Together with other activists from the Party of the Labouring Masses (PLM), Melencio went to urban poor communities along the flood-breached Marikina River with supplies collected from ordinary people, whose upsurge of solidarity was in sharp contrast with the official response.

On August 13, Peter Boyle, a correspondent for Green Left Weekly and Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal, interviewed Melencio, the chairperson of the PLM. The party is part of a global network of people’s organisations and NGOs demanding imperialist countries pay up for the consequences in global warming and take radical actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

________________________________


Peter Boyle interviews Sonny Melencio

Peter Boyle: With the heavy rains easing it is reported that the death toll is still rising, and some 300,000 people remain displaced and a new danger of disease epidemics is looming? The disaster is far from over but how are the various strata in Philippines society coping and responding?

Sonny Melencio: Tens of thousands of evacuees are returning to their homes and are facing a situation in which they won't even have a place to sleep on. Many houses have been damaged, others have been swept away by the flood, and most have mud inside their homes as thick as a foot high. They are forced to leave the evacuation centres, which are mostly public schools and buildings, as classes and government work resume today [August 13].

The poor have been the victims of the flood and will continue to suffer from loss of homes, loss of income (most are street vendors, tricycle drivers, itinerant workers and factory workers who did not earn for a full week during the floods), damaged health, rising prices and government neglect in all social aspects.

There is going to be an extended period of crisis. After the floods, a health crisis is looming. The government’s department of health has issued a warning alert on expected rise of leptospirosis, typhoid and diarrhea due to the flood and contaminated water. The level of crisis is magnified by pharmaceutical companies jacking up the prices of medicines, especially for these illnesses. The price of anti-leptospirosis medicine for instance has been raised by 750%, prompting Philippines President Benigno Aquino to censure the drug company responsible (but not mention it by name), but stopping short of calling for price controls on vital medicines.

On the other hand, I think the ruling class and the trapos [traditional politicians] are heaving a sigh of relief, not because the weather has improved and the floods have subsided, but because they are now free of the pressure to at least show some semblance of responsibility and concern to the flood victims. The media will stop showing shocking photos and video clips showing people’s deprivation in the streets and in the evacuation centres. It’s back to business for the elite.

Peter Boyle: The mainstream media seemed to focus on blaming people who refused to leave their homes in the most flooded areas. What is this all about?

Sonny Melencio: This has been the case every time there has been flooding, especially in Metro Manila. Of course, the usual flooded areas are the poor communities that are near rivers and canals in the cities. The TV reporters report on the dire situation, but one half of the report is spent on castigating people on why they did not leave their flooded homes. In the same breath, these reporters mention the lack of rescue boats and overflowing evacuation centres for residents in flooded areas. Those in the studio do the same thing; they join in the fray by prolonging the conversation on how "hard headed" and "foolish" the people are for not leaving their homes.

This is the same spiel we heard from government officials interviewed on radio and TV. This has become the norm of mainstream media reporting during this calamity. I think they have been trained to report this way. It’s almost like they have a scripted report.

Instead of investigating why there are not many rescue boats and what’s happening in the evacuation centres, the media would rather blame the victims for not heeding the government’s call for relocation. But this call for relocation is usually just a call. How can the government expect people to leave their homes when no means of transport are adequately provided; the evacuation centres are public buildings without adequate ventilation and toilets; and there is lack of food, water and other necessities that people need?

In Barangay Olandes, Marikina which we visited on the second day of the flooding, more than a thousand residents in the evacuation centre and thousands more outside had not had food for a full day. Our porridge was just enough to feed those in the evacuation centre.

In Lupang Arenda, Taytay, the 278 families in the evacuation centre were divided into 14 small classrooms with around 19 families per classroom. It was only on the third day that they were visited by local government officials who brought 14 cartons of cup noodles and sardines for everyone to share.

Peter Boyle: The PLM has criticised the inadequacy of the official response, and like other people's organisations has stepped in to organise emergency aid with modest resources. There are also reports that attempts to replan Manila to avoid the worst flooding are being blocked by official corruption and indifference? What does this reflect structurally?

Sonny Melencio: There have been billions of pesos slated for calamities every year. This year, it’s 10.5 billion pesos. The remaining calamity fund is around 6 billion pesos. But the release of the funds is open to corruption in the bureaucracy. The funds are ordered released by the president and it goes through the various departments and local government units concerned in cities or areas where a state of calamity has been declared.

In the end, the bureaucracy decides where the funds will be used. It is easy for any official to divert the funds elsewhere. We have raised the demand that the calamity fund be used strategically, that is to allocate a big part to finance structural projects that will control flooding, such as building of dikes, water basins, barriers; modernising drainage systems; dredging clogged rivers and canals; and the like. Now, because of the flood crisis and the impending health crisis, we are demanding that the entire calamity fund be released to finance rehabilitation project for communities, and also to start strategic projects right away.

Peter Boyle: At times of crisis like this we often witness an explosion of human solidarity from ordinary people. Have you seen this in this crisis? Can you give some examples?

Sonny Melencio: The people are showing more solidarity with each other during the flooding. Neighbours help their neighbours; even children helped out by using styrofoam and plastic basins to roam around the neighbourhood and rescue residents who were trapped in their houses. You can see that in many photos. Many people’s organisations, NGOs, student groups and civic clubs came out from day one to support the flood victims. In fact, many braved the floods on the first few days, while the government took its time to distribute relief. The barangays (village councils) also became frontline organisations that undertook rescue and relief at the height of the flooding.

Peter Boyle: Do you think it is possible to generalise this kind of solidarity as a basis for a new socialist society? What can help this and what are the barriers to such a generalisation of solidarity?

Sonny Melencio: I think human solidarity is a basic trait of our people. Especially if it’s not mediated by people and institutions that want to profit at the expense of others, like the trapos who use the occasion to campaign for the coming elections. The president’s entourage, which boarded a truck that waded through the floods in Pasig City, consisted of senatorial candidates in the coming 2013 elections; shame on them. Or like the pharmaceutical companies and other capitalist corporations which raised the prices of their goods to astronomical figures because of big demand.

Outside of these elite creatures and capitalist institutions, the ordinary people responded in the most humanely way. Most of the support we collected came from workers and urban poor residents too. They donated dry clothing, provided cooking utensils and helped out in the feeding stations we set up in the evacuation centres. People’s solidarity is a latent component that exists even in the capitalist system. We have to nurture it and provide an environment for it to fully develop by changing the system.

Peter Boyle: Manila and other parts of the Philippines seem to experiencing these severe flooding every year. Is it getting worse? Do you think this is a symptom of global climate change? Do you think the imperialist countries that have a massively greater per capita carbon footprint have an obligation to pay for the terrible consequences of global warming and take a lead in addressing it?

Sonny Melencio: The large amount of rainfall during typhoon or monsoon season that the Philippines is experiencing now is indicative of climate change. This has not happened before. We became aware of this phenomenon during Typhoon Ondoy in 2009, which inundated many parts of Metro Manila.

What hit the Philippines this time was not even a typhoon, it was monsoon winds and rains, but the amount of rainfall has been reported greater than Ondoy’s. And this time around, half of Metro Manila was flooded, not to mention the nearby provinces surrounding Metro Manila in the north and south. Massive flooding in Metro Manila is becoming a normal occurrence and it’s getting worse.

There are already reports that the country would have to brace for another round of monsoon rains and winds.

The PLM is part of the network of people’s organisations and NGOs that are demanding that the imperialist countries pay up for the consequences in global warming and to take radical actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions. We also believe that persuasion will not work with these imperialist governments, and what the peoples of the world should do is to apply more pressure against them.

In the end, the only solution will be to get rid of the capitalist system and institute a system where human solidarity, human needs and the preservation of the planet’s resources would become a top priority.


______________________________


Support the PLM's Medical Missions

A health epidemic is now looming in the aftermath of the floods. Party of the Laboring Masses-PLM and its mass organisations are now preparing medical missions in the affected PLM base communities (see poster below). There has been no move on the government's part to do so in a comprehensive way. While we are calling on the government to mobilise all health professionals to affected areas, we are undertaking it on our own initiative as we can't wait for the government to respond.

Donations can be made to assist these missions to Transform Asia:

Donations can be made in three ways:

1. For those with PayPal accounts you can send donations topartidolakasngmasa@gmail.com via PayPal and it will be sent directly to the Transform Asia flood appeal account.

2. Go to the Transform Asia website transform-asia.org/transform-asia-appeal and press the "donate" button.

3. Transfer directly to:
Transform Asia Gender and Labor Institute
Account No. 304-2-30400456-2
Swift Code: MBTCPHMM
Metro Bank, Anonas
Branch: Aurora Blvd, Project 4
Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines
Email: transform.asia1@gmail.com
Mobile No. +63 (0)9088877702


http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/51888

http://links.org.au/node/2984

error

I read "climate change" and sure enough, the mantra of 'Greenhouse gasses' comes in on the wing.
A carbon tax would push marginal societies off the edge in higher food and energy cost and millions would die.

The Earth has been COOLING for the last ten years, the UN's ICC has been proven to be a fraud.
It's HAARP and other climate war weapons being directed against the people, not 'greenhouse gasses' which are to blame.
Shut down HAARP and stop the chemtrails and we would see less bazaar weather.

Selective retarded is at here again calling himself Carbon Nazi. Never mind what great majority of climate scientists say just listen to few conspiracy theorists and some ignorant commentators.

The existence of the greenhouse effect was argued for by Joseph Fourier in 1824. The argument and the evidence was further strengthened by Claude Pouillet in 1827 and 1838, and reasoned from experimental observations by John Tyndall in 1859, and more fully quantified by Svante Arrhenius in 1896.

Local and global weather has always fluctuated and always will, so global warming cannot be expected to be a smooth process. But what can be seen above is that half of all man-made CO2 has been put into the air since 1975, and that matches the one-degree F global temperature increase since 1975 rather well.

This is not proof of that the CO2 caused the warming. But, if CO2 did not cause it, we have a somewhat unusual coincidence. As seen on the temperature page this thirty-year temperature increase is unusual. There was only one temperature swing of this size in the oldest thermometer record which dates back 350 years, and it was a down swing. Upswings of this magnitude would seem to happen only about once in 700 years, and this one happened right in step with human CO2 production.

Caution: The match of the CO2 and temperature graph above is somewhat deceptive. Since one is temperature and one is CO2 they cannot be graphed on the same axis, so the two axes have been adjusted to align the two. However this process does not change the fact that temperature rose faster from 1975 to now than from 1880 to 1975, and so did CO2. It also cannot change the fact the temperature has been highest recently and so has CO2.

The slight downward trend in temperature from about 1945 until about 1975 is due to the increase in Sulfate Aerosols (SO4), largely produced by burning coal that contains sulfur. These cool the earth, and their increase during these years largely canceled the increase in CO2 during the same period.


In the Solar System, Mars, Venus, and the moon Titan also exhibit greenhouse effects; that on Venus is particularly large, due to its atmosphere, which consists mainly of dense carbon dioxide. A runaway greenhouse effect occurs if positive feedbacks lead to the evaporation of all greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.A runaway greenhouse effect involving carbon dioxide and water vapor is thought to have occurred on Venus

I see 'Bob' is also here to promote a genocidal carbon tax!
CO2 levels have been many times higher and the vegetation [ read agriculture at this time ] was far more vigorous.
But 'Bob' is now waiving pseudo science at the reader.
Did 'Bob' know that water vapor has many times the greenhouse effect that CO2 does?
A carbon tax would merely allow speculation and trading in "carbon credits". While starving millions and de-industrializing nations with increased fuel prices.

The Climate Crisis Hoax - Forbes.com - Information for the ...
... corrupted processes and agenda-driven report conclusions rendered by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ... Other fraud is evident through public exposure of e-mail files retrieved from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at Britain's University of East Anglia.
http://www.forbes.com/2011/01/03/climate-change-hoax-opinions-contributors-larry-bell.html
BBC News - Climate scientists targeted for fraud
Climate scientists targeted for fraud By Richard Black Environment correspondent, BBC News ... Goree runs a reporting service called the Earth Negotiations Bulletin, which gives detailed accounts of proceedings in fora such as the UN climate
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12219472

Just like selective thinking destroyed Easter Island's environment, Anazazi Indians'and many other civilizations before. Selective thinking might destroy global civilization as we know it.

"Selective Retarded" a.k.a "Carbon Nazi"is not just helping destroy the Syrian's people's dream for a better life, he is also helping destroy the world with his selective thinking.

Climategate 2: More E-mails Proving the Climate Fraud, while UN´s COP17 Shameful Giant NWO Charade Has Lost Interest ... data, and colluding with politicians to misuse scientific information. > Prof. Jones - who is working with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate .
http://euro-med.dk/?p=25339

EDITORIAL: A climate of fraud. New emails shed light on the global warming racket. The latest release of 5,000 emails from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) reconfirms.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/29/a-climate-of-fraud/

Just the facts ain't enough...for a selective mind

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/blog/5808/just-facts-aint-enough-maam

Gore Refuses ClimateGate Questions - WSJ.com
United Nations security officials have once again prevented a journalist from asking attendees at the climate change conference in Copenhagen questions about the growing ClimateGate scandal. This time, the person on the receiving end of the apparently forbidden queries was Nobel Laureate Al Gore
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704398304574598333184878524.html
"lost data"
Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html#ixzz23lzTLWjd
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html

Climate Change Denier Concludes Global Warming Is Real, Caused By Humans

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/368615/20120731/climate-change-skeptic-richard-muller-confirms-global.htm

The world's source for global temperature record admits it's lost or destroyed all the original data that would allow a third party to construct a global temperature record. The destruction (or loss) of the data comes at a convenient time for the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in East Anglia - permitting it to snub FoIA requests to see the data.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/13/cru_missing/
So any 'points' on any 'chart' are meaningless.

The deniers have received significant funding from coal and oil companies, including ExxonMobil

ExxonSecrets was born out of a need to easily explain the complex web of organizations, pundits, lobbyists and skeptic scientists running Exxon's campaign to deny and undermine the scientific evidence on global warming.

Greenpeace has followed been following the anti-Kyoto crowd since the early 1990's. The same scientists and spokespeople kept popping up, along with the same organizations who were either backing, employing or celebrating the skeptic voices.

We found the easiest way to show the links between all the groups and individuals was to do it graphically. Thus we developed and launched the ExxonSecrets map tool in 2004. The code was developed by Josh On (of They Rule.net), the graphics by Amy Balkin. The project leaders at Greenpeace were Kert Davies and Cindy Baxter.
Why Exxon?

While the rest of the world is now accepting climate change and moving on the issue, especially in the business sector, ExxonMobil continues to fund the think tanks and organizations who are running a decades-long campaign denying the consensus of urgency from climate scientists and attacking policies to abate global warming. A major shift by ExxonMobil would send strong signals throughout the business world. While Exxon isn't the only company funding these organizations, it has played a leading role in several key anti-environmental lobby groups, including the Global Climate Coalition and the American Petroleum Institute.
But doesn't Exxon say it cares about climate change?

Exxon might "take climate change seriously" but the reality is that it has been spearheading this campaign to undermine action on climate change for many many years. The company has recently recognized that its longstanding position on global warming has become unpalatable with increasing public awareness and political momentum on climate change, so it has shifted its rhetoric and revised its choice of words around the issue.
Don't the deniers have a right to free speech?

There's a difference between free speech and a campaign to deny the climate science with the goal of undermining international action on climate change. However, there's also responsibility that goes with freedom of speech - which is based around honesty and transparency. Freedom of speech does not apply to misinformation and propaganda.
Debate is part of science, isn't it?

Real scientists always debate science - that is correct, its part of the scientific process, testing hypotheses and introducing new data and analysis. But the scientists named on ExxonSecrets rarely publish peer reviewed scientific work.

In 2001, American communications consultant Frank Luntz, wrote a long research memo to the Republicans advising them on the language they should use when talking about climate change.

"The scientific debate remains open," he wrote , "Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate, and defer to scientists and other experts in the field"

Those scientists and experts recommended by Luntz have been provided by the Washington think tanks funded by ExxonMobil along with other oil, coal, electric utilities and car companies.

This is a similar campaign strategy to that adopted by the Tobacco industry decades earlier. "Doubt is our product" was the famous comment of one tobacco lobbyist to a US Senator. Indeed, you'll find that some of the key deniers and organizations named on ExxonSecrets were also paide by Big Tobacco to generate doubt about the hazards of smoking.

But Exxon says it's just funding the groups to debate policy issues because it doesn't like the Kyoto Protocol

The Kyoto Protocol came about after rising scientific evidence of the dangers of global warming and when Governments realized that the voluntary UN Framework Convention on Climate Change wasn't going to bring about the cuts in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases needed to combat the problem. Essentially, the Kyoto Protocol was driven by the urgency generated by the science.

It follows, therefore, that the Exxon-funded groups and deniers have focused on challenging the science as the best way to challenge Kyoto.

The now famous 1998 American Petroleum Institute memo, Global Climate Science Communications Actions Plan, authored by Exxon, API and several of the individuals and organizations that headline ExxonSecrets, drew a bead on the importance of the debate on science framing the moment in 1998:

"The advocates of global warming have been successful on the basis of skillfully misrepresenting the science and the extent of agreement on the science, while industry and its partners ceded the science and fought on the economic issues. Yet if we can show that science does not support the Kyoto treaty - which most true climate scientists believe to be the case - this puts the United States in a stronger moral position and frees its negotiators from the need to make concessions as a defense against perceived selfish economic concerns.

Upon this tableau, the Global Climate Science Communications Team (GCSCT) developed an action plan to inform the American public that science does not support the precipitous actions Kyoto would dictate, thereby providing a climate for the right policy decisions to be made. The team considered results from a new public opinion survey in developing the plan.

Charlton Research's survey of 1,100 "informed Americans" suggests that while Americans currently perceive climate change to be a great threat, public opinion is open enough to change on climate science. When informed that "some scientists believe there is not enough evidence to suggest that [what is called global climate change] is a long-term change due to human behavior and activities," 58 percent of those surveyed said they were more likely to oppose the Kyoto treaty. Moreover, half the respondents harbored doubts about climate science."
But hasn't Exxon dropped its funding of the deniers?

After consistent campaigning by Greenpeace through ExxonSecrets, ExxonMobil was forced, in 2006, to drop funding to some of its key allies in the campaign to deny climate science and delay policy action The Competitive Enterprise Institute was the key group dropped - it had received $2.2 million from ExxonMobil since 1998, more than any other thinktank. But the relationship continues as CEI's climate operatives continue to work closely with the other think tanks funded by Exxon.

And ExxonMobil continues to fund many of the key groups, including most of those involved in the 1998 API memo mentioned above.

A key question remains: if these groups had not done anything that Exxon disagrees with, why has Exxon now decided to drop some of them? The company has not answered this question.

http://www.exxposeexxon.com/facts/faq.html

Now this show that you are on the wrong side again

Global warming hypothesis falsified by data: "Climategate" e ...
Global temperatures have declined since 1998 (and here) while carbon emissions have risen, undermining the scientific argument for global warming. Now, the public release of hundreds of internal e-mails hacked from University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU)
http://www.examiner.com/article/global-warming-hypothesis-falsified-by-data-climategate-e-mails-expose-carbon-tax-scam

Aside from the desperate effort to hold the [1] 'Global Warming' thesis together I believe that weather war is being waged against the people of Earth. You can see it in the chemtrails overhead and the freak weather patterns despite the declining temperatures worldwide.

US government takes down HAARP website to conceal evidence of US weather...
Updated April 21, 2011 - The HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) website has HAARP's waterfall charts and magnetometer charts gave evidence of an ongoing weather war
http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=2261

By grinding the weather patterns into hostile periods of drought and rain, massive damage can be done 'under the rug' to limit production, raise prices and even eliminate what the overclass views as a population 'overburden' by restriction of food, massive floods and freak storm patterns.

ExxonMobil has pumped more than $8 million into more than 40 think tanks; media outlets; and consumer, religious, and even civil rights groups that preach skepticism about the oncoming climate catastrophe. Herewith, a representative overview.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2005/05/put-tiger-your-think-tank

To the person who call himself Carbon NAZI this time,

Let me get it straight.

So you are a greenhouse gas effect denier who thinks that if there is global freak weather change it is the result of the so-called HAARP program by the “overclass”. This HAARP program is some kind of weather warfare by the over-class against humanity.

That you also believe that 9/11 bombing was done by Al Qaeda under the tutelage of the CIA -that the CIA did not stop their support of the Al Qaeda until now.

You also believe that Khadafy and Hafez-al Assad and Bashar al-Assad are loved by their people. They are not ruthless dictators but good leaders. The rebellion going on in Syria is actually an invasion by NATO forces led by the CIA.

You also believe that the video clips in YouTube that show tens of thousands of demonstrators in Syria against Assad are staged by the CIA. Those tens of thousands of demonstrators are actually actors, actresses and agents of the CIA, MI5 and the Mossad.

Well, that shows it all...

I rest my case.

Pretty well sums it up.
The leadership of Libya and Syria were/ are popular in the face of the bloodbath by foreign terrorists. And in particular the reign of terror in the aftermath of 'liberations' that occurred in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. Millions dead, infrastructure destroyed and the lands poisoned by the Uranium weapons by-products
You would have us all believe the ComCorp media lies but the truth buried under it is far less glorious.
In attempting to be sarcastic, the truth of western meddling is all too evident in main world press.
As is the war being waged against them.
Weather is just another facet of this war.
HAARP
Activist Post: Weather Wars and the Devil's HAARP
Weather Wars and the Devil's HAARP ... Meanwhile, talk of a climate weapon is increasing in volume.
http://www.activistpost.com/2010/08/weather-wars-and-devils-haarp.html

ponder the possibility
HAARP as a weather weapon...
***

-A key passage from Between Two Ages (1970) states, “Technology of weather modification could be employed to produce prolonged periods of drought or storm.”

With this in mind, let’s consider some recent events that might suggest HAARP has achieved its full operational potential as a weapon that can be accurately directed to a given target if geopolitical masterminds give the order.

Venezuela Drought — The worst drought in 50 years came in late 2009 after Elites labeled Hugo Chavez an authoritarian (despite repeated popular elections). They indicated a desire to, “divert the country toward a democracy.” That type of rhetoric often indicates a mission to destabilize a regime, and impose a true dictator subservient only to the whims of the Globalists. Big Oil hates iconoclastic leaders who are not members of The Club. The benefit of political instability can set the stage for a future coup, so we have to wonder if a weather weapon was tested to produce anger among the populace. Chavez invoked El Nino at the time, but did indicate his awareness of U.S. weather weapons after the Haiti Earthquake.

Pakistan Floods — The suddenness of the weather could be a tipoff. This is a disaster that experts are saying dwarfs the impact of the 2004 Tsunami in Indonesia, and is the worst in Pakistan history. And it came by surprise. Unlike a Tsunami which can have a random earthquake as its source, weather has been charted enough to put meteorologists on TV who presumably make a living off of their accurate analysis. Yet, millions have been affected, and hundreds of villages erased by this anomalous event that dropped from the skies. A recent article in the Daily Mail has scientists speculating that a blocked jet stream is causing a prolonged weather system over Pakistan . . . as well as Russia. A stated ability of HAARP is to “perturb the ionosphere,” which can lead to the stalling, or supercharging of weather systems, as the jet stream is affected. In fact, it appears that the jet stream has split in two, with one arm going north over Russia, and the other arm heading south into Pakistan; the region in the middle is feeling the effects.

Russia Heat Wave — The worst heatwave in the nation’s history is slowing its economic recovery and causing destabilizing anger in the populace. Major media coldly states that the Russians penchant for alcohol is to blame for the subsequent deaths. Meanwhile, talk of a climate weapon is increasing in volume. Then there is Global Warming and carbon taxes: Russia has been a holdout on the effects of man-made Global Warming and the attendant need to tax industry. Premier Medvedev stated in late 2009, “We will not cut our development potential.” He also made it clear that he believed that Global Warming was, “some kind of tricky campaign made up by some commercial structures to promote their business projects.” Yet, who can doubt the effects of man-made warming now? Medvedev was quoted recently doing a complete about-face, “What’s happening with the planet’s climate right now needs to be a wake-up call to all of us, meaning all heads of state, all heads of social organizations, in order to take a more energetic approach to countering the global changes to the climate.”

Freak U.S. Storms — Washington D.C. has been getting pounded. A recent storm came out of nowhere. Could this be retaliation from Russia for a perceived (or real) attack on its main agricultural region? The storms produced the first hail in the state’s history and dumped 5 inches of rain per hour, amid 180,000 lightning strikes. Or, perhaps it was domestically inspired — the area’s freak storm claimed the life of community leader and activist, Carl Henn. Either way, experts are noting in Russia and D.C. that a change in the jet stream has led to the significant events. The D.C. events come on the heels of a strange storm in Montana, curiously not long after the governor turned down Federal stimulus money.-
http://theintelhub.com/2010/08/16/13323/
Katrina, which took out New Orleans had several anomalies...
***
Dedicated with caring and compassion to the many who suffered and died in the massive earthquakes in Japan and Haiti, and in the Indonesian tsunami and Hurricane Katrina.
http://www.wanttoknow.info/war/haarp_weather_modification_electromagnetic_warfare_weapons

This is what you said "genocidal carbon tax! - A carbon tax would merely allow speculation and trading in "carbon credits". While starving millions and de-industrializing nations with increased fuel prices."

And this is what happened according to the news: (ah yeah, you don't believe in the news unless it suit you)

After the introduction of carbon tax, Australia's inflation is at 13-year lows, unemployment fell last month to 5.2 per cent, the Reserve Bank cash rate is almost half its level at the change of government in 2007 and the Australian economy has been growing above its long-term trend rate.

Figures show inflation effect of carbon tax mostly hot air

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/figures-show-inflation-effect-of-carbon-tax-mostly-hot-air-20120806-23qd8.html

http://www.theage.com.au/business/the-economy/consumer-prices-subdued-despite-carbon-tax-20120806-23owy.html

________________________

More about climate change:

http://grist.org/series/skeptics

The HAARP system is is a military project that consumes power in the gigawatt range.
This poses what can only be described as a broad BW weapon system and it is capable of tearing the ionosphere open or merely 'heating it'. Among many other things which are certainly classified. This is dangerous technology without any precautionary principle, under military control. Of course it serves the dark network of the overclass. But what do those psychopaths care? They are psychopaths. National Security can hide a great deal of roaches in its darkness.
The chemtrail patterns augments this system as well as providing other disturbing effects upon the environment. Do we hear anything about this topic in the ComCorp media? Of course not.

HAARP
Early work on climate control was crude and unpredictable but it is claimed that both the Americans and Russians continued to experiment behind closed doors even after the UN ban in the mid-Eighties, and both now possess sophisticated systems which are capable of controlling the weather - with potentially devastating results.
In the US, the technology was developed under the high-frequency active auroral research programme ( HAARP) - originally part of Ronald Reagan's controversial Star Wars defence system. Based in Gokoma, Alaska, the weapon operates by beaming powerful radio waves into the upper atmosphere to alter weather patterns. Some experts claim the system is already up and running, while others say it won't be ready for another 20 years.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=1061
***
It's all a devious distraction, this 'climate change' mantra and tax to the IMF while uncontrolled havoc is loosed by 'minor' problems like GMO contamination and proven sterility effects, radiation contamination and exposure, chemical contamination in the air, the water in all levels of food production [ except for high priced organic ] and packaging, clear cutting, mountaintop removal..military 'testing' and all the other real threats out there. The Pacific Ocean poisoned by radiation, the Gulf of Mexico poisoned by Her Majesty's BP [ should have arrested the bitch when she came over here to dance on the graves of the thousands that will die early in that region because of the released pollutants ] but hey, I digress.
HAARP is a major environmental problem. Chemtrails are a major problem. Weather warfare is a major problem.
Bozo says it's CO2 oh, and 'climate change'. Bozo says we need a carbon tax.
So we can all pay the IMF and subsequently, the goons of the UN to 'peacekeep' us and make damn sure we pay those taxes.
thanks for your time.

The cuckoos are a family, Cuculidae, of near passerine birds. The order Cuculiformes, in addition to the cuckoos, also includes the turacos (family Musophagidae, sometimes treated as a separate order, Musophagiformes). Some zoologists and taxonomists have also included the unique Hoatzin in the Cuculiformes, but its taxonomy remains in dispute. The cuckoo family, in addition to those species named as such, also includes the roadrunners, koels, malkohas, couas, coucals and anis. The coucals and anis are sometimes separated as distinct families, the Centropodidae and Crotophagidae respectively.

The cuckoos are generally medium sized slender birds. The majority are arboreal, with a sizeable minority that are terrestrial. The family has a cosmopolitan distribution, with the majority of species being tropical. Some species are migratory. The cuckoos feed on insects, insect larvae and a variety of other animals, as well as fruit. Many species are brood parasites, laying their eggs in the nests of other species, but the majority of species raise their own young.

Cuckoos are medium-sized birds that range in size from the Little Bronze Cuckoo, at 17?g and 15 cm (6 inches), to the Channel-billed Cuckoo, at 630?g (1.4 lbs) and 63 cm (25 inches).[1] There is generally little sexual dimorphism in size, but where it exists, it can be either the male or the female that is larger. One of the most important distinguishing features of the family are the feet, which are zygodactyl, meaning that the two inner toes point forward and the two outer backward. There are two basic body forms, arboreal species (like the Common Cuckoo) which are slender and have short tarsi, and terrestrial species (like the roadrunners) which are more heavy set and have long tarsi. Almost all species have long tails which are used for steering in terrestrial species and as a rudder during flight in the arboreal species. The wing shape also varies with lifestyle, with the more migratory species like the Black-billed Cuckoo possessing long narrow wings capable of strong direct flight, and the more terrestrial and sedentary cuckoos like the coucals and malkohas having shorter rounded wings and a more laboured gliding flight.

The subfamily Cuculinae are the brood-parasitic cuckoos of the Old World.[1] They tend to conform to the classic shape, with (usually) long tails, short legs, long narrow wings and an arboreal lifestyle. The largest species, the Channel-billed Cuckoo, also has the most outsized bill in the family, resembling that of a hornbill. The subfamily Phaenicophaeinae are the non-parasitic cuckoos of the Old World, and include the couas, malkohas, and ground-cuckoos. They are more terrestrial cuckoos, with strong and often long legs and short rounded wings. The subfamily typically has brighter plumage and brightly coloured bare skin around the eye. The coucals are another terrestrial subfamily of long tailed long legged and short winged cuckoos. They are large heavyset birds with the largest, the Greater Black Coucal, being around the same size as the Channel-billed Cuckoo. The subfamily Coccyzinae are arboreal and long tailed as well, with a number of large insular forms. The New World ground cuckoos are similar to the Asian ground-cuckoos in being long legged and terrestrial, and includes the long billed roadrunner, which can reach speeds of 30 km/h when chasing prey. The final subfamily are the atypical anis, which include the small clumsy anis and the larger Guira Cuckoo. The anis have massive bills and smooth glossy feathers.

The feathers of the cuckoos are generally soft, and often become waterlogged in heavy rain. Cuckoos often sun themselves after rain, and the anis hold their wings open in the manner of a vulture or cormorant while drying. There is considerable variation in the plumage exhibited by the family. Some species, particularly the brood parasites have cryptic plumage, whereas others have bright and elaborate plumage. This is particularly true of the Chrysococcyx or glossy cuckoos, which have iridescent plumage. Some cuckoos have a resemblance to hawks with barring on the underside; this apparently alarms potential hosts, allowing the female to access a host nest.[2] The young of some brood parasites are coloured so as to resemble the young of the host. For example, the Asian Koels breeding in India have black offspring to resemble their crow hosts, whereas in the Australian Koels the chicks are brown like the honeyeater hosts. Sexual dimorphism in plumage is uncommon in the cuckoos, being most common in the parasitic Old World species.

Cuckoo genera differ in the number of primary wing feathers as below.

Coccycua, Coccyzus, Phaenicophaeus, Piaya – 9
Cuculus – 9 or 10
Pachycoccyx, Clamator levaillantii, Centropus – 10
Microdynamis, Eudynamys, Clamator glandarius – 11
Some coucals – 12
Scythrops novaehollandiae – 13

2025 is a study designed to comply with a directive from the chief of staff of the Air Force to examine the concepts, capabilities, and technologies the United States will require to remain the dominant air and space force in the future. Presented on 17 June 1996, this report was produced in the Department of Defense school environment of academic freedom and in the interest of advancing concepts related to national defense. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the United States government.

This report contains fictional representations of future situations/scenarios. Any similarities to real people or events, other than those specifically cited, are unintentional and are for purposes of illustration only.

This publication has been reviewed by security and policy review authorities, is unclassified, and is cleared for public release.

Contents

Chapter

Disclaimer
Illustrations
Tables
Acknowledgments
Executive Summary

Introduction
Required Capability
Why Would We Want to Mess with the Weather?
What Do We Mean by "Weather-modification"?
System Description
The Global Weather Network
Applying Weather-modification to Military Operations
Concept of Operations
Precipitation
Fog
Storms
Exploitation of "NearSpace" for Space Control
Opportunities Afforded by Space Weather-modification
Communications Dominance via Ionospheric Modification
Artificial Weather
Concept of Operations Summary
Investigation Recommendations
How Do We Get There From Here?
Conclusions
Appendix
A Why Is the Ionosphere Important?
B Research to Better Understand and Predict Ionospheric Effects
C Acronyms and Definitions

Bibliography
Notes
http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usaf/2025/v3c15/v3c15-1.htm

High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAARP
_______________________________________

Global warming

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
_______________________________________

Greenhouse gas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
_______________________________________


More about climate change:

http://grist.org/series/skeptics

Chapter 2
Required Capability

Why Would We Want to Mess with the Weather?

According to Gen Gordon Sullivan, former Army chief of staff, "As we leap technology into the 21st century, we will be able to see the enemy day or night, in any weather- and go after him relentlessly."3 A global, precise, real-time, robust, systematic weather-modification capability would provide war-fighting CINCs with a powerful force multiplier to achieve military objectives. Since weather will be common to all possible futures, a weather-modification capability would be universally applicable and have utility across the entire spectrum of conflict. The capability of influencing the weather even on a small scale could change it from a force degrader to a force multiplier.

So you see, the prospect of warfare by weather is not a mere speculation. As I again state, warfare is currently being waged against the people of the Earth by aberrant weather systems having noting to do with CO2 than with certain interests who desire a IMF carbon tax by 'tweaking' the rain and wind patterns.
The noise level as well as the particular attention given to this issue is instructive.

This IMC wont allow me to publish because the issues I report are too controversial.
My writing style has no style.
Just facts that this mole riddled IMC can't tolerate.
Like how the Warbergs built Auschwitz to service I.G. Farben.
I.G. Farben - Holocaust Education & Archive Research Team
Holocaust Education & Archive Research Team ... I.G. Farben was a German Limited Company that was a conglomerate of eight leading German chemical manufacturers, including Bayer, Hoechst and BASF, which at the time were the largest chemical firms in existence.
holocaustresearchproject.org/economics/igfarben.html

The focus of this article is Philippine flood appeal, but the two bozos keep debating about HAARP v. 'climate change'. Manila food victims desperately need help!!!

.. memories of psyop trolls and their little games. Like I said, from a playbook.
Distract
Infer mental problems
Infer siding/affiliation with the adversary
Infer personal gain
etc. etc.
Off topic insults and faked, biased data are to be expected as the Bozo on the keyboard tries to cover up or control the parameters of the discussion.
Which in this case is HAARP and weather modifacation to grind down the food production and mask contrived disasters as 'natural'. All for the pretext of a carbon tax collected by our also good friends of the IMF.
Bozo is obviously under orders to work this one out to the general good of this tax.

Uh, Peter, this article started right in on the assumption that 'climate change' was responsible. It didn't start out as a plea for humanitarian assistance. That came very much later in the article which was a shill for 'climate change' and thusly, an IMF carbon tax that Bozo is an advocate for.
But we both know the readership will read and make up their own minds in the light of discovery.
good luck, Bozo

2 HAARP v. 'climate change'
hi, this is 3nity. i don’t know u and you don’t know me. i don’t know how to contact u so i have to issue this message tru this forum. d ComCorp is about to get u. Because u are 1 of d few who was able 2 c d truth, crack d code so 2 speak, they will reprogram ur mind. bob and co was able 2 get ur IP. Refrain from leaving ur haus. If u have 2, look over ur shoulder. B careful.

You see, the issue is a bit hot, huh?
If you don't like this kind of information than maybe you shouldn't post pro-carbon tax propaganda under the figleaf of 'humanitarian' PSAs...
Someone may lift up the carpet a dig out from under what is buried.l
Like the HAARP program and the war of weather being perpetrated upon the populations of Earth.
Scroll up, dear reader and see for yourself the playlist of attempts to distract. Or obfuscate.
The IMF and their Bozos really need to tax you in order to fund the criminality of future UN actions. To say nothing of making huge profits off of the speculations thereof.

If ever you end up in court I will always volunteer to defend you. I am not a lawyer but I can easily convince the court that you are not guilty due to the reason of...

Let just agree to disagree

I have been spending a lot of my personal time answering you. I admit it is a bit entertaining but it is a wasted time really. Maybe you think this is productive because your quest is to “enlighten” the public. As for me, I’ve got better things to do.

You seem to have a lot of time in your hand. Out of school youth? Unemployed perhaps? Or simply you have access to the internet in your workplace. Instead of doing your work, you are blogging instead. Well, it is none of my business really.

What an insight you have contributed here. Your father and mother must be proud to have a bright child like you. Good luck to your quest.

Let just agree to disagree and let the readers decide.

_______________________________________

HAARP v. 'Climate change'

High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAARP
_______________________________________

Conspiracy theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory

_______________________________________

Global warming

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
_______________________________________

Greenhouse gas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
_______________________________________


More about climate change:

http://grist.org/series/skeptics


We might meet again someday. I hope not.

whatever...
The main problem as I see it is that through an uninformed public this kind of propaganda has a meme effect and like parrots we see and hear the 'global warming' or 'climate change' chorus and believe it through saturation, without analysis.
The IMF carbon tax is being offered as a response to the freak weather patterns and the freak weather patterns that are blamed on these nonsense terms are brought about as weather weapons to convince us of the necessity to "curb" the climate. All this from a global overclass which controls the military through their dark networks. Network which brought us the JFK assassination the OK bombing and the events on 9-11.

I guess you are entitled to your opinion.

I guess you are entitled to your opinion.

Not only my opinion that HAARP is altering the weather.
The reasons are clear in order to stress the populations into accepting this carbon tax under the guise of 'climate control'. So the IMF can have a dependable funding source. Particularly in view of the declining global temperature over the last decade and the proven fraud of the UNs "climategate" where the researchers 'lost' all of their raw data.
Who stands to gain by all this. The IMF, of course.

Gee, you keep on harping about it.

My answer is...whatever.

Let me have the last word, please....Goodbye.

Don't like the handle I'm using I bet. It kind calls out the propaganda for what is is.
It ain't a CO2 problem it a problem with meddling with the weather using HAARP to goad the people into accepting an IMF carbon tax. Virtually at gun point. To prevent 'climate change'
Your attention to this issue is just another marker showing who is interested in this topic so relentlessly.
ha ha
going to be a loooong thread.

Don't you have a life....GOODBYE!!!

well, you have 'concluded' this thread several times.
As a comment, to the crushed 'climate change' thesis because 'climate change' is a nonsense phrase we'll dismiss that out of hand. Scroll back to see the evidence of 'lost' raw data and the cooling global trend of the last ten+ years

Bozo has not been able to address the evident motive of the IMF to have the HAARP system cause the various freak weather anomalies in order to compel the public into accepting a carbon tax.

Ah, this is your life...What a life!

It's the nic I'm using right? It's destroying the entire gist of this propaganda piece. Can't have it on the front page, huh?
The HAARP system along with the chemtrails are the primary suspects in all of these freak weather troubles.
The IMF is a vampire banking system of rapine.
It isn't beyond them to wage weather war upon the people of Earth to force a carbon tax in spite of the fraud proven to be 'Global warming' because of "greenhouse gasses".

For your eyes only

Shhhhh.....(whispering) The Weather War Against Humanity (WWAH) is supposed to be secret.....so it's just between you and me....please, preaty please........keep quiet, okay?..... lol

Bozo is getting funny. It can't counter the evidence of HAARP technology, it can't support the fraud of 'climate change' and it cannot refute the extreme incentive of the IMF to have HAARP put the weather screw to the populations of Earth. To goad the people into accepting a carbon tax paid, of course, to the IMF
Oh no, they would never do that.
They would never destroy in order to profit. We all know just how moral these individuals are.
Scroll up and view the desperation Bozo is having, trying to hide the connected dots that this propaganda piece is trying to obfuscate.

Ah yeah, your nic is a very powerful weapon.You have "convinced' many with your nickname.

I might as well use it to counteract your power...very powerful indeed.

Bozo can't leave this thread!
But it's all good because this 'climate change' nonsense is getting to be wearysome each time our 'friends' drag out yet another attempt at pro-carbon tax propaganda. Particularly as the myth of 'global warming' dies with each winter more severe than the last and temperatures over the globe dropping on the average for over the last ten years.
HAARP in the hands of the criminal banking class to produce a freak series of drought and rain patterns goes a long way to explain the cause which isn't a minor [ less than 0.14% ] greenhouse gas that all plant life requires.
Along with the massive spraying of chemtrails, HAARP poses a real threat to life on Earth.
But the IMF wants a carbon tax, just like "GOODBUY" Bozo does.
ha

El calentamiento global es el aumento de la temperatura media de la atmósfera terrestre y los océanos desde finales del siglo 19 y su continuación proyectada. Desde principios del siglo 20, la temperatura media de la superficie de la Tierra ha aumentado aproximadamente 0,8 ° C (1,4 ° F), con cerca de dos terceras partes del incremento que se producen a partir de 1980. El calentamiento del sistema climático es inequívoco, y los científicos son más que seguro que el 90% es causada principalmente por las crecientes concentraciones de gases de efecto invernadero producidos por actividades humanas como la quema de combustibles fósiles y la deforestación. Estos resultados son reconocidos por las academias nacionales de ciencias de todas las naciones industrializadas.

Proyecciones de modelos climáticos se resumen en el Informe de Evaluación 2007 Cuarto (AR4) del Panel Intergubernamental sobre el Cambio Climático (IPCC). Indican que durante el siglo 21 la temperatura de la superficie mundial es probable que aumente otro 1,1 a 2,9 ° C (2 a 5,2 ° F) por su menor escenario de emisiones y entre 2,4 y 6,4 ° C (4,3 a 11,5 ° F) para su más alto [8]. Los rangos de estas estimaciones se derivan de la utilización de modelos con una sensibilidad diferente a las concentraciones de gases de efecto invernadero.

Los cambios relacionados con el calentamiento y pueden variar de una región a todo el mundo. Los efectos de un aumento en la temperatura global incluyen el aumento del nivel del mar y un cambio en la cantidad y el patrón de precipitación, así como una probable expansión de los desiertos subtropicales. El calentamiento se espera que sea más fuerte en el Ártico y se asocia con la retirada continua de los glaciares, el permafrost y el hielo marino. Otros posibles efectos del calentamiento incluyen una mayor frecuencia de fenómenos meteorológicos extremos como olas de calor, sequías y lluvias torrenciales, la acidificación de los océanos y la extinción de especies debido a los cambios en los regímenes de temperatura. Efectos significativos para los seres humanos son la amenaza a la seguridad alimentaria de los rendimientos decrecientes y la pérdida de hábitat de la inundación. Si la temperatura media mundial aumenta a 4 ° C (7.2 ° F) por encima de los niveles preindustriales, los límites de la adaptación humana es probable que se supere en muchas partes del mundo y los sistemas naturales en todo el mundo sería en gran parte incapaces de adaptarse, lo que resulta en la pérdida de los beneficios (servicios de los ecosistemas) que esos sistemas proporcionan y de los que depende el sustento humano.

Las respuestas políticas al calentamiento global incluyen la mitigación de la reducción de emisiones, la adaptación a sus efectos, y la geoingeniería futuro posible. La mayoría de los países son signatarios de la Convención Marco de Naciones Unidas sobre el Cambio Climático (CMNUCC), cuyo objetivo último es evitar que antropogénica peligrosa (es decir, inducido por el hombre) el cambio climático. Partes de la CMNUCC han adoptado una serie de políticas destinadas a reducir las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero : 10 : 9 y para ayudar en la adaptación al calentamiento global : 13. : 10 Las partes en de la CMNUCC han convenido en que los recortes profundos en las emisiones se requieren, y que el calentamiento global en el futuro debe ser limitado a menos de 2,0 ° C (3,6 ° F) en relación con el nivel pre-industrial. Un informe de 2011 de análisis por parte del Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente y el Organismo Internacional de Energía sugieren que los esfuerzos a partir de principios del siglo 21 para reducir las emisiones pueden ser insuficientes para satisfacer las 2 de la CMNUCC ° C del objetivo.

Los cambios observados de temperatura

La evidencia del calentamiento del sistema climático incluye aumentos observados en el aire promedio global y las temperaturas del océano, el derretimiento generalizado de nieve y hielo, y el aumento del nivel medio del mar. La temperatura de la Tierra media de la superficie aumentó en 0,74 ± 0,18 ° C en el período 1906-2005. La tasa de calentamiento en la última mitad de ese período fue de casi el doble que en el período en su conjunto (0,13 ± 0,03 ° C por década, frente a 0,07 ± 0,02 ° C por década). El efecto isla de calor urbano es muy pequeño, que se estima representan menos de 0.002 º C de calentamiento por década desde 1900. Las temperaturas en la troposfera inferior se han incrementado entre 0,13 y 0,22 ° C (0,22 y 0,4 ° F) por década desde 1979, de acuerdo con las mediciones de temperatura por satélite. Proxys climáticos muestran que la temperatura se han mantenido relativamente estables durante los mil o dos mil años antes de 1850, con fluctuaciones que varían regionalmente, tales como el Período Cálido Medieval y la Pequeña Edad de Hielo.

Según estimaciones recientes, por el Instituto Goddard de Estudios Espaciales (GISS) y el National Climatic programa del Centro de Datos que el año 2005 y 2010, empatado en el año más caluroso del planeta desde que las mediciones fiables, instrumentales extendidas se pusieron a disposición en el siglo 19, superior a 1998 por unas pocas centésimas de un título. Estimaciones de la Unidad de Investigación Climática (CRU) muestran el 2005 como el segundo año más caliente, por detrás de 1998 con 2003 y 2010, empatado en el año más caliente en tercer lugar, sin embargo, "el error de estimación para los distintos años ... es por lo menos diez veces más grande que las diferencias entre estos tres años ". La Organización Meteorológica Mundial (OMM) declaración sobre el estado del clima mundial en 2010 explica que," El valor nominal de 2.010 0,53 ° C ocupa el lugar justo por delante de los de 2005 (0.52 º C) y 1998 (0,51 º C), aunque las diferencias entre los tres años no son estadísticamente significativos ... "

Las temperaturas en 1998 fueron inusualmente cálidas porque las temperaturas globales se ven afectados por el fenómeno El Niño-Oscilación Sur (ENOS), y el más fuerte fenómeno de El Niño en el siglo pasado se produjeron durante ese año. La temperatura global está sujeta a fluctuaciones a corto plazo que se superponen tendencias a largo plazo y temporal puede enmascarar. La relativa estabilidad de la temperatura desde 2002 hasta 2009 es consistente con ese episodio. de 2010 fue también un año de El Niño. En la oscilación a la baja de la oscilación, el 2011 como un año de La Niña estaba más fresco pero aún así fue el año más cálido desde que comenzaron los registros 11 en 1880. De los 13 años más cálidos desde 1880, 11 fueron los años de 2001 a 2011. Durante el registro más reciente de 2011 fue el más cálido de La Niña año en el período 1950 a 2011, y estaba cerca de 1997 que no estaba en el punto más bajo del ciclo.

Los cambios de temperatura varían en el mundo. Desde 1979, las temperaturas de la tierra han aumentado casi el doble de rápido que las temperaturas del océano (0,25 ° C por década frente a 0,13 ° C por década). Las temperaturas del océano aumentan más lentamente que las temperaturas de la tierra debido a la mayor capacidad calorífica efectiva de los océanos y porque el océano pierde más calor por evaporación. [41] El hemisferio norte se calienta más rápido que el hemisferio sur, ya que tiene más tierra y debido a que tiene extensas áreas de nieve estacional y el mar de hielo sujeta la cubierta de hielo-albedo de retroalimentación. Aunque cada vez más gases de efecto invernadero se emiten en el hemisferio sur que el norte no contribuye a la diferencia en el calentamiento debido a los gases de efecto invernadero más importantes persisten el tiempo suficiente para mezclarse entre los hemisferios.

La inercia térmica de los océanos y las respuestas lentas de otros efectos indirectos significa que el clima puede llevar siglos o más para adaptarse a los cambios en el forzamiento. Los estudios climáticos indican que el compromiso, incluso si los gases de efecto invernadero se estabilizaran en los niveles de 2000, un calentamiento adicional de aproximadamente 0,5 º C (0,9 ° F) seguiría siendo positivo.

Causas iniciales de los cambios de temperatura (forzamientos externos)

El efecto invernadero es el proceso por el cual la absorción y emisión de radiación infrarroja por los gases en la atmósfera se caliente la atmósfera inferior de un planeta y la superficie. Fue propuesto por Joseph Fourier en 1824 y fue investigado por primera vez cuantitativamente por Svante Arrhenius en 1896. [46]

Cantidades naturales de gases de efecto invernadero tienen un efecto de calentamiento medio de unos 33 ° C (59 ° F) Los principales gases de efecto invernadero son el vapor de agua, que causa aproximadamente el 36-70% del efecto invernadero;. De dióxido de carbono (CO2), lo que provoca 26.9%, el metano (CH4), que causa 9.4%, y el ozono (O3), que causa 3.7% Las nubes también afecta a la radiación. equilibrio a través de los forzamientos de nubes similares a los gases de efecto invernadero.

La actividad humana desde la Revolución Industrial se ha incrementado la cantidad de gases de efecto invernadero en la atmósfera, dando lugar a aumento de forzar radiativo del CO2, el metano, el ozono troposférico, los CFC y el óxido nitroso. Las concentraciones de CO2 y de metano han aumentado en un 36% y 148% respectivamente desde 1750. Estos niveles son mucho más altos que en cualquier momento durante los últimos 800.000 años, el período para el que existen datos fiables ha sido extraída de los núcleos de hielo. evidencia geológica menos directa indica que los valores de CO2 más altos que esto fuera visto por última vez alrededor de 20 millones de años. [56 quema] de combustibles fósiles ha producido alrededor de las tres cuartas partes del aumento del CO2 de humano actividad durante los últimos 20 años. El resto de este incremento se debe principalmente a cambios en el uso de la tierra, en particular la deforestación.

Durante las últimas tres décadas del siglo 20, el producto interno bruto per cápita y el crecimiento de la población fueron los principales impulsores de los aumentos en las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero. las emisiones de CO2 siguen aumentando debido a la quema de combustibles fósiles y el cambio de uso del suelo. : 71 Las emisiones se pueden atribuir a las diferentes regiones. Las dos figuras opuestas muestran las emisiones anuales de gases de efecto invernadero para el año 2005, incluyendo el cambio de uso del suelo. Reconocimiento de las emisiones debido al cambio de uso del suelo es un tema controvertido :. 289

Escenarios de emisiones, las estimaciones de cambios en los niveles de emisiones futuras de gases de efecto invernadero, se han proyectado que dependen de la incertidumbre la evolución económica, sociológica, tecnológica y natural. En la mayoría de los escenarios, las emisiones siguen aumentando durante el siglo, mientras que en unos pocos , se reducen las emisiones. las reservas de combustibles fósiles son abundantes, y no limitar las emisiones de carbono en el siglo 21. escenarios de emisiones, junto con el modelo del ciclo del carbono, se han utilizado para producir las estimaciones de la forma las concentraciones atmosféricas de gases de efecto invernadero podría cambiar en el futuro. Con los seis IPCC SRES "marcador" escenarios, los modelos indican que para el año 2100, la concentración atmosférica de CO2 podría oscilar entre 541 y 970 ppm. Este es un aumento de 90 a 250% por encima de la concentración en el año 1750 .

Los medios de comunicación populares y el público a menudo confunden el calentamiento global con el agotamiento del ozono, es decir, la destrucción del ozono estratosférico por los clorofluorocarbonos. Aunque hay unas pocas áreas de vinculación, la relación entre los dos no es muy fuerte. Reducción de la capa de ozono estratosférico ha tenido una influencia leve enfriamiento sobre las temperaturas superficiales, mientras que el ozono troposférico aumento ha tenido un efecto de calentamiento un poco más grande.

-La evidencia del calentamiento del sistema climático incluye aumentos observados-



No hace falta. "Perdieron" los datos primarios.

So even in Spanish we should remember that first they lost all the raw data
-Leaked emails won't harm UN climate body, says chairman | Environment...
The IPCC, which was set up by the UN in 1988, is the world's leading authority on climate change. of the raw data used to calculate warming has been permanently lost -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/29/ipcc-climate-change-leaked-emails
and the entire UN climategate fraud was blown wide open with the software cheat codes revealed, massive tampering involved and disgraced 'climate' scientists running for cover...
Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email...
Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995. Strong left the UN in disgrace awhile back due to some type of money scandal
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html
so we really have a full scale attempt to repair the myth of what used to be "global warming" in the face of a world wide drop in temperature.
Now they assign a nonsense phrase like "climate change".

What they mean is a war of climate and we'd better start paying the IMF to get them to stop chemtrailing us and lower the HAARP output a trifle.

Q & A - Global Warming / Climate Cahange


‘There is no evidence of significant global warming’ — Yes, there is

http://grist.org/climate-energy/there-is-no-evidence/



‘The temperature record is unreliable’–But temperature trends are clear and widely corroborated

http://grist.org/climate-energy/the-temperature-record-is-simply-unreliable/



‘One hundred years is not enough’–Yes it is

http://grist.org/climate-energy/one-hundred-years-is-not-enough/



‘The scientists aren’t even sure’ — No scientist ever is

http://grist.org/climate-energy/the-scientists-arent-even-sure/

http://grist.org/climate-energy/there-is-no-proof-that-co2-is-causing-global-warming/



‘The satellites show cooling’–No, they don’t

http://grist.org/climate-energy/the-satellites-show-cooling/



‘Global warming stopped in 1998?–Only if you flagrantly cherry pick

http://grist.org/climate-energy/global-warming-stopped-in-1998/



‘Some sites show cooling’–But you can’t draw global conclusions from individual sites

http://grist.org/climate-energy/some-sites-show-cooling/



‘Global warming is a hoax’–I wish James Inhofe were just a hoax …

http://grist.org/climate-energy/global-warming-is-a-hoax/



‘There is no consensus’–If this is not consensus, what would consensus look like?

http://grist.org/climate-energy/there-is-no-consensus/



‘Consensus is collusion’–Is climate science maturing, or should we reach for our tinfoil hats?

http://grist.org/climate-energy/consensus-is-collusion/




‘Climate models are unproven’–Actually, GCM’s have many confirmed successes under their belts

http://grist.org/climate-energy/climate-models-are-unproven/



‘Global warming is part of a natural cycle’–This idea is one short step above appealing to magic

http://grist.org/climate-energy/current-global-warming-is-just-part-of-a-natural-cycle/



Volcanoes emit more CO2 than humans’–Not even close

http://grist.org/climate-energy/volcanoes-emit-more-co2-than-humans



‘Climate is always changing’–That doesn’t mean it isn’t different today

http://grist.org/climate-energy/climate-is-always-changing/



‘Natural emissions dwarf human emissions’–But emissions are only one side of the equation

http://grist.org/climate-energy/natural-emissions-dwarf-human-emissions/



‘Natural emissions dwarf human emissions’–But emissions are only one side of the equation

http://grist.org/climate-energy/natural-emissions-dwarf-human-emissions/



‘The CO2 rise is natural’–No skeptical argument has been more definitively disproven

http://grist.org/climate-energy/the-co2-rise-is-natural/



‘Climate scientists dodge the subject of water vapor’–No, they really don’t

http://grist.org/climate-energy/climate-scientists-dodge-the-subject-of-water-vapor/

http://grist.org/climate-energy/water-vapor-accounts-for-almost-all-of-the-greenhouse-effect/



‘It’s the sun, stupid’–Very bright, yes, but not getting brighter

http://grist.org/climate-energy/its-the-sun-stupid/



http://grist.org/series/skeptics

isn't that cute?
All from a very special [ one ] website! It cracks me up to see the relentless desperation to cover over the topic of HAARP and chemtrails, the IMF and their carbon tax and the disgraced UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC)
Still they are trying to patch a sinking hulk of 'global warming'.
With what, you may ask?
The answer is hot air and nothing more.

Objection: Global warming is a hoax perpetrated by environmental extremists and liberals who want an excuse for more big government (and/or world government via the U.N.).

This is a common line, regardless of how ridiculous it is, so it should not go unanswered.

Answer: Here is a list of organizations that accept anthropogenic global warming as real and scientifically well-supported:

NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS):
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20120806/

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA): http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/index.htm

National Academy of Sciences (NAS): http://books.nap.edu/collections/global_warming/index.html

State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC) – http://www.socc.ca/

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): http://epa.gov/climatechange/index.html

The Royal Society of the UK (RS) – http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=3135

American Geophysical Union (AGU):
http://www.agu.org/sci_pol/pdf/position_statements/AGU_Climate_Statement.pdf

American Meteorological Society (AMS): http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/climatechangeresearch_2003.html

American Institute of Physics (AIP): http://www.aip.org/gov/policy12.html

National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR): http://eo.ucar.edu/basics/cc_1.html

American Meteorological Society (AMS): http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/jointacademies.html

Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS): http://www.cmos.ca/climatechangepole.html

Every major scientific institution dealing with climate, ocean, and/or atmosphere agrees that the climate is warming rapidly and the primary cause is human CO2 emissions. In addition to that list, see also this joint statement (PDF) that specifically and unequivocally endorses the work and conclusions of the IPCC Third Assessment report. The statement was issued by:

Academia Brasiliera de Ciencias (Brazil)
Royal Society of Canada
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Academie des Sciences (France)
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
Indian National Science Academy
Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
Science Council of Japan
Russian Academy of Sciences
Royal Society (United Kingdom)
National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)

You can also read this statement [PDF], which includes all the above signatories plus the following:

Australian Academy of Sciences
Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
Caribbean Academy of Sciences
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Royal Irish Academy
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

But if scientists are too liberal and politicians too unreliable, perhaps you find the opinion of key industry representatives more convincing:

BP, the largest oil company in the UK and one of the largest in the world, has this opinion:

There is an increasing consensus that climate change is linked to the consumption of carbon based fuels and that action is required now to avoid further increases in carbon emissions as the global demand for energy increases.

Shell Oil (yes, as in oil, the fossil fuel) says:

Shell shares the widespread concern that the emission of greenhouse gases from human activities is leading to changes in the global climate.

Eighteen CEOs of Canada’s largest corporations had this to say in an open letter to the Prime Minister of Canada:

Our organizations accept that a strong response is required to the strengthening evidence in the scientific assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We accept the IPCC consensus that climate change raises the risk of severe consequences for human health and security and the environment. We note that Canada is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

Have the environazis seized the reigns of industrial power, in addition to infiltrating the U.N., the science academies of every developed nation, and the top research institutes of North America? That just doesn’t seem very likely.

http://grist.org/climate-energy/global-warming-is-a-hoax/

http://grist.org/climate-energy/there-is-no-consensus/

http://grist.org/series/skeptics/

they just keep recycling the same horse shit
back on track
http://conservapedia.com/Climategate
The Climategate scandal erupted on November 19, 2009, when a collection of email messages, data files and data processing programs were leaked from the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (CRU) located in the UK, revealing scientific fraud and data manipulation by scientists

All this effort!
The IMF really really wants you to pay a carbon tax!

Objection: Climate is complicated and there are lots of competing theories and unsolved mysteries. Until this is all worked out, one can’t claim there is consensus on global warming theory. Until there is, we should not take any action.

This is similar to the “global warming is a hoax” article, but at least here we can narrow down just what the consensus is about.

Answer: Sure there are plenty of unsolved problems and active debates in climate science. But if you look at the research papers coming out these days, the debates are about things like why model predictions of outgoing longwave radiation at the top of the atmosphere in tropical latitudes differ from satellite readings, or how the size of ice crystals in cirrus clouds affect the amount of incoming shortwave reflected back into space, or precisely how much stratospheric cooling can be attributed to ozone depletion rather than an enhanced greenhouse effect.

No one in the climate science community is debating whether or not changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations alter the greenhouse effect, or if the current warming trend is outside of the range of natural variability, or if sea levels have risen over the last century.

This is where there is a consensus.

Specifically, the “consensus” about anthropogenic climate change entails the following:

the climate is undergoing a pronounced warming trend beyond the range of natural variability;
the major cause of most of the observed warming is rising levels of the greenhouse gas CO2;
the rise in CO2 is the result of burning fossil fuels;
if CO2 continues to rise over the next century, the warming will continue; and
a climate change of the projected magnitude over this time frame represents potential danger to human welfare and the environment.

While theories and viewpoints in conflict with the above do exist, their proponents constitute a very small minority. If we require unanimity before being confident, well, we can’t be sure the earth isn’t hollow either.

This consensus is represented in the IPCC Third Assessment Report, Working Group 1 (TAR WG1), the most comprehensive compilation and summary of current climate research ever attempted, and arguably the most thoroughly peer reviewed scientific document in history. While this review was sponsored by the UN, the research it compiled and reviewed was not, and the scientists involved were independent and came from all over the world.

The conclusions reached in this document have been explicitly endorsed by …

Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil)
Royal Society of Canada
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Academié des Sciences (France)
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
Indian National Science Academy
Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
Science Council of Japan
Russian Academy of Sciences
Royal Society (United Kingdom)
National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)
Australian Academy of Sciences
Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
Caribbean Academy of Sciences
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Royal Irish Academy
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

In addition to these national academies, the following institutions specializing in climate, atmosphere, ocean, and/or earth sciences have endorsed or published the same conclusions as presented in the TAR report:

NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS)
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20120806/

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cmb-faq/globalwarming.html

National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
http://books.nap.edu/collections/global_warming/index.html

State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC)
http://www.socc.ca/cms/en/home.aspx

Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS)
http://royalsociety.org/

American Geophysical Union (AGU)
http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/climatechangeresearch_2003.html

American Institute of Physics (AIP)
http://www.aip.org/gov/policy12.html

National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
http://eo.ucar.edu/basics/cc_1.html

American Meteorological Society (AMS)
http://eo.ucar.edu/basics/cc_1.html


Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS)
http://nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf

If this is not scientific consensus, what in the world would a consensus look like?

(Addendum: One could legitimately argue that such policy statements by necessity hide possibly legitimate internal debate while trying to present unity of position. Science is ultimately determined in peer reviewed journals. Fortunately, there is a bit of research that looked specifically at this very question — the subject of another guide entry.)

Work on the HAARP Station began in 1993. The current working IRI was completed in 2007, and its prime contractor was BAE Systems Advanced Technologies.

http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/factSheet.html

Work on the HAARP Station began in 1993. The rise in Global Temperature started between 1920 to 1920 as this graph clearly shows - debunking your HAARP conspiracy theory.

The previous graph is yet another in a seemingly endless supply of faked 'data' due to the fact ( admitted ) that the raw data used to construct them has been 'lost'.
And good grief, these weasels are sure on this for the IMF and their carbon tax...

The Climategate scandal you are talking about pertains to only one institution - University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (CRU) located in the UK.

______________________________________________

Here is a list of other organizations that accept anthropogenic global warming as real and scientifically well-supported:

NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA):

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC):

National Academy of Sciences (NAS):

State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC) –

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA):

The Royal Society of the UK (RS)

American Geophysical Union (AGU):

American Meteorological Society (AMS):

American Institute of Physics (AIP):

National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR):

American Meteorological Society (AMS):

Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS):

Every major scientific institution dealing with climate, ocean, and/or atmosphere agrees that the climate is warming rapidly and the primary cause is human CO2 emissions. In addition to that list, see also this joint statement (PDF) that specifically and unequivocally endorses the work and conclusions of the IPCC Third Assessment report. The statement was issued by:

Academia Brasiliera de Ciencias (Brazil)
Royal Society of Canada
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Academie des Sciences (France)
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
Indian National Science Academy
Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
Science Council of Japan
Russian Academy of Sciences
Royal Society (United Kingdom)
National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)

You can also read this statement [PDF], which includes all the above signatories plus the following:

Australian Academy of Sciences
Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
Caribbean Academy of Sciences
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Royal Irish Academy
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

______________________________________________

It is so typical of you to look at one tree out of the whole forest.

oh, the appeal to a gaggle of foundations, think tanks and interested parties on the payroll of the IMF.

we sure have some dedicated carbon tax weasels, don't we?
Shut down Operation Cloverleaf and HAARP.
Begin criminal investigations on crimes against humanity charging the UN and the IMF with mass murder.

http://www.examiner.com/article/leuren-moret-fukushima-haarp-nuclear-attack-by-cia-doe-bp-for-london-banks
Leuren Moret: Fukushima HAARP nuclear attack by CIA, DOE, BP for London banks
'Climate change' my ass. This is a war upon the populations of Earth.

Leuren Moret is a conspiracy theorist.

Leuren Moret Versus:


NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA):

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC):

National Academy of Sciences (NAS):

State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC) –

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA):

The Royal Society of the UK (RS)

American Geophysical Union (AGU):

American Meteorological Society (AMS):

American Institute of Physics (AIP):

National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR):

American Meteorological Society (AMS):

Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS):

Every major scientific institution dealing with climate, ocean, and/or atmosphere agrees that the climate is warming rapidly and the primary cause is human CO2 emissions. In addition to that list, see also this joint statement (PDF) that specifically and unequivocally endorses the work and conclusions of the IPCC Third Assessment report. The statement was issued by:

Academia Brasiliera de Ciencias (Brazil)
Royal Society of Canada
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Academie des Sciences (France)
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
Indian National Science Academy
Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
Science Council of Japan
Russian Academy of Sciences
Royal Society (United Kingdom)
National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)

Australian Academy of Sciences
Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
Caribbean Academy of Sciences
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Royal Irish Academy
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

plus many others

the agents for the IMF carbon tax keep dragging out this list as if it means anything other than that these interested parties have vested interests in this scam and little more.
All are implicated in the fraud at various levels including funding sources.
IPCC Fraud :
IPCC Fraud : "claims were made for which there was no evidence; in some cases the 'evidence' was clearly manufactured."
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/01/06/claims-were-made-for-which-there-was-no-evidence-in-some-cases-the-evidence-was-clearly-manufactured/