Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Historical insights & thoughts about the world we live in - and the social conditioning exerted upon us by past and current propaganda.

Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby KingMinusHead on April 2nd, 2015, 6:45 pm

Firstly, my apologies if this has already been raised before (if so, admins please feel free to delete this thread).

I generally pride myself on being pretty 'aware' when it comes to the use of CGI - I enjoy trying to spot it in film and TV, especially when it might be quite subtle or more 'background-oriented'. But after reading through the Japanese Tsunami thread a few days back I was shocked to realise that, even after having watched September Clues X number of times and followed the forums here for some time, it never occurred to me that the tsunami footage might have been faked. And I had certainly spent time watching various footage on YouTube (to the point where I was already familiar with some of it when reviewing the thread), so I have no excuses! Not long after, however, I came across this promo trailer for the 2012 documentary 'Chasing Ice'. As I watched it - with the self-annoyance of having missed the fakery of the tsunami footage still freshly smarting, and vowing to never again be so naive - It occurred to me that this footage appeared somewhat 'interesting'. It struck me as having quite a 'layered' feel, with so much 'dramatic movement' and a kind of 'artificial flow'.

full link:

I decided to follow up on this and watch the full length feature. A quote by the lead character James Balog at 09:50 stood out to me:
"The public doesn't want to hear about more statistical studies, more computer models, more projections; what they need is a believable, understandable piece of visual evidence, something that grabs them in the gut." (It almost reads like a line right out of 'Psy-ops for Dummies'!)

I would be interested to hear what other people have to say about this imagery. I have watched it quite a few times now and the 'feel' of it has not changed for me, but of course, I can't be sure. I thought it might be worth posting for a couple of reasons: firstly, because it appears in the context of a 'global warming' documentary, and is clearly intended to 'visually demonstrate the supposed real effects of global warming' in a highly dramatic fashion (I'm not sure of people's perspectives regarding global warming). Secondly, because the image quality is quite high, and the board often talks about 'CGI becoming so good that it may become impossible to detect'. Indeed, it may be 'legitimate footage' depicting 'the devastating environmental effects of global warming', but I thought it might be worth bringing it to the board's attention nonetheless.
Posts: 17
Joined: March 11th, 2015, 4:35 am

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby simonshack on April 2nd, 2015, 11:28 pm

Thanks for alerting us to this Global Warming propaganda video, KMH - one of many (I hardly bother watching them anymore....)

You've gotta love their CGI insertion of Manhattan - on top of their CGI "melting icebergs"...

At 4:10 in that video, the commentator goes:

"That's a magical, miraculous, horrible, scary thing. I don't know that anybody's seen the miracle and the horror of that."

WHO writes this crap? Oh wait - a better question: WHO buys this crap?

I don't think I have seen such blatant and shameless CGI - ever since checking out Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" Hollywood (ice)blockbuster... Let us remind ourselves that Gore's movie (much as the GW scam itself) was a massive money-maker :

"The film grossed $24 million in the U.S. and $26 million in the foreign box office, becoming the tenth highest grossing documentary film to date in the United States."

That's a 50 million-dollar "documentary" - and yet the Global Warming fable is a laughing stock for most thinking people.


What a (failed) clown this Al Gore is. Not even multi-million propaganda budgets are able to lend him any sort of credibility.
Posts: 6313
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby KingMinusHead on April 3rd, 2015, 6:57 am


Thanks for the feedback, I'm glad you see the same issues with the footage. You're right, it really is very blatantly CGI. The most obvious thing on first inspection is the clear movement of 'separate layers' behind one another, with static background layers in other places (almost like the old Hanna Barbera cartoons). But it's the 'landslides' that are the real giveaway in my opinion, they 'crumble down' in a way that appears entirely unreal and looks more like smoke or something than physical material. Plus, there seem to be some masking issues/glitches on the layer edges where the 'landslides' are seen, you can detect a degree of 'fuzziness'. I actually wonder if the 'enormous rock object' that 'emerges' from the water at 1:50 is almost meant to look like a whale on purpose, just to heighten the absurdity!

What I would like quickly share though, is the process of how I identified it:
As I wrote above, I had only just finished surveying the Japanese Tsunami footage (the 'quickly rising tides' gifs, missing building image for example), and was fairly annoyed with myself for having not even considering to possibility of CGI. Yet, even as I came to click on the Chasing Ice 'Ice calving' video, I actually DID NOT immediately recognise it as CGI; in fact, I actually initially experienced the same kind of 'wonderment of mass natural spectacle' that I almost certainly would have experienced when initially viewing the tsunami footage - talk about irony! However, because I had the tsunami footage, a degree of critical thought, and some self-annoyance still very fresh in my mind, I was 'primed' to notice the fakery more readily and was able to 'break free' of the 'state of wonderment' that had initially transfixed me. I am quite sure the chances of having concluded as to the fakery would have been SIGNIFICANTLY lower had I not just been primed prior to exposure. The reason I am sharing this is because it might just somewhat anecdotally illuminate some of the psychological processes that prevent 'the average person' from more critically recognising such fake imagery (particularly in context of 'non-trauma-related imagery), and the positive effects of 'priming' on task performance and insight (in this case, the ability to recognise fake footage). I wrote about it briefly in a thread started by icarusinbound (, but had no idea that I would actually experience it personally in relation to spotting fakery a couple of weeks later!

I hope that it might be somewhat helpful to include these observations here, for other board members, and visitors who are becoming more aware of the extent of this fakery :)
Posts: 17
Joined: March 11th, 2015, 4:35 am

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby resolution on April 3rd, 2015, 9:19 am

full link:

The above documentary screened on Channel 4 (UK) in 2007 is the only rational one I've seen in the mainstream media about the climate change issue. The science in it seems a more reasonable explanation of how the world works, and is consistent with the sun being the major driver of the earths' climate. In the end, the global warming agenda is all about control, influence and money as are most power struggles in this world.
Posts: 160
Joined: May 12th, 2012, 6:15 am

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby Selene on April 9th, 2015, 3:58 am

KingMinusHead wrote:A quote by the lead character James Balog at 09:50 stood out to me:
"The public doesn't want to hear about more statistical studies, more computer models, more projections; what they need is a believable, understandable piece of visual evidence, something that grabs them in the gut." (It almost reads like a line right out of 'Psy-ops for Dummies'!)

I would be interested to hear what other people have to say about this imagery.

Hi KingMinusHead,

Not so much on the imagery, rather on the quote you mention. And on "Global Warming". Now, I realise that quite some people here might reject the author because of the on Cluesforum proposed "Dinosaur Hoax", but please step over that thought and I can recommend reading this excellent "semi-fictional" novel. It ties into the quote above and gives a lot of background on the absurdity of the Antropogenic Global Warming (AGW) hoax:


I am not much of a reader of books, but this is one of my favourites.
Posts: 195
Joined: January 19th, 2015, 8:59 pm

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby Critical Mass on May 3rd, 2015, 11:09 am

I found this video aimed at 'the next generation' to be most revealing...

full link:

It proudly features the doublethink we've all come to know & love.

It condemns the sin of 'media hyperbole' & the 'cherry picking of facts' to create a 'confirmation bias' and then, often in the same breath, promotes the mythical '97% of scientists', mocks the 'stone age minds' of the public and laments the lack of fear & worry in the people who supposedly do 'believe' in climate change.

I'm think I'm going to spend some time on what exactly they're 'teaching' children nowadays.


The chasing ice movie reminds me of the 'great garbage avalanche of 2505'...

Critical Mass
Posts: 544
Joined: July 8th, 2014, 11:33 pm

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby Farcevalue on May 3rd, 2015, 1:29 pm

I give people more credit. Those that remain unconvinced about climate change (or what was once known as weather) are the remnants that still have the capacity to trust their senses.
Posts: 367
Joined: August 27th, 2011, 12:21 pm

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby mnew9 on May 23rd, 2015, 3:12 pm

Antarctic sea ice: Record coverage causes problems for supply ships to South Pole

Researchers and scientists have gathered in Hobart to discuss how to combat the growing problem of expanding Antarctic sea ice.
Sea ice levels are at record highs near the South Pole and have made it increasingly hard for Antarctic ships to deliver supplies.

Global warming? Phooey! :lol:
Posts: 94
Joined: September 11th, 2010, 6:57 am

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby ICfreely on May 24th, 2015, 8:38 pm

Come on mnew9, don’t be so cynical. This is serious stuff. Our future hangs in the balance. For the love of God, think of the children!

FYI, it’s Climate Change! Global Warming is so 2009. Get with the program. Our brave new knights in white shining lab coats have worked their fingers to the bone (on their keyboards) creating accurate CGI models that definitively prove we face impending doom lest we take immediate action. The science is settled & the clock is ticking. It may already be too late. This is no time for climate denial. Global problems demand global solutions. Weather Whether we like it or not, we’re all in this together & we must pay our fair share.

Need I remind you of how well we dealt with the hole in the ozone layer?

Watching the Ozone Hole Before and After the Montreal Protocol - September 18, 2012
About a quarter-century ago, scientists and policymakers unveiled what the United Nations calls “the most successful treaty in UN history.” On September 16, 1987, the first 24 nations signed on to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer; 173 more have signed on in the years since. The international agreement likely saved the world from an environmental crisis, while setting an example for how to develop and implement environmental policy.

Prompted by scientific observations from the laboratory, the ground, aircraft, and satellites, the Montreal Protocol first reduced and then banned the chlorine- and bromine-based chemicals (particularly chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs) that destroy atmospheric ozone. The destruction of the ozone layer allows more of the Sun’s ultraviolet radiation to reach the surface of the planet, increasing the risk of sunburns, skin cancer, and eye damage. The most prominent and infamous sign of depletion is the annual “ozone hole” that forms around the South Pole.

In 1979—when scientists were just coming to understand that atmospheric ozone could be depleted—the area of ozone depletion over Antarctica grew to 1.1 million square kilometers…

In 1987, as the Montreal Protocol was being signed, the area of the hole reached 22.4 million square kilometers...

By 2006, the worst year for ozone depletion to date, the numbers were 29.6 million square kilometers and just 84 DU. By 2011, the most recent year with a complete data set, the hole stretched 26 million square kilometers and dropped to 95 DU.

According to NASA scientist Pawan Bhartia, “The Antarctic hole is stabilizing and may be slowly recovering. Our focus now is to make sure that it is healing as expected.”

Scientists found in a 2009 study that without the Montreal Protocol, global ozone depletion (not just Antarctic) would be at least 10 times worse than current levels by 2050.

Changes in the ozone hole now are not significantly driven by changes in CFCs, but instead driven by year-to-year changes in weather in the stratosphere,” said Bhartia, who in 1985 was the first researcher to present satellite data showing the Antarctic ozone hole. “Like two snowflakes, two ozone holes are never alike.

An animation of cross-calibrated data sets from the Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (TOMS) on the Nimbus-7 satellite and the Ozone Monitoring Instrument on the Aura satellite which were reanalyzed by scientific models prove the ozone (which, btw, is only 0.12 inches thick) is recovering. These guys are on the ball & have our best interests at heart. They should be celebrated on the 16th of every September (International Day for the Preservation of the Ozone Layer). They saved us before & they can do it again – given proper funding of course. For instance, more UV-B research is needed because:

…while global efforts continue in a bid to prevent further ozone depletion, scientists have warned that the eventual closing of the ozone hole could dramatically alter the climate of the Southern Hemisphere and accelerate global warming.
In Europe at the moment, experts are more concerned about the effects of global warming and the health implications for us from “bad” ozone within the troposphere than the levels of stratospheric ozone.

It turns out, just like cholesterol, there’s good & bad ozone. And similar to pharmaceutical medications, geo-engineering treatments also have negative side effects. We’re facing a four-front war in Antarctica against global warming, global cooling, ‘good’ ozone depletion and ‘bad’ ozone formation. We’re morally obligated to support the cause seeing as we’re to blame for it & our collective future depends on it.

Researchers are making great progress:

This Mosaic of Satellite Images Shows Antarctica Like Never Before – September 02, 2014
Big changes are afoot at the north and south of the planet, thanks to climate change. Seeing Antarctica at this level of detail from space is a boon to researchers studying the phenomenon.

"Looking at Antarctica from space gives us so much more information than we could ever get from the ground," CCIN's information services and science manager told Fast Company. "The [mosaic of 3,150 satellite] images can tell us what is happening in places that we have never seen and may not see for a long time."


That’s amazing! Satellites are truly a Godsend. God bless David Gallaher and Garrett Campbell for their recent discovery.

"Lost" Satellite Photos Reveal Surprising Views of Earth in the 1960s - National Geographic News - 10, 22, 2014
Scientists have uncovered a cache of satellite images of Earth from the 1960s that had been forgotten in storage for nearly 50 years and that push back the first satellite images of our planet a full 17 years.

-Too bad they never found the Apollo 11 telemetric data.

The trove includes the first publicly available satellite photos of Europe, the earliest aerial views of Antarctica's ice, and a record of Central Asia's Aral Sea before it dried up.

The images, when compared with recent satellite photos, show how humankind has changed the planet, from deforestation to changes in sea ice.

-We’re like a cancerous growth on Mother Earth. I feel guilty just being alive.

Among the images from 1964 were views of Antarctica that showed a greater extent of sea ice than ever measured since. That is, until recent weeks, when the 1964 record was broken just as it was discovered to be a record at all. Unlike Arctic sea ice, which has been in decline due to global warming, the extent of Antarctic ice has varied, making the historical data all the more important for scientists trying to understand what drives changes there.

-You see? We’re making progress. We must stay vigilant!

Earth scientists David Gallaher and Garrett Campbell liberated the data from a National Climatic Data Center archive in North Carolina, uncovering 25 boxes of magnetic tapes and photographic film from three Nimbus weather satellites launched in the 1960s and 1970s.

So Gallaher and Campbell took on the painstaking process of digitizing hundreds of thousands of photos and making them publicly available.

The grainy images are from "the Precambrian of satellite data," Gallaher says.

The pair say that many more treasures may be waiting to be found among the images.

-I can’t wait.

"We pried open the box, but we didn't by any means pull out [everything] in there," says Gallaher. The scientists do not have enough funding to analyze all they found and are now raising money to make more data available to the public.

-Give what you can. Every little bit helps.

"We're still hoping to get three more years of data," says Campbell. For now, satellite images that were obtained at a cost that would amount to billions in today's dollars, according to the researchers, remain in the dark.

-Awesome! We could get valuable research data for pennies on the dollar. It's a no brainer.

Scientists scanned nearly 40,000 images taken from Nimbus 1 to create the earliest satellite views of Antarctic sea ice…
The newfound Nimbus satellite photos give scientists their earliest look yet at Antarctica before global warming.

How can anyone deny Climate Change? Is the continent of Antarctica a fictitious fantasy island as well? Come on, get real!

NASA Research Leads to First Complete Map of Antarctic Ice Flow – 08, 18, 2011

Flow of Ice Across Antarctica

full link:
Posts: 549
Joined: February 7th, 2015, 6:41 pm

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby Selene on June 13th, 2015, 6:46 pm

full link:

A nice video by Stefan Molyneux, unfortunately not sourced on screen like he does in many of his other presentations.

Main topics presented:
- breaking down the ridiculous "97% consensus on human induced Global Warming"; "worse than fiction, as it is passed as true" - well put
- debating the human factor in Global "Warming"
- looking into the most filthy business of all time; the huge air (CO2) trade
- stating the real reason behind environmental destruction; the way debt works and is promoted; consuming as much as possible in the now and deferring the "pay"load in the future

Now, he mentions the "fact" that Global Warming is also happening elsewhere in the solar system. This is a difficult point without looking into the publications behind it. Is it based on real astronomical observations from Earth (using one of the many great telescopes mankind has built over the years -and keep building them which according to the NASA stories would be strange if we have "a clear view of the skies" with Hubble, Kepler and all those other fantasy probes they claim to have sent to circle the Earth).

So, if this argument comes from Earth-observed data (and has withstood the scrutiny of -real, not politised- scientific review), then I'd call it a valid point. If it's coming from NASA (Molyneux is as far as I know -unfortunately- not (yet?) criticising NASA or space travel as a whole) it's a different subject...

Searching for information on Yahoo!, Google and BING gave me the following link written by the perpetrators and useful idiots (any scientist seeing this page would be horrified by the claims and the way science is presented -not as a method, but as something like divine scripture [see Stefans mentioning of this in the final seconds of his presentation quoting Roger Bacon]- and the rape of the word "skeptical", doing exactly that which is non-skeptical; merely following the politised science) which points to 1 pdf written by an Australian farmer (!) where he quotes 2 papers to which I unfortunately don't have full access:

- Marcus, P.S. 2004: Prediction of global climate change on Jupiter:
Nature 446:828-8318
- Hathaway, D.H. and Wilson, R.M. 200: What the sunspot record tells us about space climate.
Solar Physics 224: 5-19

We do have an abstract and 1 double paged article which help further; it looks like they used "data" "gathered" by NASA's fantasy flight Voyager for the Nature article and sunspots observed from Earth for the Solar Physics one, so only 1 easy-to-find publication about this discovery is pretty pretty poor...:

1 - Nature, 2004
Jupiter's atmosphere, as observed in the 1979 Voyager space craft images, is characterized by 12 zonal jet streams and about 80 vortices, the largest of which are the Great Red Spot and three White Ovals that had formed1 in the 1930s. The Great Red Spot has been observed continuously since 1665 and, given the dynamical similarities between the Great Red Spot and the White Ovals, the disappearance of two White Ovals in 1997–2000 was unexpected. Their longevity and sudden demise has been explained5 however, by the trapping of anticyclonic vortices in the troughs of Rossby waves, forcing them to merge. Here I propose that the disappearance of the White Ovals was not an isolated event, but part of a recurring climate cycle which will cause most of Jupiter's vortices to disappear within the next decade. In my numerical simulations, the loss of the vortices results in a global temperature change of about 10 K, which destabilizes the atmosphere and thereby leads to the formation of new vortices. After formation, the large vortices are eroded by turbulence over a time of approx60 years—consistent with observations of the White Ovals—until they disappear and the cycle begins again.

2 - What the sunspot record tells us about space climate - Solar Physics, 2004
Sunspot observations through historic time [from Earth I suppose, but cannot read the full article]

full link:

This show of the Corbett Report is an interview with the author of a book on Technocracy. Direct link starting @ 21:48

Interesting is @21:48-29:00, where they show on screen what allegedly the Club of Rome in 1991 had planned (haven't (read) the book to check the correctness of it). See the wording "fill the bill". That is not natural scientific and also not engineering speak. That is politisation of serious sciences and engineering.

Also mentioned further on in this part of the full video is Christiania Figueres, not an engineer nor natural (climate, geo-, hydro-) scientist, yet responsible for the AGW agenda within the UN. :rolleyes:

More reading material:
- Topic about the "Warming in the Solar System" on AboveTopsecret forum - some more NASA-based disinformation and what seems to be more real [i.e. Earth-based] information listed there
- Consensus reality - Wikipage about "consensus reality", a pretty poor piece which should be improved by one of our readers?
- Truth by consensus - Wikipage about "truth by consensus", already the title is completely erroneous, for real truth seekers... :unsure:


How can great minds be produced in a country [or: world] where the test of a great mind is agreeing in the opinions of small minds?
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)
Posts: 195
Joined: January 19th, 2015, 8:59 pm

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby ICfreely on June 27th, 2015, 11:50 pm

I'm posting this article to (hopefully) provoke thought, not a heated debate!

Global Warming and the Age of the Earth: a Lesson on the Nature of Scientific Knowledge

Anthony Watts / June 7, 2015
In the wake of Karl et al. 2015, which revises data to match a consensus, we can all take a lesson from how scientific consensus has operated in the past

Guest essay by Dr. David Deming

The world stands on the verge of committing itself to limits on the emission of carbon dioxide that would drastically reduce the use of fossil fuels. If this fateful decision is made, the economies of developed nations will be strangled. Human prosperity will be reduced. Our ability to solve pressing problems, both human and environmental, will be severely limited. We have been told that these shackles must be imposed to forestall a hypothetical global warming projected to occur some time in the distant future.

-Contrary to popular belief, carbon dioxide is not a harmful substance. Humans & animals inhale oxygen/exhale carbon dioxide and plants inhale carbon dioxide/exhale oxygen. Life, as we know it, wouldn’t be possible without carbon dioxide! Mainstream science has basically convinced us breathing is the original sin.

-The ‘fossil fuel’/’peak-oil’ fairytales deserve a separate post or thread. In the meantime here are a few links:

-I think one of the main goals of the AGW scam is the establishment of a new international monetary system. ‘Smart’ appliances and meters will be used to monitor our ‘carbon footprints’ & determine the amount of ‘carbon credits’ we will be allocated. You know, It’s all about austerity & sustainability. We can’t keep depleting our ‘planet’s’ resources like parasites.

The validity of warming predictions depends upon the questionable reliability of computer models of the climate system. But Earth’s climate system is complex and poorly understood. And the integrity of the computer models cannot be demonstrated or even tested. To anyone with an awareness of the nature and limitations of scientific knowledge, it must appear that the human race is repeating a foolish mistake from the past. We have been down this road before, most notably in the latter half of the nineteenth century when it appeared that mathematics and physics had conclusively answered the question of the Earth’s age. At that time, a science that had been definitely “settled” fell apart in the space of a few years. The mathematical models that appeared to be so certain proved to be completely, even ridiculously wrong.

The age of the Earth is one of the great questions that has puzzled people for thousands of years. In Meteorologica, Aristotle (384-322 BC) asserted that the world was eternal. But with the advent of Christianity and Islam, scholars began to assume that humanity was coeval with the Creation of the world. It followed that the age of the Earth could be estimated from a careful examination of sacred writings.

-Simply put, the age of the Earth is unknowable! Seeing as the origin of the Earth/life (assuming there was a beginning) are not observable, demonstrable or repeatable it is inherently unscientific to pretend to know when/how they occurred. Big Bang & Evolution proselytizers have successfully convinced people that, by not attributing the origin of Earth/life to an intelligent designer, their theologies are somehow scientific. The false ‘evolution/ancient Earth vs. creation/young Earth’ paradigm was intentionally constructed to polarize and trap people into never-ending and fruitless debates. Although it’s sold as science vs. religion it’s, in actuality, a banal battle between two diametrically opposed religious ideologies.

The first person to make a quantitative estimate of the Earth’s age was the Islamic scientist al-Biruni (c. 973-1050). al-Biruni based his chronology on the Hindu, Jewish, and Christian religious scriptures. He divided the history of the world into eras, and concluded that it had been less than ten thousand years since the Creation.

Working in the tradition begun by al-Biruni, Bishop James Ussher (1581-1686) estimated the age of the Earth by meticulously studying the Bible and other historical documents. In The Annals of the World Deduced from the Origin of Time, Ussher pinpointed the date of Creation as the “night preceding the 23rd of October, 4004 BC.” Ussher’s scholarship was impressive, and his dates were accepted as the standard chronology. Bible editors began to place Ussher’s dates in the margins of their texts.

-Wow, he meticulously pinpointed it to the day so he must have been right, right?

Isaac Newton (1642-1727), the greatest [pseudo] scientist of the age, was also a Biblical fundamentalist who believed in a young Earth. Newton explained to his nephew, John Conduitt, that the Earth could not be old because all human technology was of recent invention. Like Ussher, Newton wrote his own universal history, Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, that was published posthumously in 1728.

-I wonder if the textbook know-it-alls who take comfort in accusing dissenters of being scientifically illiterate people who are a) obviously unfamiliar with the Newtonian/Scientific Method and/or b) blinded by religious/personal biases, know these little fun facts about their ‘god’ whose ‘laws’ they obey so dutifully.

By the time Charles Darwin (1809-1882) published Origin of Species in 1859, geologists were of the opinion that the Earth was practically, although not literally, of infinite age. With infinite time at this disposal, Darwin was able to invoke the slow mechanism of natural selection as an explanation for the organic evolution evidenced in the fossil record.

-The heliocentric & evolution ideologies both required infinite time to explain the (supposed) billions of ‘light years’ distance of the stars and the (supposed & ever-changing) gradual process of ‘transmutation of species.’

To demonstrate the vast extent of geologic time, Darwin offered the erosion of the Weald, a seaside cliff in England, as an offhand example. Darwin assumed an erosion rate of an inch a century, and then extrapolated that some 300 million years were apparently necessary to explain the total amount of erosion that had occurred.

But Darwin’s estimated erosion rate of one inch per century was little more than speculation. The number was unconstrained by any measurement or scientific observation. Nineteenth-century geologists lacked any quantitative method for establishing dates. The rocks of the Earth’s crust might represent the passage of ten million years. But just as easily, the amount of time could have been a hundred, a thousand, or ten thousand million years.

-‘Gods’ of Newton & Darwin’s stature don’t hypothesize like us mortals. They induce & decree! BTW, we still lack quantitative methods for establishing dates.

Darwin and his geological colleagues were soon taken to the woodshed by the greatest physicist of the nineteenth century, William Thomson (1824-1907). Better known as Lord Kelvin, Thomson was a man of prodigious gifts who possessed enormous intellectual stature. He published his first scientific paper at age sixteen, and had been appointed a chaired professor at the University of Glasgow at the precocious age of twenty-two.

In 1861, Lord Kelvin began to seriously address the question of dating the Earth. He was aware that the Earth radiated internal heat. This process could not have been going on forever. By maintaining that the Earth was infinitely old, the geologists in effect were postulating that energy was not conserved. This violated the First Law of Thermodynamics, and Kelvin was aroused to do battle.

-Shit gets real when the decreed ‘laws’ of science ‘gods’ contradict each other. Historically, the ‘law’ of the ‘god’ who’s more charismatic, convincing, conniving and connected prevails.

In the nineteenth century, the only known source for the internal heat of the Earth was the original mechanical heat of accretion. Reasoning that the Earth had been molten at the time of its formation, but cooling ever since, Kelvin was able to construct an elegant mathematical model that constrained the age of the Earth on the basis of its measured geothermal gradient. Much the same method is used today by coroners who estimate the time of death by taking the temperature of a cadaver.

In 1862, Kelvin published his analysis in a paper titled On the Secular Cooling of the Earth. He arrived at a best estimate for the age of the Earth of 100 million years. Kelvin’s estimate was no idle speculation. It was based on a precise mathematical model constrained by laboratory measurements and the laws of thermodynamics.

-Lord Kelvin + elegantly precise mathematical models = scientific ‘proof’ the Earth is 100 million years old.

Kelvin attacked Darwin directly. He raised the question: were the laboratory measurements and mathematical calculations in error, or was it more likely “that a stormy sea, with possibly channel tides of extreme violence, should encroach on a chalk cliff 1,000 times more rapidly than Mr. Darwin’s estimate of one inch per century?”

Darwin was devastated. He wrote to his mentor, Charles Lyell, “for heaven’s sake take care of your fingers; to burn them severely, as I have done, is very unpleasant.” Geologists were left sputtering. They had no effective rebuttal to Kelvin’s calculations. Within a few years, the geological establishment began to line up with Lord Kelvin. Among the influential converts was Archibald Geikie, President of both the British Association for the Advancement of Science and the Geological Society of London.

-Consensus truth – the science was settled! Darwin had lost the battle but would go on to win the war thanks to his bulldog.

Researchers began to look for evidence that would confirm Kelvin’s calculations. In 1865, Geologist Samuel Haughton had estimated the age of the Earth as 2300 million years, a number reasonably close to the modern value of 4500 million years. But under the influence of Kelvin’s authority, in 1878 Haughton drastically shortened his earlier calculation to 153 million years.

-Haughton reduced his estimate by roughly 93% in deference to his Lord’s authority. Very scientific, wouldn’t you say?

A lone voice of dissent was raised by the biologist, Thomas Huxley (1825-1895). Huxley pointed out that there was a fundamental weakness in Kelvin’s mathematical model. “Mathematics may be compared to a mill of exquisite workmanship, which grinds you stuff of any degree of fineness; but, nevertheless, what you get out depends on what you put in.” Put in more modern terms, Huxley’s observation amounted to “garbage in, garbage out.”

-Well versed in the politics and nuances of the scientific hustle (as smj would say), Hoaxley realized that Kelvin’s garbage needed to be pushed out before Darwin’s garbage could be pushed in.

But as the end of the nineteenth century approached, the scientific community was beginning to regard Kelvin’s estimate of 100 million years as a near certainty. Writing in the American Journal of Science in 1893, geologist Warren Upham characterized Kelvin’s estimate of the age of the Earth as the most “important conclusion in the natural sciences…[that] has been reached during this century.”

The science was definitely settled in 1899 by the Irish physicist, John Joly (1857-1933). Joly hit upon a robust method for calculating the age of the Earth that was entirely different from Kelvin’s. Joly’s calculation was childishly simple, yet apparently foolproof. He estimated the age of the Earth by dividing the total salt content of the oceans by the rate at which salt was being carried to the sea by the rivers. He found that it would take 80 to 90 million years for the ocean’s salt to accumulate.

-If you believe it’s possible to determine the total salt content of the oceans, then I have some Apollo lunar samples that might interest you.

In consideration of the uncertainties involved, Joly’s age estimate was essentially identical to Thomson’s. With different methods yielding the same result, it seemed evident that the result was conclusive: the Earth was 100 million years old. It seemed that to deny this reality, was to deny not only the authority of the scientific establishment but the very laws of nature themselves.

-Challenging the false authority of the pseudoscientific establishment is the epitome of scientific integrity.

The ingenious calculations of Kelvin and Joly were soon to be overturned by an improbable empiricism. In the thirteenth century, modern science began when philosophers came to the realization that logic alone could never uncover the secrets of the cosmos, no matter how seductive its appeal. Contemplation of the mysterious properties of the magnet convinced Roger Bacon and his contemporaries that nature contained occult or hidden forces that could never be discerned or anticipated rationally, only discovered experimentally.

-Instead of attributing unknown/unknowable phenomena to an invisible sky god, Bacon & Co. chose to uncover nature's occult or hidden forces with meticulously crafted ‘thought experiments.’ Pot meet kettle.

In 1896, Henri Becquerel accidentally discovered radioactivity when he found that photographic plates were exposed when placed next to certain minerals. By 1904, it became apparent that there were radioactive minerals inside the Earth releasing heat. Lord Kelvin’s assumption of no internal heat sources was wrong. At the beginning of the twentieth century, it was not even clear if the Earth was cooling or heating. Thomson’s calculations were precise, but he had no way of knowing about radioactivity.

-OMG, how could the ‘Lord’ be fallible? Say it ain’t so Lo!

Radioactivity also provided a rigorous way to calculate the age of the Earth. The accepted modern estimate for the age of the Earth is 4500 million years. The nineteenth-century estimate of 100 million years that seemed so certain was wrong, not just by 20 or 30 percent, but by a factor of 45. In retrospect, the reason that Thomson’s estimates had been independently confirmed is that geologists looked for data that would support Thomson’s physics. The consensus that had emerged was the product of a human psychological process, not objective science. The nature of science is such that people who look for confirming evidence will always find it.

-The worst kind of deception is self-deception!

Compared to modern climate models, William Thomson’s models were simple, and contained only a few assumptions. In contrast, global warming models are hideously complex, and contain numerous hidden assumptions, many of which are highly uncertain.

-Whenever we place blind faith in their mounding (ci cago) piles of assumptions, scientists make asses out of you & me.

There is also much we do not understand about why Earth’s climate changes. It is possible that cosmic rays, modulated by the Sun’s magnetic field, cool Earth by inducing the formation of clouds. We don’t know why Ice Ages end so spectacularly and suddenly. Once they begin, Ice Ages should continue indefinitely, as cooling is reinforced by a number of positive feedbacks.

-I don’t know if Ice Ages occurred at all. The concept of Ice Ages & the rising/sinking of the continents were science’s answer to the Biblical Great Flood (which was inspired by the Epic of Gilgamesh flood narrative):

“After reading Agassiz's work Charles Lyell believed he had found the mechanism for the elevation and submergence of continents. He theorized that just as high mountains become ice-covered, so too might entire continents if they had become sufficiently elevated by subterranean volcanic action. He proposed that by the accumulation of enough ice, say two miles thick, this would depress the elevated continents below sea level. Here the ice would eventually melt allowing the submerged land to receive the sediments. Later, helped by the mysterious process of "isostasy," the continents would elevate once again above sea level. Of course, since there were twenty-one sedimentary layers of rock this entire process would have been repeated the same number of times. Lyell's explanation was eagerly welcomed by anti-biblical enthusiasts, and, while they were reluctant to argue for twenty-one ice ages, the textbooks settled for four. In 1863 Lyell made tentative suggestions in this direction in chapters 12 to 16 of his Antiquity of Man. There have been half a dozen theories to explain the origin and the number of ice ages. It is perhaps in recognition of this that textbooks today speak of "interglacial periods" thus not having to commit themselves to any specific number.”

We ought to be intelligent enough to acknowledge that we don’t know what we don’t know. Science is never settled. We should keep in mind Seneca’s admonition. “Nature does not reveal all her secrets at once. We imagine we are initiated in her mysteries: we are, as yet, but hanging around her outer courts.”

There has never been a time when the need for understanding the limits and nature of scientific knowledge is so compelling, or the ramifications of ignorance so consequential. Those who ignore history are apt to repeat its mistakes.[/i]

- Hear, hear!

David Deming ( is a geophysicist and professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma. He is the author of a history of science in three volumes, Science and Technology in World History.

[i] "Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint...the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today… Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity."

-- Michael Ruse FRSC (Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada), Professor of philosophy
Posts: 549
Joined: February 7th, 2015, 6:41 pm

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby Flabbergasted on June 28th, 2015, 11:18 am

ICfreely wrote:"Mainstream science has basically convinced us breathing is the original sin."

"There has never been a time when the need for understanding the limits and nature of scientific knowledge is so compelling"

Lots of precious stuff in that post.
Posts: 601
Joined: November 12th, 2012, 1:19 am

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby ICfreely on October 19th, 2015, 5:06 am

In the spirit of moving forward with the research, I quickly assembled this ‘core issue’ post.

A United Green Religion
Blending the world’s religions together and bringing them under the umbrella of the United Nations has been high on the Global Green Agenda for many years. Dr Robert Muller, until recently the Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations, and its #2 ranked official, appears to be the driving force behind the plan to create a new United Religion. His passion for this spiritual agenda is readily apparent, "My great personal dream is to forge a tremendous alliance between all religions and spiritual groups, and the UN. We desperately need a United Religions Organisation to bring reconciliation, unity and peace to all the peoples of our world."

The final green religion will be the blending of all religions into one unified expression of spirituality based on reverence for our shared planet and human interconnectedness with all living beings. No doubt anyone one who refuses to accept this new spirituality will be labelled an intolerant radical fundamentalist. In the wake of an earth-shattering crisis, such as the one described in A United World, ‘fundamentalists’ are likely to be blamed for all the world’s problems. A new world religion, in addition to a new world order, will be gratefully received by most given a crisis of sufficient magnitude.

You see? They intentionally provoke people in order to get negative emotional responses (which is how most decent people would react). They’re counting on it. So why give it to them on a silver platter? I say, turn the other cheek – butt cheek that is!

So who are ‘they’?

Well, here are a few of them in their own words:

The Green Economy – A Global Economic Suicide Pact
"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsiblity to bring that about?"
- Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme

"A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States. De-development means bringing our economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation."

- Paul Ehrlich, Professor of Population Studies

"The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can't let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are."
- Michael Oppenheimer, Environmental Defense Fund

"Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control."
- Professor Maurice King

"We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place for capitalists and their projects. We must reclaim the roads and plowed land, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of acres of presently settled land."
- David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!

"Complex technology of any sort is an assault on human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it."
- Amory Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute

"The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet."
- Jeremy Rifkin, Greenhouse Crisis Foundation

Not surprisingly, the backers of the greenback agenda are the kings of bling. They know that time is money & money makes the world go round. They could give two fucks about trees because money doesn't grow on them. But they love tree huggers because they are helping pave the path towards:

Miliband plans carbon trading 'credit cards' for everyone
Every citizen would be issued with a carbon "credit card" - to be swiped every time they bought petrol, paid an energy utility bill or booked an airline ticket - under a nationwide carbon rationing scheme that could come into operation within five years, according to a feasibility study commissioned by the environment secretary, David Miliband, and published today.
In an interview with the Guardian Mr Miliband said the idea of individual carbon allowances had "a simplicity and beauty that would reward carbon thrift".

The 2009 Climategate incident delayed their plans but they are persistent to say the least. Their rhetoric gets more & more pathetic as time goes on. For example, John Kerry recently made this bizarre (doublespeak) statement:

John Kerry: Global Warming Played a Role in Syrian Civil War
By Tom S. Elliott — October 17, 2015

Appearing today at the Milan Expo 2015, Secretary of State John Kerry spoke about the role he believes global warming played in the Syrian civil war.

“It is not a coincidence that immediately prior to the civil war in Syria, the country experienced the worst drought on record,” he said. “As many as 1.5 million people migrated from Syria’s farms into Syria’s cities, and that intensified the political unrest that was beginning to brew.”

“Now, I’m not telling you that the crisis in Syria was caused by climate change,” Kerry conceded. ”No, obviously, it wasn’t – it was caused by a brutal dictator who barrel bombed, starved, tortured, and gassed his own people.”
“But the devastating drought clearly made a bad situation a lot worse,” he said.

Jumpy, I dedicate this post to you!

Chillax brochacho! Outing the perps is easier than you think. Please don’t stop posting on my account. Speak your mind freely but remain cognizant of the ‘reverse psychology’ tactics of these twisted misters.
Posts: 549
Joined: February 7th, 2015, 6:41 pm

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby Flabbergasted on October 19th, 2015, 1:39 pm

My great personal dream is to forge a tremendous alliance between all religions and spiritual groups, and the UN (Robert Muller).

Just for the record (it is probably known to many already), the quest for a syncretic umbrella religion goes back to at least 1983 and the UN-sponsored URI (United Religions Initiative). Lee Penn competently documented the birth and rise of the monster in his book "False Dawn".
Available here:
Posts: 601
Joined: November 12th, 2012, 1:19 am

Re: Global warming - 'Chasing Ice'?

Postby ICfreely on November 4th, 2015, 6:34 pm

Religious leaders call for a zero carbon, climate resilient, equitable future agreement
World Council of Churches - A worldwide fellowship of churches seeking unity, a common witness and Christian service
20 October 2015

In a recent statement, religious leaders called for an ambitious climate agreement, reminding all governments to commit to emission cuts and climate risk reduction. They promised to continue working for climate justice, including divestment from fossil energy.

The statement is a follow-up to the Interfaith Summit on Climate Change organized by Religions for Peace and the WCC in September 2014 in New York, as well as Pope Francis’ Encyclical on “care for our common home”. The document also refers to international faith initiatives such as pilgrimages for climate justice [ :D ] and fasting for the climate [ :lol: ].

Dr Guillermo Kerber, WCC programme executive for Care for Creation and Climate Justice, said, “Once again faith leaders have expressed an urgent need for a fair, ambitious and binding treaty as an outcome from Paris. Time is running out, and present commitments by states, although relevant, do not match with the needs of people in the most vulnerable communities in various places who are already suffering the impacts of climate change.”

Priest + Rabbi = $$$$$$IX-$$$$$$IX-$$$$$$IX

In what ways, if any, do science and Judaism conflict?


Judaism is rich, but often arcane; our stories alienate skeptical moderns who cherish hard facts. Science is true, but often cold; its mechanistic view devalues nature and humanity. Science emphasizes knowledge and utility; Judaism views the world with appreciation and awe. Both matter, and we Jews have long been blessed to blend the best of each. While offering its own mythic truths, Judaism has long respected scientific truths: The Bible carefully observes the natural world (Proverbs, Job, Ecclesiastes); great Talmudic rabbis were also agronomists and researchers; astronomers and doctors wrote great medieval Jewish treatises, and Rav Kook supported Darwin, writing that “evolution sheds light on all God’s ways.”

Our pro-science history gives hope today, when attacks on science threaten our very lives [ :o ]. There’s a robust scientific consensus that our short-sighted actions are already causing dangerous climate change; it’s getting worse but can be averted with our serious commitment. Some ideologues [ :ph34r: ] (usually funded by carbon-intensive industries) [ :lol: ] deny [ :lol: ] climate science. Here, we Jews, who bring scientific facts into our spiritual formation, can lead: When we pioneer zero-carbon religion for our imperiled era, we’ll be both empirical and ethical. Sustainability is the synthesis of science and spirit.

Rabbi Fred Scherlinder Dobb

Adat Shalom Reconstructionist Congregation

Bethesda, MD

$cientism + $pirituality = $U$TAINABILITY!

Zero Carbon World is a charity registered in England and Wales, and Scotland. It is also a Limited liability company registered in Bath, Somerset.


The objectives of the charity are
1. To implement carbon reduction projects
2. To challenge the misconceptions surrounding carbon reduction amongst individuals and organisations
3. To encourage greater adoption of sustainable solutions

For the love of G-d, indoctrinate the children!

Kids suing to push government on climate change
By PHUONG LE, Associated Press
Published: November 3, 2015, 6:10 AM

SEATTLE — They can’t vote yet, but dozens of young people want a say in the planet’s future, so minors nationwide have been suing states and the federal government in recent years to push action on climate change.

They say their generation will bear the brunt of global warming and that government at every level has an obligation to protect natural resources, including the atmosphere, as a “public trust” for future generations.

The Oregon-based nonprofit [EXPLOIT] Our Children’s Trust has been leading efforts to file lawsuits or administrative petitions in every state and against the federal government. Some of the youth-led cases have been dismissed, while others are pending in states including Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Oregon.

“None of them have gotten to the finish line,” said Michael Gerrard, a professor and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. “It’s an uphill climb. The U.S. courts have so far not wanted to set climate policy.”

“We’re the ones who have to live with it if the oceans are acidic and the planet is 5 degrees warmer,” said Gabriel Mandell, 13, an eighth-grader and plaintiff in the case. “The snowpack is melting. Ocean is acidifying. The Earth is warming. Everything that can go wrong is going wrong, and we need to fix it.”

Mandell and other youths represented by the Western Environmental Law Center argue that Washington state has failed to reduce carbon emissions based on the best available science. They say the government has violated its duties under the state constitution and the legal principle called the public trust doctrine, which requires the government to protect shared resources.

The state said in court documents that the Washington Department of Ecology department was working on adopting a rule to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

“Climate change is the most important environmental problem,” said Stu Clark, Washington’s air quality program manager. “We need to do whatever we can. We are doing what we can with what we have.”
Nationwide, the cases need to pass certain legal hurdles, such as establishing that the public trust doctrine applies to the Earth’s atmosphere or that the children have standing to sue. The cases have cleared some hurdles but not all, said Gerrard, the professor.

“I don’t think this litigation is going to be successful because climate change is a global problem, and it’s not clear what a state could do,” added Richard Stewart, a law professor at New York University. “A state could do certain things, but it can only make an infinitesimal contribution” to a global problem.

In Oregon, two Eugene teens are appealing after a state judge rejected their petition in May. The judge ruled that Oregon’s public trust doctrine does not apply to the atmosphere, water, beaches and shorelines.

In August, 21 youths across the country sued the federal government, alleging that approval of fossil fuel development
has violated the fundamental right of citizens to be free from government actions that harm life, liberty and property.

The EPA did not comment on specifics of the lawsuit but said in a statement that President Barack Obama and the agency have been taking action to “give our kids and grandkids the cleaner, safer future they deserve.”

Aji Piper, 15, a Seattle high school sophomore, is a plaintiff in that case and the one in Washington state.

“The government isn’t doing the best to assure that we have the best quality of life,” he said. “It holds more urgency for us. Our future is at hand.” [ :lol: ]

The Washington case has gone the farthest because a judge in King County Superior Court will be hearing arguments on the petition’s merits, rather than on a procedural or jurisdictional issue, said Julia Olson, executive director for Our Children’s Trust.

There’s no denying that Climate Change is the bedrock of the biggest and most despotic religious/political/monetary racket of all time. September Clues and the Vicsim Report have gone a long way in exposing 9/11 and media fakery in general. Unfortunately we can’t undo 9/11 but we can (& should) try to expose/thwart CC using CF’s extensive research on NASA chicanery.
Posts: 549
Joined: February 7th, 2015, 6:41 pm


Return to General World Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest