the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

Interpretations of Propaganda

Posted by Jeff Id on May 15, 2014

A Gallup poll reported recently the percentage of people who believe in global warming and the impact on their lives.

 

1fg1lko9aeudfirowsqxww[1]

It’s interesting that the lowest point for the dark green line occurs in early 2010, right after climategate.   People seem smart enough to recognize the basic physics of global warming, and some appear blindly susceptible to the fear mongering when it involves people hurting the environment.  Considering that we have seen no global warming since 1998, it is impressive that 11% more people are afraid of serious effects to their lives than in 1998 when the first poll was recorded.

They must think that the thermometer records are a an evil Koch brother plot or something.   I don’t know, it is impossible to make any sense out of what people think sometimes.

The good news is it only cost approximately a half trillion dollars to change those opinions.  By that estimate, we can pass 50 percent fear-for-life for only another 637 billion and a supermajority of 66% for only 1.36 trillion dollars!

Money well spent I say!

 

 

 

 

 


14 Responses to “Interpretations of Propaganda”

  1. The problem remains, most people do not care, and only hear what the MSM says. SO they believe the lies.

  2. omanuel said

    Thank you, Jeff, for having the courage to question propaganda.

    I was personally “too close to the trees to see the forest,” but Climategate helped me gain this new perspective:

    FEAR of nuclear annihilation in 1945 initiated the chain of events that led to Climategate in 2009. This is the conclusion of precise experimental data** and the work of a nuclear geochemist, KAZUO KURODA, that took secret possession of Japan’s atomic bomb plans in 1945.

    Forgiveness and healing from the trauma of Climategate emails may be aided by sharing this story:

    a.) Aston’s warning on 12 Dec 1922 of the danger of transforming Earth into a star by uncontrollable release of nuclear energy [See page 20, last paragraph of Aston’s Nobel Prize Lecture]:

    http://veksler.jinr.ru/becquerel/text/books/aston-lecture.pdf

    b.) Information on uncontrolled chaos in the closing days of WWII

    _ 1. Allied atomic bombs destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki;

    _ 2. Japan exploded an atomic bomb off the east coast of Konan, Korea; http://tinyurl.com/my5zsty

    _ 3. Stalin’s USSR troops captured Japan’s atomic bomb facility and took scientists and technicians to Russia; http://tinyurl.com/n3agdan and

    _ 4. A young nuclear geochemist took secret possession of Japan’s atomic bomb plans . . . http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2170881.stm

    FEAR of death forged the alliance of world leaders and scientists that Climategate emails exposed in Nov 2009.

    With kind regards.
    Oliver K. Manuel
    Former Student of
    KAZUO KURODA &
    Former NASA Principal
    Investigator for Apollo

    **Pages 19-27 of my biography are nine pages of precise experimental data that falsify post-1945 Standard Models of the cores of:

    1. Heavy atoms like Uranium
    2. Some planets like Jupiter
    3. Ordinary stars like the Sun
    4. Galaxies like the Milky Way
    5. The expanding Universe

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Chapter_2.pdf

  3. Take a look at slide #35 here:
    http://www.lpi.usra.edu/planetary_atmospheres/presentations/Catling.pdf

    The slide appears to be part of a James Hansen paper that should have been published last year. If all goes well with “Pal Review” it will be published soon. If the “Main Stream Media” is not asleep at the switch they will realize that Hansen has solved two important problems.

    In 1896, Arrhenius calculated that Earth’s surface temperature would rise by 4.5 Kelvin for each doubling of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.
    http://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/arrhenius-revisited/
    Slide #35 shows 4.5 K per doubling:

    To explain the last seven glaciations in terms of [CO2] the sensitivity constant would have to be 16 Kelvin/halving of [CO2]:
    http://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2013/05/04/the-dog-that-did-not-bark/
    Slide #35 shows 16 K/halving. How amazing is that? You can bet Hansen’s calculations will be not be available to the general public yet the “Useful Idiots” in the MSM will assure us that this utter non-science (= nonsense) is revealed truth.

    CAGW was never about science; it is propaganda backed by trillions of dollars. Even so it lacks traction because “Mother Nature” has a wicked sense of humor.

    • M Simon said

      “Mother Nature” has a wicked sense of humor.

      Yup.

    • omanuel said

      Yes, Mother Nature has a “wicked sense of humor” and will at a time of Her choosing show world leaders and their armies of propaganda artists (disguised as “scientist”) who is really in control.

      I do not know when, but I already know absolutely the final conclusion to Climategate:

      “Truth is victorious, never untruth !”

  4. Iain Hall said

    Reblogged this on Iain Hall's SANDPIT and commented:
    The thing that never ceases to amaze me is that even if the alarmists are right about the science (something that I think unlikely)the political reality at a global level is that the mooted prescription of massive cuts in the use of fossil fuels just can not be made to happen. This means that any “mitigation” schemes can never work and that expenditure on these schemes is just a total wast of effort and treasure. In the end if there is any substantial change in the climate we will have to adapt to those changes and any capital not wasted on futile mitigation will be better spent on the necessary adaption. Tell this message to the true believers and they immediately resort to name calling as they are unable to get their heads around the global truth.
    Cheers Comrades

  5. Skiphil said

    Jeff, some fascinating and important material I am finding on early activist propaganda, even before Hansen’s notorious 1988 debacle at the US Senate committee hearing…. cross posted with Judith’s place if I may:

    This is about how biased general climate assessments have been from the start, long before the NCAs (but providing a template for 27 years of climate science activism posing as neutral science). This is info on the 1987 workshops and summary document which spurred the whole process leading into UNFCCC, IPCC, and now entities like the NCAs.

    Speaking of scientific ACTIVISTS:

    Biased at birth??

    This crucial 1987 process which led toward the UNFCCC and the IPCC had as its three core sponsors three groups which have included the following activist scientists:

    (1) Michael Oppenheimer – EDF
    (2) John Holdren, WHRC
    (3) Paul Ehrlich and Jane Lubchenko, Beijer Inst.
    (current affiliations, don’t know yet who might have been involved in 1987)

    Far from any attempt at an objective, unbiased representation of scientists, this process was advocacy and activism at its core. Right from Day One!! No wonder they were providing a range of temp. increases estimated at 0.3C to 0.8C per DECADE without drastic action (in the document linked below).

    (1) “Interesting” that the Environmental Defense Fund was one of the 3 core groups listed as initiating the whole process in 1987!

    (2) Along with the “Woods Hole Research Center” (this is John Holdren’s activist group and NOT the famed Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Holdren merely glommed onto the reputation of WHOI with his activist group’s name…. resulting in lots of confusion through the years)

    (3) The 3rd of the initiating groups may be more more scientifically respectable, perhaps, (the Beijer Institute affiliated with the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences — although still activist in orientation) — it lists Paul Ehrlich and Jane Lubchenko among its “Fellows” who seem to have very long term affiliations with the Beijer…. although I don’t see what the make-up was in the late ’80s.

    http://www.princeton.edu/step/people/faculty/michael-oppenheimer/Villach-Bellagio-WMO-report.pdf

    • omanuel said

      Good luck with your search.

      I agree, Skiphil, the AGW story has been biased from its birth in the “Unreported FEAR & CHAOS” that gripped world leaders and nuclear scientists in August 1945.

      Aston had warned in December 1922 of the danger of accidently igniting Earth’s atmosphere by uncontrollable release of nuclear energy. After Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed, Japan apparently exploded its own bomb on 12 Aug 1945. Stalin’s USSR troops captured Japan’s atomic bomb facility at Konan, Korea. They shot down and captured the American crew of a plane that tried to fly over the area. And at least one copy of Japan’s plans for building atomic bombs disappeared from government control for the next fifty-seven years, from August 1945 until 2002.

      These chaotic events in August 1945 provided a noble reason to deceive the public about neutron repulsion in cores of stars and nuclei: To save the world from nuclear annihilation.

      The AGW debate cannot be resolved because:

      FEAR of nuclear annihilation started the deception in 1945.
      FEAR of public retaliation keeps the deception going today.

      “Oh what a tangled web we weave,
      When first we practiced to deceive!”

  6. Further tests should be performed in order to evaluate the risk of long-term exposure to such fields.
    For governmental purposes, these are treated as same as normal bicycles.
    Laws vary from state to state and for example neither license nor insurance is required
    under the state laws in California.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: