Climate Change & Mind Control
by Richard K. Moore   May 24, 2016

Politically incorrectConcern over climate change has become the existential issue for activists and citizens all over the world. The level of concern, the desperation, is very much like the feelings we had during the Cold War, when we believed we were always just a radar-blip away from nuclear extinction.

I suppose the beginning of the widespread concern began with Al Gore’s film, An Inconvenient Truth. From there the concern has been fed by countless nature documentaries, and by frequent media reports of rising sea levels, desperate polar bears, hottest days on record, and heartless oil companies. What’s there to talk about, the science is settled. Either you’re concerned about climate change, or you’re a head-in-the-sand climate denier, or you don’t believe in science, or else you’re in the pay of the oil companies. End of story. But as they say in my favorite song from Porgy and Bess, “It Ain’t necessarily so”.

Censored at WikipediaDoes it not raise suspicion when what seems to be an anti-establishment message is trumpeted from so many bullhorns? Is this a grassroots movement or is it being led from above? If it’s really anti-establishment then why isn’t the media propaganda being better managed, as it is in every other area of our lives, from foreign policy to chemtrails to vaccines? Why aren’t climate-change worriers being labeled by pundits as delusional, along with chemtrail activists and vaccine refuseniks? What’s wrong with this picture? Why are we being inundated with sentiments that seem to oppose the established regime and the profits of the supposedly all-powerful corporations?

Again, rather than speculating randomly, it makes sense to refer to the Big Agenda, i.e., a technocratic world government. Climate hysteria has succeeded in channeling all concerns about the environment into a single priority — the reduction of carbon combustion, which implies the reduction of energy consumption generally. In other words, whether people realize it or not, they are campaigning for energy rationing. What better way to micromanage the affairs of the world? In the interests of the Earth, you are allowed one lukewarm shower per week, to be monitored by your smart meter. Technocracy — the centralized management and distribution of resources, based on the ’the greatest good for the greatest number’, as determined by ‘the experts’, and even more by those who pay their salaries. One should never forget the maxim, “Be careful what you wish for”.

As for the so-called science, it’s all bogus. In Gore’s film, for example, he shifted the graph, so that it showed CO2 increasing prior to temperature increases. In fact, temperature increases precede CO2 increases, in the long-term record. I carried out my own climate study, based not on what anyone claimed, but on the actual historical temperature data, going back many thousands of years. It turns out that CO2 has no noticeable effect on climate, as you would expect from a trace gas. We had 200 years of warming, and that was expected, based on the long-term pattern. It has now turned around, and we’re in for 200 years of equally-rapid cooling. That’s why the folks at East Anglia were caught trying to “hide the decline”. Here are two articles I published on the subject:

Climate Science: Observations versus Models
Climate Variation & its Cosmic Origins

The fascinating thing, from a mind-control perspective, is how such a Big Lie, presumably based on science, can be turned into a mass consensus. Obviously there cannot be any grand conspiracy that includes all scientists. So how does it work? As regards the general public, they're a piece of cake; they respond to Gore, and they respond to the constant media propaganda. As usual, they believe whatever they’re told repeatedly. As regards scientists, the story is a bit more interesting.

As we all know, scientists divide themselves into specialties. There are very few who actually specialize in climate science. The rest look to the few for judgments about climate, just as they look to geneticists for judgments about genetics. Most scientists have no more understanding of climate than the public has. So it’s only necessary to get control over certain research centers, and over the editorial policies of certain journals. From that base of operations emerged the famous ‘climate models’, which are based on the false assumption that temperature rises in line with CO2 concentration. Meanwhile, CO2 levels are in fact increasing.

Once the models were given official blessing by the corrupt IPCC, as regards climate truth, then the funding floodgates opened. A scientist could get a grant for his research, as long as the title was of the form, “The effect of climate change on X”. The pseudo models, plus the fact of rising CO2, transforms such a meaningless piece of research into ‘yet another alarm bell’. It is no surprise that activists would rally in response to the apparent dangers.

This has been going on long enough now that we’ve passed a certain mind-control threshold. Besides being politically incorrect, it has now become a sign of mental imbalance, or retardation, to be a ‘denier’. It’s scary how easy it is to control the minds of populations.

Message of May 2016 from Peter Meyer to Richard K. Moore:

You might be interested to hear that in Australia the CSIRO (govt. research organization) is planning on shutting down the section that studies ice core data, eliminating 74 jobs. The ice lab was set to partner with NASA in looking for million-year-old ice. The CSIRO will still, however, do research on preparing for expected climate changes and the prevention of further climate change (ha!ha!).

This sounds like a political move — eliminate the scientific work likely to disprove AGW and thereby maintain the profitable (for the banks) carbon trading schemes.

A search on "csiro paleo-climate science unit" will bring up relevant articles.

Richard replied:

Here we see more evidence for the coming of technocracy: society ruled by science, and science ruled by manufactured orthodoxy. Ice cores are out because they contradict AGW orthodoxy. AGW orthodoxy is in because it enables a certain societal agenda (ie, 21). In general, real science must be suppressed. In Canada whole swaths of public-sector science have been cut from the budget over the past few years, including those who monitor marine life in BC. In this case the relevant orthodoxy is: no need to worry your head about Fukushima.

Carbon trading isn’t the reason for AGW orthodoxy, rather it’s a motivator for the lower echelons. The real reason for Big Agendas is always social control, and social engineering, not money. Those who call the shots can always access more money than they need, given that they control most of the world’s currencies and directly own a considerable fraction of the world’s resources.

See also Climate Change and Trump on Scott Adams' blog, especially the comments, such as this one by "DanB":

Yip Yap, Yip Yap. In the early 70s I ran home from elementary school to my parents to tell them we needed to move from North Dakota to Texas because my teachers presented a scientific report that global cooling was going to cover Northern US with a sheet of ice by the turn of the century. All scientist agreed global cooling caused by humans was going to kill the planet. The next scare was the ozone. Upon further review, I noticed scientists have gone back and forth between global warming and global cooling since the early 1900s depending on what the current climate trend was. Although scientists keep changing their predictions for the earth's future climate, they have remained consistant that humans have caused it. As always, they point at the new technology that makes the current prediction correct versus the bad predictions of old technology. Sorry, but I am not buying it anymore. Hell, the scientists aren't even bold enough to say warming or cooling anymore. Now it is just change. Getting colder? That is because of climate change caused by humans. Getting hotter? That is also caused by humans. Until all these scientists live in huts with no electricity, ride bikes for transportation and take sail boats to travel abroad, I will sleep easy knowing humans have little to no affect on the climate.

And for a marvellously informative set of pages on climate change see Monte Hieb's

 Global Warming:
A Chilling Perspective

Richard K. Moore's Articles on Serendipity
The Global Warming Scare Serendipity Home Page