.

tdeel

There is no doubt that climate changes. The controversy is over whether or not it is caused by man. I fall on the side of man can not be the reason for climate change. People are blaming the record rain in Texas in May of this year on man-made climate change. The previous record was set in 1895. Did man cause that change also? Was it corporations that caused the last ice age, or the end of the last ice age?

payne1000

Natural climate change happens very gradually, over many centuries.
What is happening today is not gradual in any way.

tdeel

Yeah, that dust bowl thing was a real gradual thing. The flood of 1895 occurred in one month, just like the flood of 2015. That's not gradual. So, if you think that what is happening today is happening too quickly, it is not climate change. If it's not Global Warming and it's not Climate Change, what do you want to call it? I hate to give anyone any ideas, but you might want to call it Climate Manipulation.

Pulfnick Loc: Knoxville, TN

While Paul Craig Roberts has great credentials as an economist, he rightly admits he knows nothing about climate change. So far so good. He also has no scientific background whatsoever, and this article is simply accepting on faith that climate is measurably warming, and that scientists flogging the myth are "independent".

In fact, the scientist creating the "data" beyond the myth are anything but independent. They are paid for by the people who benefit from the hoax: politicians in office and con artists like Al Gore who use the hoax to enrich themselves. And Robert's assertion that corporations

But he says corporations pay people to lie about it! This is pure idiocy, sadly displaying an irrational side. Roberts does know all about using data to prove his point, and his lack of data, just absurd statements, is way below himself.

Pulfnick Loc: Knoxville, TN

[

payne1000

M. Granger Morgan is the head of the Department of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University. In this video, he is speaking at a Council on Foreign Relations meeting on “Developing an International Framework for Geoengineering.”
http://consciouslifenews.com/millions-spent-confuse-public-geoengineering/116250/
Mr. Morgan said at that meeting,
“First of all, of course, there is a lot of money getting spent to make sure that a very substantial portion of the public stays totally confused about this. And, I mean, it’s been really quite pernicious. But there’s been literally tens of millions of dollars spent on every little thing that comes along that might, you know, relate to some uncertainty. And while sure there’s uncertainty about some of the details of the climate science, there isn’t any uncertainty about whether we have a serious problem.”

tdeel, are you getting a cut of that "tens of millions of dollars?"

payne1000

Are you getting a cut of the "tens of millions of dollars"?

rolech Loc: Louisville, KY

I have experienced climate change for the past 76 years, it's called summer, fall, winter and spring.

payne1000

In how many of those 76 years have you viewed chemtrails?

I'm 75 and I didn't start seeing chemtrails until about 10 years ago.

W8_4_It

You mean the condensation that comes off jet engines? I've seen them since I was a kid, more than half a century ago.

They even come off other aircraft engines. You can see them in Photos of WWII coming off B-17s

payne1000

Deniers always come up with the same lame example.
During WWII the military did many experiments intended for weather control.

I'm talking about the chemtrails which have become such a common sight in our skies today. I was a professional photographer from 1966 until 1996. During that 30-year period, no chemtrail ever showed up in my photographs. Now you see them frequently on TV in sports events and news events as well as in the skies above us almost every day.

It must cost the government billions to spray all those chemicals into the atmosphere every day, but they are willing to do it to keep the fossil fuel industries from having to admit they are killing the planet and every living thing on it.