Science Theory Unbound by Test — The Story of the Man-Made Global Warming Hypothesis
By Charles R Anderson – Australian Climate Sceptics – February 12, 2021
In 1988, James Hansen of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, announced that NASA climate models indicated a tendency for heatwave drought situations in the Southeast and the Midwest USA in the late 1980s and the 1990s. This prediction proved wrong.
Also in 1988, James Hansen, testified to our Congress that the Washington, D.C. area would go from 35 days a year warmer the 90F to 85 days a year in the next 50 to 60 years. He also said the ocean will rise between one and six feet. We are 32 years into that 50 to 60 years and so far the average number of days warmer than 90F has decreased. According to NOAA, the rise in sea level from 1988 to 2020 was 9.81 cm or 3.86 inches. Once again, 32 years into that 50 to 60 year prediction, the rise of sea level is running way behind the low end of the prediction.
About the same time, James Hansen, told a reporter the West Side Highway running along the Hudson River on Manhattan Island would be underwater in 20 years. The windows of Manhattan Buildings would all have tape across them due to the high winds. I have been in Manhattan a number of times since the start of 2020. Neither of these predictions have come to fruition.
In June 2008, Hansen claimed there would be no Arctic sea ice in the summer in 5 to 10 years. Al Gore, not to be outdone, predicted that the entire North polar ice cap would be gone in 5 years. U.S. Navy scientists predicted the Arctic could lose its summer sea ice in 2016. In 2020 there was still considerable summer sea ice at the seasonal minimum, as there has been every year since 2008.
In 2009, Prince Charles said we had 8 years to save the world. Damn, we lost the world in 2017.
In 2014, the French Foreign Minister, Laurent Fabius, said we had 500 days to avoid climate chaos.
Joe “The Great Idiot” Biden, Hanoi John Kerry, the stark raving mad 8 years to doomsday AOC, and the entire Elite of the Democratic Socialist Party claim that man-made global warming is an “existential” threat to planet Earth. Where Trump may have exaggerated his Inauguration crowd, Biden told us the massive lie that there is an existential threat to the Earth due to our use of carbon fuels. This existential threat requires him to drag us back into the Paris Climate Accord, though it is an unratified treaty. Of course, these politicians are just shills and mooks who have zero understanding of the science of radiative heat transfer.
Supposedly, the principal claim that the catastrophic man-made global warming hypothesis is true is the claim that its effects have been modelled correctly in their many global climate computer models. They recently claimed these models are good at predicting the surface temperature, but the science the models are supposed to represent makes predictions of the atmospheric temperature throughout the atmosphere, not just at the surface. What is more, the surface temperature record has been strongly biased upward in recent times and downward in the past, making it a very unreliable temperature record. The atmospheric temperature record is much more a global record and has not been manipulated and affected by urban heat island effects in the way the surface temperature record has been. So once again, let us present this comparison of the model temperature predictions for the atmosphere and actual temperature measurements of the atmospheric temperature:
The supposedly science-based global computer models predict much greater temperature increases than have been found in the measurements. The scientific method demands that we declare the hypothesis of catastrophic man-made global warming a failed hypothesis due to its long history of failed predictions. In other words, the continued belief in catastrophic man-made global warming is anti-science because it has ignored a basic requirement of the scientific method.
Why are its advocates claiming this anti-science belief is justification for putting more than 10,000 Keystone XL Pipeline workers into the already massive pool of the unemployed? Why are they denying the livelihoods of some already who earn a living extracting oil and gas from federal lands and offshore fields and many in the future whose oil and gas jobs will not be created as a result? Why are they damaging the earnings of the many people who provide goods and services to these carbon fuel industries and their employees? Why are they forcing transportation costs for all Americans to rise greatly? Why are they causing the energy costs to run our businesses and to operate our homes to increase drastically? Why are they pushing a future of electricity brown-outs and black-outs upon us? Why are they advocating spreading solar panels and wind generators over huge acreages of the nation? Why do they now no longer care how many birds and bats are killed by wind generators? Why do they want to saddle us with electric vehicles with their massive purchase cost, limited range, and massive repair costs? Why do they not care about the massive damage to our future economy and the many jobs which will be lost, the many jobs that will not be created, and the many advances in other areas of human endeavour that will never come about because of a very harmful energy policy?
The answer is the desire for the Great Reset. These advocates want what the World Economic Forum is advocating, which is an end to capitalism and end to personal property, an end to individual rights, and a complete dependence upon government controlled by a socialist Elite. Biden plagiarized his Build Back Better campaign slogan from the World Economic Forum for a reason. Biden is not a creative man. He has never created or built anything. His speciality is the destruction of things built and created by others. Even in his speeches and writings, he has a long history as a plagiarist. So, it is entirely to be expected that the kind of people who are behind the World Economic Forum has made him their point man, albeit with many socialist managers, for exercising the program of the World Economic Forum upon the USA. This program is absolutely evil and absolutely un-American. Carrying it through is massively unconstitutional. It will be extremely deleterious to the Welfare of the People of the USA. It is moving forward rapidly under the Biden Regime.
Texas Power Freeze-Down Demonstrates Political Climate Craziness
By Larry Bell | PA Pundits – International | February 22, 2021
Texas just sent a very chilling message to the rest of the nation about what to expect your life to be like with President Biden’s “Build Back Better” plan AKA, “Green New Deal,” in order to save the planet from overheating.
It seems he’s already overachieving that goal.
An unusual Arctic blast that spread across the state from the tip of the Panhandle all the way to the Rio Grande Valley has left millions of homes and businesses here without electricity.
A series of forced rolling blackouts were required to prevent power grid collapse as single-digit temperatures froze wind turbines and hobbled dozens of power plant operations.
How could this possibly happen here in Texas?
This isn’t supposed to be California, after all, where over-dependence on wind and solar power destabilized the grid during a record 2020 heat wave.
California already leads the nation with the least reliable power system and greatest number of annual outages … 4,297 were recorded between 2008 and 2017. And conditions will only become far worse as the state now requires that all new homes be nearly entirely electric.
More than 30 cities, including San Francisco, have already enacted bans on new gas appliance hookups. California plans to eventually outlaw gasoline and diesel cars.
Hey y’all… this is Texas, a land of far more savvy dudes in a state rightly famous for being awash in huge petroleum and natural gas resources.
Texas isn’t a place where we who live here ordinarily worry about freezing to death due to a lack of reliable fossil and nuclear power to heat our homes… unlike northern latitudes that routinely get really cold with iced-up failing power lines.
So, in addition to record low temperatures, what happened to change that?
I guess we got a little bit too woke.
The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) which oversees the state’s wholesale power market has shifted grid reliance away from reliable coal, nuclear, and natural gas toward heavily taxpayer-subsidized (no free lunch here) wind energy.
That wind generation now constitutes the second-largest electricity power source in Texas. According to ERCOT, it accounted for 23% of the state supply last year, behind natural gas which represented 45%.
Over the past decade, strict CO2 emission regulations have caused coal’s share of Texas’s electricity to plunge by more than half, to supply 18%.
A power crunch ensued, as bitter cold damp conditions caused wind turbines in West Texas to freeze at the same time it was causing residents to crank up their thermostats. Regulators did what they could to protect public safety by rationing gas for commercial and industrial uses to ensure fuel for power plants and household heating.
Some natural gas wellheads also froze, along with refining facilities in some locations, in turn bleeding natural gas needed for turbines that provide essential back-up “spinning reserve” power for – at best intermittent – wind and solar outputs.
And who could have possibly imagined what happened next?
The spot price of wholesale electricity on the Texas power grid spiked more than 10,000%, surging past $9,000 per MegaWatt-hour. Even during high demand summer months, $100 per MW-hr would be considered high.
On second thought, maybe Texas and every other state might have anticipated much of this occurring based upon Germany’s “Energiewende” (energy transition) experience, a policy established in 2000 to decarbonize its primary energy supply.
When the program was first launched, 6.6% of Germany’s electricity came from renewable sources, primarily solar and wind. By 2019, nearly two decades later, that share had reached 41%.
By 2019, average German household electricity costs during that same period have doubled to 34 U.S. cents per Kilowatt-hour. (Compare this with 22 cents per kWh in France, and 13 cents in the United States.)
Meager renewable energy supply conditions worsened dramatically this winter as the coldest western Europe weather in a decade have blanked millions of Germany’s solar panels with snow and ice and rendered 30,000 of its wind turbines idle. This left the greatest share of vital power coming from coal.
In January, the German RBB (Berlin-Brandenburg) public broadcasting network aired a report that sums up the consequences of continually shutting the country’s coal and nuclear energy capacities in favor of adding those “green renewable alternatives.”
Harald Schwarz, a professor of power distribution at the University of Cottbus, went straight to the point, saying: “die gesicherte leistung von wind + sonne = 0,” which means:
“The guaranteed output of wind + sun = 0.”
To be more charitable to those renewables, the actual benefit reportedly ranges between zero and two or three percent.
The RBB broadcast went on to warn that Germany’s futile attempt to replace reliable nuclear and coal-fired energy with wind and solar will extend the supply and demand gap dangerously wide.
The current trend leaves Germany with no real future alternative but to rely more on natural gas from Russia, coal power from Poland, and nuclear power from France.
And what about America, where wind and solar combined provide, at most, about four percent of our grid electricity (not total energy), versus about 80% from hydrocarbons?
The $2 trillion Biden “Equitable Clean Energy Future” agenda pledges to eliminate those hydrocarbon emissions from electricity by 2035, and then achieve “net-zero carbon” by 2050.
To prove he’s serious, on his very first day in the Oval Office, President Biden capped off the Keystone XL pipeline at the Canadian border along with about 11,000 jobs and 830,000 barrels of oil per day it would have delivered, which must now be transported by CO2-emitting rail and trucks.
On top of decimating our current energy supply infrastructure, the plan is for taxpayers to finance a half-million electric car chargers across the nation and add a humongous number of electricity-thirsty electric vehicles to further stress already precarious capacities.
Before buying into this political man-made climate crisis of lunacy, demand to know where sufficient energy will come from, and at what economic and social cost, to air condition fully-electrified Texas summer and New England winter homes – plus recharge millions of plug-in vehicles – on windless cloudy days and nights – especially during inevitable extreme weather demand periods.
Larry Bell contributes posts at the CFACT site. He heads the graduate program in space architecture at the University of Houston. He founded and directs the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture. He is also the author of “Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax.”
Wind Power Did Cause The Texas Blackouts!
By Paul Homewood | Not A Lot Of People Know That | February 22, 2021
There has been a marked lack of data made public about last week’s blackouts in Texas, which has allowed all sorts of misinformation to fly around. I suspect this is quite deliberate.
I have however found hourly data on the US EIA website. This is what happened on those crucial couple of days:
https://www.eia.gov/beta/electricity/gridmonitor/expanded-view/electric_overview/US48/US48/GenerationByEnergySource-4/edit
The chart is interactive, and below are the actual numbers from Sunday evening to Monday morning:
| MW | Wind | Gas | Total Generation |
| Sunday 18.00 | 9015 | 41042 | 66449 |
| Sunday 22.00 | 7083 | 43720 | 66804 |
| Monday 02.00 | 5205 | 40405 | 62198 |
| Monday 03.00 | 5154 | 33096 | 52952 |
So, consider this.
Between 6 pm and 10 pm on the Sunday, wind power suddenly lost 2 GW, about a quarter of its load. Fortunately, gas power was quickly ramped up to fully compensate for this.
Wind power continued to be shed, with another 2 GW disappearing by 2.00 am on the Monday morning. As demand was also declining, gas power was reduced accordingly.
However, it was between 2.00 and 3.00 am that gas power too fell off the cliff.
It must be fairly evident that this had nothing to do with weather conditions, which could not possibly have had such a sudden impact. (In this respect, gas power was perfectly stable after 3 am for the rest of the day and week).
So what did cause that sudden drop in generation, something we also see with coal at exactly the same time, which dropped from 11 GW to 9 GW in that hour?
There is only one possible conclusion, and it is that the grid itself has become totally unstable, as wind power fell away. The evidence points to massive tripping out at gas and coal power stations as generation and demand got out of balance.
I would guess that just one gas plant tripping out in this fashion would have a cascading effect.
Whilst it has been evident from the start that the sudden shedding of wind power played a major part in the blackouts, the establishment media have been quick to close ranks by putting most of the blame on gas power stations, which having much greater capacity naturally suffered bigger drops in generation.
They have done so without publishing any of the detailed data, which I have done above. All they are interested in, of course, is deflecting the blame from renewable energy.
If they had done so, it would have been obvious that the real culprit was unreliable wind power.
The Trump Energy Resilience Plan which Could have Saved Texas
By Eric Worrall | Watts Up With That? | February 20, 2021
Has Trump derangement syndrome cost Texan lives? Back in 2017, Secretary of Energy Rick Perry proposed paying Coal and Nuclear Power Stations to keep at least 90 days worth of coal onsite, for disaster resilience.
At the time the resilience proposal was widely criticised as being a thinly disguised Trump scheme to pump government money into the coal and nuclear industries. But in hindsight, a bit more resilience might have saved Texas from days of painful electricity blackouts.
From 2017;
Rick Perry: DOE’s Coal, Nuclear Proposal Is ‘Rebalancing the Market’
Perry doubles down on arguments that the NOPR will protect Americans.
LACEY JOHNSON NOVEMBER 02, 2017
Energy Secretary Rick Perry said a proposed rule to subsidize coal and nuclear plants is “rebalancing the market” to correct for the Obama administration’s support of renewable energy.
They “clearly had their thumb on the scale toward the renewable side,” said Perry, who spoke about his energy policy priorities with Meet the Press moderator Chuck Todd and Axios CEO Jim VandeHei at an event in Washington, D.C. on Thursday.
The DOE’s request to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) would upend decades of energy market policy by guaranteeing cost recovery for power plants with 90 days of fuel supply on-site — something that only nuclear power, a few hydropower sites, and some larger coal power plants can provide.
“If you can guarantee me that the wind is going to blow tomorrow, if you can guarantee me that the sun’s going to get to the solar panels…then I’ll buy into that. But you can’t,” said Perry.
The notice of public rulemaking, or NOPR, implies that there is a looming threat to grid reliability due to coal and nuclear power plant retirements. Its conclusions are largely based on an incomplete analysis of the 2014 polar vortex, which could have led to blackouts had several coal-fired plants now slated for closure not been available to serve the load.
The move has been widely criticized by clean energy advocates as politically motivated and factually unproven, and has drawn a backlash from major sectors of the energy industry.
…
Federal regulators rejected the plan, on the grounds that Rick Perry failed to provide enough evidence that retiring coal and nuclear plants was undermining grid stability. The plan was eventually dropped, after vigorous lobbying from gas and renewable energy groups.
Now that the scenario Rick Perry predicted has actually happened in Texas, it seems pretty obvious the Rick Perry was right about the risks. Nuclear power plants and fossil fuel plants which had access to adequate fuel supplies mostly stayed fully operational.
Why is government intervention required to ensure grid resilience?
Keeping several months worth of fuel onsite is a cost which does not contribute to company profits. The cost of all that reserve fuel represents money which could instead have been used to pay down capital debts, or pay out dividends to shareholders. Power companies which choose to wear this kind of expense are at a competitive disadvantage compared to power companies which run leaner operations, by running their reserves down to the bare minimum. The expense of keeping fuel in reserve impacts market share and company growth; consumers frequently flock to the lowest price energy service, without considering the long term consequences.
Rick Perry’s plan would have eliminated the financial penalty for keeping a fuel reserve onsite, by compensating power companies for the cost of maintaining substantial fuel reserves.
Given resilience payments seem to be a workable solution, will President Biden or Texas Governor Greg Abbott implement the 2017 Trump / Perry energy resilience plan, to ensure nothing like the Texas power outage disaster ever happens again?
Coronapocalypse; Big Pharma’s Doomsday Vaccine #666
By Mike Whitney • Unz Review • February 19, 2021
Here’s your Vaccine puzzler for the day:
What do Dr. Barton Williams, Hank Aaron, and 46 elderly residents in a Spanish nursing home all have in common?
Answer— They all died shortly after getting the Covid-19 vaccine.
But let’s not jump to conclusions, after all, in every case, the media has assured us that the vaccine had nothing to do with their deaths. Do you believe that?
Of course, not, but that will probably not undermine your trust in vaccines because–as you know– not trusting vaccines is tantamount to putting on a tinfoil hat and blabbering conspiracy theories about pedophile rings in the basement of pizza parlors. It’s absolute lunacy. One must never question the unshakable integrity of the big pharmaceutical companies who only produce these miracle drugs for purely philanthropic reasons. It’s inconceivable that these experimental concoctions –which have never been tested on animals or undergone long-term trials– might have been created for political purposes rather than medicinal. Is that even remotely possible?
Yes, it is possible, but it’s also another crackpot conspiracy theory, so shut up and take the jab, right?
Wrong, because everything about the Covid vaccine is wrong, just like everything about Covid-mania is wrong. It’s all unprecedented, suspicious and, frankly, weird. None of it passes the smell test, none of it. When have we ever locked down the entire country to slow the spread of a virus? When have we ever quarantined 300 million healthy people, ordered everyone to wear masks, shut down businesses, bars and schools, and pushed the economy off a cliff?
When?
Never.
When have public health experts and their Democrat allies usurped emergency powers and ruled by executive fiat essentially short-circuiting the constitutional powers of the state legislatures?
When have the media and the Tech Giants removed scientists, epidemiologists, virologists and statisticians from their platforms because their professional views conflicted with the nonsensical “official narrative” of white-coat phonies like Tony Fauci?
When have state agencies actively taken part in the purging of the accounts of individuals whose opinions do not support the mass vaccination of millions of people with a toxic cocktail that may-or-may-not impact long-term health, fertility and, yes, life itself?
When has a giant media organization, like AP, launched a full-page attack on “conspiracy theorists” whose views on the shadowy origins of the Covid infection do not match their own? (“The superspreaders behind top COVID-19 conspiracy theories“, The Seattle Times ) And why does it matter to them? Is the MSM so insecure that they feel they must viciously belittle those people with whom they disagree rather that provide objective in-depth reporting? And how does this spiteful behavior affect the public? Do people want to see their media act as enforcers of state doctrine by targeting and crushing anyone who doesn’t parrot the party doctrine? Do they like it when journalists become attack dogs for the political establishment and big pharma? Is that why we have a First Amendment?
But–media aside– the experience of the last year has been completely weird, hasn’t it? And, yet, if one simply speculates on what they think might be driving the weirdness, they are immediately smeared, censored and dragged through the mud by an army of trolls. So much for free speech, eh?
Is that normal or is someone very afraid that they are losing their control over the “spinning” of information? This is the reaction that one would expect from someone who is accustomed to monopolizing information and is determined not to share that power with anyone else. It’s also the behavior of someone who is not being completely straightforward about their objectives, someone who has something to hide.
So, what are they hiding? Who is pulling the media’s strings? Who gives Fauci and the Democrat Governors their marching orders? Who’s calling the shots in this pandemic fiasco or aren’t you the slightest bit curious?
Imagine for a minute that everything we are currently experiencing is not the random response of a government that is trying to muddle through a thorny and stressful crisis, but part of a broader plan to generate as much hysteria as possible in order to create a submissive public that clicks its heels and follows orders without question? Is that too far-fetched?
And let’s say, that at the very peak of the hysteria, a bolt of lightning appears in the night sky and suddenly there is a miracle drug, a vaccine, that promises to deliver the people from their collective misery and return them safely to normal life. Doesn’t that strike you as a bit coincidental? Oh yeah, and let’s not forget that this life-saving vaccine was invented just days after the presidential election. (Nothing to see here, move along.) It almost seems like it was part of a script, but that couldn’t be true, because that would mean that our leaders are scheming dishonest miscreants who can’t be trusted. Perish the thought.
But ask yourself this: Who is touting this new wonder drug and insisting that all 7 billion people on the planet get inoculated? Is it the scientists, virologists and epidemiologists who have no dog in the fight and who’s judgements are based on the science alone, or is it the conflicted state bureaucrats, the public health toadies and do-goodie billionaires who seek access to the personal biology of all humanity in order to effect the changes they believe will trim the world’s population and reverse the projected acceleration of climate change? Which is it?
And why– you may ask– have these do-goodie-billionaire climate activists settled on public health when their real passion is depopulation and global warming?
Good question.
Isn’t it because they have identified vaccines as the access-point they need to achieve their ambitions? Isn’t that why they have spent decades creating the critical infrastructure for the global public health organizations, not to improve the lives and health of impoverished mothers and children in Africa and India, but to expand and reinforce the tentacles of this new international vaccine-deployment hydra that can reach across the earth and draw every human being into its oily grip.
This isn’t a conspiracy theory. This infrastructure actually exists and it has been greatly expanded and strengthened in the last decade. But, why?
I would argue that this infrastructure was not painstakingly assembled to save humanity from the “killer virus”, but to implement a strategy for inserting needles in the arms of 7 billion people. This is not philanthropy. This is something else altogether. Something calculating, underhanded, and sinister. But that is just my opinion.
Of course, it’s all a crazy conspiracy theory and even if it is happening it’s not really happening because our real owners and our new Reality Czar have already decided that it’s not happening. In fact, they are reaching out across the Internet to “disappear” anyone who dares to mention what they think is actually going on. That said, we still must reconcile all the inconsistencies, half-truths and outright lies with the fact that people are dying after taking the jab. That’s the one fact that cannot be denied.
So, how do we resolve these inconsistencies? How do we explain the permanent state of emergency that only serves to strengthen the power of tyrants and their lackeys, how do we reconcile the lockdowns, the masks, the school closures, and the deliberate obliteration of our civilization for a virus that kills just 1 in every 400 people?
It’s impossible. It can’t be done. When the government goes crazy and loses the confidence of the people, skeptics will come up with theories that explain what’s going on. It’s only natural. And that’s what’s happening now.
As for the vaccines, well, we know that reputable professionals have warned us that these zombie injections could impact fertility health and mortality, but is that probable? After all, the experts, celebrities and media are promoting these mRNA vaccines with more exuberance than any Madison Avenue product-launch in history. Maybe we should set aside our concerns and just go with the flow. After all, what could go wrong? Check out this except from an interview with Dr. Chris Shaw, Ph.D, Specialist in Neuroplasticity and Neuropathology. Here’s what he said:
“The mRNA lipid-coated PEG-construct– by Moderna’s own study–does not stay localized but spreads throughout the body including the brain. Found in animal studies in bone marrow, brain, lymph nodes, heart, kidneys liver, lungs etc Doctors are saying that the vaccine does NOT cross the blood-brain barrier, but that is NOT true. … If it reaches the brain there will be an auto immune response that will cause inflammation What characterizes virtually all neuro-degenerative diseases is this misfolded protein that is characteristic to Lou Gerrigs disease, to Alzheimer’s, to Parkinsons to Huntington’s etc. They are different proteins, but they tend to form these sheets of misfolded proteins called Beta Sheets. Now you are asking cells in various parts of the body–including the brain– to make a lot of these proteins and release them to the outside, and, are we sure that’s what it’s all doing? Are you getting clusters of misfolded proteins inside neurons? That would be a bad thing to do. So you’d like to know where it is, how much of it there is, and which groups of neuronal groups its targeted. .and those are the kinds of questions you like the companies to have solved long before they got authorization and discovered some years later that they have a problem.”
“This is a vast experiment that should have been done in the lab on animals and now it is being done on people. The potential is that you are going to harm a lot of people while you do this experiment.” (“NEUROSCIENTIST’S CONCERNS ABOUT COVID VACCINES”, Chris Shaw, Ph.D, Specialist in Neuroplasticity and Neuropathology)
Sound serious?
It does to me. Frankly, I’d rather not have synthetic toxins from an experimental vaccine floating around in my brain, but that’s just me.
Now check out this clip from an interview with Robert F Kennedy Jr for a bit of background on these mRNA vaccines:
“What we know about coronavirus from 30 years of experience is that a coronavirus vaccine has a unique peculiarity, which is any attempted making of the vaccine has resulted in the creation of a class of antibodies that actually make vaccinated people sicker when they ultimately suffer exposure to the wild virus. Following the SARS epidemic that began in 2002, China launched a concerted effort to develop a coronavirus vaccine. They succeeded in developing 30 promising models, and they chose the four “best in class” to fabricate and then test on ferrets, the animal most analogous to human beings when it comes to upper respiratory infections.
The ferrets all developed admirable, robust, and durable antibody responses, and the scientists believed they had hit the jackpot. But then, when the animals suffered exposure to the wild virus, something frightening happened. The vaccinated animals sickened and died with body-wide inflammation. The vaccine had created a condition known as paradoxical inherent immune response, which amplified the injury caused by the illness rather than preventing it.
The scientists at that time recalled a similar occurrence from the 1960s where the NIH had conducted studies on a vaccine for RSV, an upper respiratory illness very similar to coronavirus. The 35 children in that study had developed a strong antibody response but had become terribly ill upon exposure to wild RSV. Two of the children died. Remembering this incident, the scientists in 2012 abandoned their efforts to create that vaccine. And that is why today you are hearing dire warnings from unexpected quarters… who have all warned that a coronavirus vaccine may end up making people sicker from coronavirus rather than avoiding the disease.” (“Interview with Robert F Kennedy J”, Children’s Health Defense)
Repeat: “when the animals suffered exposure to the wild virus, something frightening happened. The vaccinated animals sickened and died with body-wide inflammation.”
This is recurrent theme when one reads alternate literature on the mRNA vaccine. It may also explain why the vaccine manufacturers skipped animal trials before seeking approval from the FDA. We should also note, that none of the current crop of vaccines have concluded their Phase 3 trials which will not be finished for two years from today. Readers should not find that reassuring.
Let’s take a minute and dig a little deeper into this idea that vaccines can actually make you sicker and perhaps die. Here’s a blurb from a research paper published in Nature in July 2020 on the condition called Antibody-dependent Enhancement:
“Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) of disease is a general concern for the development of vaccines and antibody therapies because the mechanisms that underlie antibody protection against any virus have a theoretical potential to amplify the infection or trigger harmful immunopathology. This possibility requires careful consideration at this critical point in the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)…
The implications of our lack of knowledge are twofold. First, comprehensive studies are urgently needed to define clinical correlates of protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2. Second, because ADE of disease cannot be reliably predicted after either vaccination or treatment with antibodies—regardless of what virus is the causative agent—it will be essential to depend on careful analysis of safety in humans as immune interventions for COVID-19 move forward…
Conclusion
It is clear that after many years, and considerable attention, the understanding of ADE of disease after either vaccination or administration of antiviral antibodies is insufficient to confidently predict that a given immune intervention for a viral infection will have negative outcomes in humans…
Additional mechanism-focused studies are needed to determine whether small-animal and NHP models of virus infection, including for SARS-CoV-2, can predict the probable benefits or risks of vaccines or passive-antibody interventions in humans…
In the meantime, it will be necessary to directly test safety and define correlates of protection conferred by vaccines and antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 and other viral pathogens in human clinical trials.” (“A perspective on potential antibody-dependent enhancement of SARS-CoV-2“, Nature)
Let’s summarize:
- You could get sick and die. (Quote– “Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) creates the “potential to amplify the infection or trigger harmful immunopathology.”)
- We don’t know what we don’t know. (Quote–“…ADE of disease cannot be reliably predicted after either vaccination or treatment with antibodies… it will be essential to depend on careful analysis of safety in humans as immune interventions for COVID-19 move forward…”)
- We are flying blind and hoping for the best. (Quote– “Additional mechanism-focused studies are needed to determine whether small-animal and NHP models of virus infection, including for SARS-CoV-2, can predict the probable benefits or risks of vaccines or passive-antibody interventions in humans…”)
- Let’s keep testing because we have no idea if what we are doing is safe. (Quote– “In the meantime, it will be necessary to directly test safety and define correlates of protection conferred by vaccines and antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 and other viral pathogens in human clinical trials.”)
So, while Shaw sees one set of potential problems, Kennedy sees others altogether different. But these are just the tip of the iceberg because Dr. J. Patrick Whelan, a pediatric rheumatologist, believes the mRNA vaccines could cause microvascular injury to the brain, heart, liver and kidneys in ways not assessed in safety trials. In fact, he even wrote a detailed letter to the FDA in December warning them explicitly about these potential dangers. Here’s an excerpt from an article at Global Research that provides the details:
“I am concerned about the possibility that the new vaccines aimed at creating immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein have the potential to cause microvascular injury to the brain, heart, liver and kidneys in a way that does not currently appear to be assessed in safety trials of these potential drugs.”
Whelan was referring to the fact that mRNA vaccines work by incorporating the genetic blueprint for the key spike protein on the virus surface into a formula that — when injected into humans — instructs our own cells to make the spike protein….
Based on the research conducted to date, it is very likely that some recipients of the spike protein mRNA vaccines will experience the same symptoms and injuries associated with the virus.
Again, according to Whelan, “the potential to cause microvascular injury (inflammation and small blood clots called microthrombi) to the brain, heart, liver and kidney … were not assessed in the safety trials.”..
Ignoring these valid and scientifically supported warnings may result in hundreds of millions of people suffering potentially deadly injuries or permanent damage following vaccination. It will also further erode the dwindling confidence that our country has in our federal regulatory agencies to protect the health of all Americans
Unfortunately, Whelan’s concerns were not acknowledged, and the agency instead relied on the limited clinical trial data. The VRBPAC endorsed the use of the Pfizer vaccine on Dec. 10. The following day, the FDA issued the first COVID-19 vaccine emergency use authorization allowing the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to be widely distributed in individuals 16 and older without calling for the additional studies that Whelan felt were critical to assure safety of the vaccine, especially in children.” (“Could Spike Protein in Moderna, Pfizer Vaccines Cause Blood Clots, Brain Inflammation and Heart Attacks?” Global Research)
These are just a few of the many warnings that medical professionals have issued publicly. They reflect the growing concerns about this new regime of dodgy vaccines. Needless to say, their warnings have either fallen on deaf ears or been lost in the celebratory din surrounding the new wonder drug. As we speak, millions of people around the world are being injected with an experimental nanoparticle that may-or-may-not impact their health and well-being for the rest of their lives. They have based their decision not on sound science and long-term outcomes, but on relentless fearmongering followed by a garish and overpowering media blitz. This crass manipulation of public perceptions precludes what any reasonable person would call “informed consent”. We are being led like sheep to the slaughter.
So, here’s the million-dollar question: Are the Covid vaccines safe or not?
How could they be? They were not sufficiently tested, the technology is new and experimental, Phase 3 Trials have not been completed, thorough animal trials were never conducted, there is no data on long-term adverse side effects, and the final product was ramrodded through the “rubber stamp” FDA under the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) provision. On top of that, medical professionals are now warning us that the vaccines could “cause microvascular injury to the brain, heart, liver and kidneys.”
The American people need to consider these things before they make their decision
Stock of Alt-Energy Quadrupled during the Pandemic. What’s Up?
By Leo Goldstein | Watts Up With That? | February 19, 2021
The COVID-19 epidemic and the response to it have devastated the economy. However, the alternative energy stock indexes quadrupled on average, including 150% growth before the US elections.
Alt-energy (alternative energy) market performance can be captured in the performance of the leading alt-energy ETFs (exchange traded funds): QCLN, PBW, and TAN. In addition to alt-energy, these ETFs also hold non-energy manufacturing and service companies, critically dependent on climate alarmism. Thus, the assets of any of these ETFs can be used as a financial index, tracking climate alarmism.
After sustaining no growth and moderate losses for five previous years, alt-energy gained an average of 150%, during the first year of COVID-19 (October 25, 2019 to October 30, 2020; see Fig. 1 below). Even more telling, most of these gains happened in the period of draconian and highly politicized lockdowns; see Fig. 2 below.
There is no economic explanation for this steep increase in alt-energy’s valuation. A society under shutdowns or lockdowns consumes less energy and thus, all energy stocks would consequently suffer. Even alt-energy corporations, mainly producing carbon credits, would suffer, because carbon credits are bought mainly by businesses producing or consuming real energy. Additionally, the significant loss of income due to the sudden downturn of the economy would leave little or no funds for anything other than dealing with the current crisis.
One possible explanation for alt-energy’s growth is the expanding political powers of climate alarmism / global governance. Many entities openly celebrated the COVID-19 pandemic as an opportunity for a power grab, starting with “address[ing] the climate emergency and transition to net zero carbon emissions“. On June 3, 2020, Klaus Schwab, the Head of the World Economic Forum, called for a Great Reset, stating:
“There are many reasons to pursue a Great Reset, but the most urgent is COVID-19.”
“[the pandemic] has shown how quickly we can make radical changes to our lifestyles. Almost instantly, the crisis forced businesses and individuals to abandon practices long claimed to be essential, from frequent air travel to working in an office. Likewise, populations have overwhelmingly shown a willingness to make sacrifices …“
Alt-energy ETFs valuation quadrupled between Oct 25, 2019 (pre-pandemic) and February 12, 2021 (the first date of this writing). Of course, nearly half of these gains happened after the November 3rd elections. Since this is an expected outcome for political rackets, when their party wins, this article only covers the period before the election: Oct 2019 – Oct 2020.
During this period, the S&P 500 index, capturing some of the largest corporations, only grew by 8%. Small businesses are mostly devastated, and employment in the private sector is in shambles. The following charts compare alt-energy with S&P 500.
The blue line represents the S&P 500. The pink, brown, and violet lines represent alt-energy ETFs. The green and red bars at the bottom of the graph are trade volumes, not used. All time periods start and end on Friday. The charts show changes from the first day in the period, in percent.
Chart 1. The first 12 months of COVID-19 globally; Oct 25, 2019 – Oct 30, 2020; weekly
(Yahoo! Finance)
Notice the jump of the alt-energy ETFs in February 2020, at the beginning of the pandemic.
Chart 2. 6 months of irrational shutdowns, May 1, 2020 – Oct 30, 2020; daily
(Yahoo! Finance)
May 1, 2020 to October 30, 2020, was the period of unjustifiable shutdowns and lockdowns. Some states had shutdowns and others had lockdowns, after it was clear that COVID-19 had a low fatality rate, especially among younger people. By this time, COVID-19 treatments and prophylaxis were found and “the curve” had been bent. See the COVID-19 hospitalization rates and the death rates (which are about four weeks behind).
Remarks:
- This article was first drafted before alt-energy failed Texas. The Texas blackouts have shown how dependent we are on reliable electric power supply from the grid. There are almost no local emergency power options. Even gas-powered heating units need electricity to work. In many cases, people lost their internet services (thanks to Obamanet, in part) even before losing power. Most people are totally dependent on the Internet for information, emergency and/or evacuation orders, etc. Many do not even have AM/FM radios. This is a big problem that hopefully states will address.
- It should be noted that before the pandemic, alt-energy ETFs had relatively low beta. Beta values for PBW, TAN, and QCLN were 1.0, 1.2, and 1.5, respectively, measured against S&P 500.
- Big Tech is another economic sector that showed significant gains during the shutdowns and lockdowns. In Big Tech’s case, the causation is well known. Lockdowns forced most business interactions and personal relationships to take place through the Internet, which is dominated by Big Tech. My observation from early June has remained correct – countries suffering under the “rule” of Big Tech (Americas and Europe, excluding Russia and Ukraine) suffered the worst outcomes during COVID-19, especially when adjusted to indoor population densities and healthcare capacities.
- Alt-energy or “clean energy” refers to energy sources other than fossil fuels, nuclear, and large-scale hydro.
Biden Administration Sending Emergency Diesel Generators to Texas
By Eric Worrall | Watts Up With That? | February 18, 2021
If you were expecting [proclaimed] President Biden to ship emergency solar panels to Texas, you were wrong. Looks like when renewable energy fails, as it did in Texas, even the Biden administration turns to more reliable forms of energy.
Biden administration sending generators to Texas amid power outages
Ursula Perano | February 18, 2021
… White House press secretary Jen Psaki said at a briefing on Wednesday that the Biden administration is sending emergency generators to Texas amid ongoing power outages and freezing weather.
Why it matters: Huge swaths of Texas have been without electricity for days due to critical failures in the state’s power grid. The outages come while a winter storm continues to pummel the state, causing unsafe conditions and a desperate need for heat. … Read more
Click here to see a video of Jen Psaki explaining the plan to send diesel generators to Texas and other states likely to be affected by winter storms.
Even if a storm like this only happens every 20 years, going 100% renewable is clearly now unacceptable. People who rely on electricity for heating are in deadly danger, if the only source of power is renewable energy, and the renewable energy systems freeze solid during severe ice storms.
If the plan is to maintain enough diesel backup to keep the lights on when renewables fail, renewables will never be affordable. Consumers will be saddled with the expense of maintaining the renewable infrastructure, and the additional expense of maintaining a complete second set of power infrastructure at operational readiness, ready to switch on when the renewables fail.
Midwest Have No Surplus Power For Texas
By Paul Homewood | Not A Lot Of People Know That | February 18, 2021
Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO)
It is claimed that Texas would be better off as part of a wider grid. The obvious one would be MISO, to which there is already a small interconnector.
However MISO has been having severe difficulties due to the cold spell:
https://www.misoenergy.org/mcsnotification/?id=1131
As with Texas, MISO is currently relying almost entirely on coal, gas and nuclear power. If they had been operating with a quarter of the power from wind, as Texas was last week, I suspect that they would have been experiencing the same blackouts as Texas has had.
https://www.misoenergy.org/#
It is also not much bigger capacity wise than Texas, which has been running at around 60 GW this week. I suspect that any extra demand from Texas would quickly destabilise the MISO grid.
There is an interesting backstory to this.
The Natural Resources Defense Council says the Midwest energy grid operator known as MISO hasn’t planned enough interstate transmission lines.
MISO manages the system of utilities and transmission lines that operate in a wide region, from Manitoba, Canada to Louisiana.
John Moore is a senior attorney with the Council. He says MISO for too long has approved numerous local transmission projects, but only a tiny number of interstate transmission lines – which operate much like interstate highways, moving energy, rather than vehicles, from state to state.
He says MISO needs to plan more aggressively to meet the economic and environmental needs of the region.
“If we let business as usual take its course, then MISO may not be as bold as it needs to be,” he says.
Moore says the lack of interstate transmission capacity is leaving clean energy projects on the table.
That includes 42 clean energy proposals in Michigan since 2016 that were unable to proceed, because the existing transmission system couldn’t handle them.
https://www.michiganradio.org/post/nrdc-midwest-grid-operator-plan-blocking-clean-energy
Installing more wind power inevitably means more long distance transmission capacity is needed. The unpredictability of wind power results in huge surpluses at times, which require transmitting to areas short of power. This could often be over distances of hundreds of miles.
Since that is the case, surely it is a cost that wind farms should be paying, something that would probably make them totally unviable economically.
Climate Facts or Leaps of Faith? Governments Can’t Tell the Difference
We have no hard evidence of a crisis. Only expert opinion and best estimates.
By Donna Laframboise | Big Picture News | February 17, 2021
Governments are currently fighting climate change to the tune of billions. For this to make sense, each idea in the following chain of reasoning needs to be bulletproof:
#1 – scientists know there’s a climate crisis
#2 – scientists know it’s humanity’s fault
#3 – scientists know we can alleviate the crisis by changing our behaviour
But each of these amounts to a leap of faith. Let’s start with the conviction that something unusual is going on. This planet is more than 4 billion years old. The climate was marching to its own drummer long before humans appeared. It has changed numerous times – sometimes gradually, sometimes violently. Twenty thousand years ago, much of North America was covered by ice.
Because humans weren’t recording and analyzing those billions of years of climatic history, today’s scientists have no way of knowing if anything unusual is going on now.
They can surmise. They can speculate. They can extrapolate. But they have no smoking gun. I’ve written two books about the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). That organization says it’s “extremely likely that more than half” of the global warming between 1951 and 2010 was caused by human activity. It talks about its “best estimate.”
click to enlarge; source here
Please note the startling imprecision here: Extremely likely. More than half. Best estimate. These aren’t facts. They’re educated guesses. They’re opinion. It’s absolutely crucial that we grasp this point: the IPCC has no hard evidence of a crisis. It has no math that can be examined and verified. It has only expert opinion. Estimates.
If you choose to take this leap of faith, you’re immediately invited to take another – to embrace the notion that the alleged climate crisis was triggered by human activity. As I’ve just outlined, the IPCC can’t prove this. It merely believes humans caused more than half of the warming over a 60-year period. That’s a long way from demonstrating clear human responsibility for imminent catastrophe.
On these two decisive questions – is there really a climate problem, and are humans really to blame – the IPCC has nothing definitive to contribute. Governments have, nevertheless, taken these leaps of faith.
Everyone seems to have forgotten that scientists are fallible. Like the rest of us, they know a great deal about their own field, but can be surprisingly misinformed about broader trends. Like the rest of us, they are susceptible to groupthink. Many IPCC personnel subscribe to a belief system that regards human activities as unnatural and therefore automatically threatening to the natural world. But belief systems are not proof.
Leap of faith #3 – the idea that humanity can fix whatever is currently going on with the climate – is equally dubious. Even if something alarming is happening, even if it is our fault, that doesn’t mean it lies within our power to influence, interrupt, or steer the powerful natural forces that have already been set in motion. It certainly doesn’t mean there’s only one sure-fire, anointed fix – slashing greenhouse gas emissions.
Governments are obsessed with greenhouse gases because they signed a UN treaty back in 1992. Long before the IPCC had produced its multi-thousand-page reports the cart was put before the horse. The UN – a political body – decreed that human-generated emissions were a problem that governments should do something about. The IPCC has struggled ever since to build a scientific case in support of that position.
No one actually knows whether reducing emissions will work. No one knows how long it might take to ‘stabilize’ the climate via this means. Yet governments are piling on the carbon taxes. Year after year, they divert billions away from healthcare and education to fight climate change with ever-expanding emissions reduction policies.
In 1992, the UK was led by John Major, Germany was led by Helmut Kohl, America was led by George H.W. Bush, and France was led by Francois Mitterrand. The Internet barely existed in 1992, the founding of Google was still years away.
That treaty belongs to a different era. There is no shame in walking away from outdated, 30-year-old thinking.
NY Times’s Klein Ponders Having to ‘Dim the Sun’ to Fight Climate Change
By Joseph Vazquez | NewsBusters | February 10th, 2021
The New York Times has taken eco-nuttiness to a new level by publishing a podcast speculating whether the solution to fighting climate change will include — wait for it — dimming the sun.
Times opinion columnist Ezra Klein took his new interview podcast of global warming fearmonger Elizabeth Kolbert and turned it into an op-ed. Klein began his piece with a creepy quote from environmentalist Stewart Brand, “‘We are as gods and might as well get good at it.’” He later spewed that one solution he was obsessed with for fighting climate change was “solar geoengineering … Are we really going to dim the sun?” [Emphasis added.]
Klein’s predominant disagreement with Brand was that he was “overly optimistic. We did not get good at [being gods]. We are terrible at it, and the consequences surround us.” In effect, according to Klein, we should consider that we may end up having no other choice than to be “gods” and “dim the sun.”
“Dim[ming] the sun” sounds about as realistic as when climate change extremists were advocating for “melting the arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot” to stave off global cooling in the 1970s. The idea is also just as crazy as when George Soros-funded economist Mariana Mazzucato raised the possibility of a global “climate lockdown” if the world didn’t undergo a “green economic transformation.”
Klein had to quickly defend his position on the possibility of dimming out the thing that makes life possible on Earth by scolding people who only want comfortable solutions:
[A]ny reasonable analysis of the mismatch between our glacial politics and our rapidly warming planet demands that we deny ourselves the luxury of only contemplating the solutions we would prefer. With every subsequent day that our politics fails, the choices that we will need to make in the future become worse.
The transcript of Klein’s interview with Kolbert was just downright scary:
Ezra Klein: You have a wonderful quote in the geoengineering chapter of your book from Andy Parker, who is a project director for the Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative. He says, ‘We live in a world where deliberately dimming the [expletive] sun might be less risky than not doing it.’ That feels like quite an indictment of the human race and where we’ve gotten ourselves to with all our knowledge and all our power.
Elizabeth Kolbert: I think that does sort of sum things up. We are in this very deep — there are only wrong answers, only hard choices at this point. Nothing easy from here on in.
Ezra Klein: What do you think of geoengineering?
Elizabeth Kolbert: I very consciously avoided coming down very clearly on that. But some very, very smart people are thinking about it and are very worried that it may be our best option at a certain point. And I think they may, unfortunately, be right — but wow, it’s dimming the [expletive] sun, you know?
Biden Attacks Farms – Comprehensive War on Global Food Supply – Engineered Famine
Ice Age Farmer | January 29, 2021
The Biden admin’s executive actions in the last 48 hours are attacking farms and implementing the technocratic takeover of food, accelerating a global collapse in food production by paying farmers NOT to grow food, cutting their financial support, tasking Tom Vilsack’s USDA with a Net-Zero goal, changing COVID guidance on grocery stores, restaurants, and meatpacking plants. Meanwhile, the media is finally acknowledging the soybean shortage, and the US is now also experiencing a fertilizer shortage, which will further increase costs and cause yields will collapse. As other countries stop exporting to protect domestic supplies, the US has been wholly sold out. This confluence of issues and cascading failures merits our attention urgently — start growing food today.
Download (mp3):
FULL SHOW NOTES:
SUBSCRIBE on bitchute: https://bitchute.com/iceagefarmer
On Lbry.tv: https://lbry.tv/@iceagefarmer
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT:
https://patreon.com/iceagefarmer
– other methods/PO box: https://iceagefarmer.com/support
Ice Age Farmer Guilded (chat) group:
http://iceagefarmer.com/guilded
The Victory Seed — easy pamphlet to share:
http://thevictoryseed.org
IAF RESOURCES:
⇒ GDD: Growing Degree Days tool: how much colder has 2019 been for you?
http://iceagefarmer.com/gdd
⇒ IAF Wiki – read history, understand cycles, know what’s coming:
http://wiki.iceagefarmer.com/wiki/History
⇒ Maps from previous cycles:
http://wiki.iceagefarmer.com/wiki/Strategic_Relocation:_Maps
⇒ Crop Loss Map
http://map.iceagefarmer.com
⇒ Join the email list – stay connected:
http://iceagefarmer.com/mail
*** SUPPORTERS – I recommend (because I use personally) ***
STORED FOOD (+ more) @ MyPatriotSupply:
https://iceagefarmer.com/prep
FREEZE DRY YOUR OWN FOOD (like printing money, but food):
https://iceagefarmer.com/harvestright
BUY SEEDS @ TRUE LEAF MARKET:
https://iceagefarmer.com/trueleaf
EMP-proof Solar: mention IAF save $250
https://Sol-ark.com
BEST CBD:
https://bignuggetfarm.com 10% code: IAF2018
⇒ More books: http://amazon.com/shop/iceagefarmer
⇒ Stored food: http://iceagefarmer.com/prep
___
LINKS: (see FULL SHOW NOTES above!)
https://www.cleveland.com/politics/2021/01/biden-signs-orders-strengthening-efforts-to-battle-climate-change.html
https://www.agriculture.com/news/business/biden-vows-to-pay-farmers-to-plant-cover-crops-and-put-land-in-conservation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/09/27/boris-johnson-commits-restoring-nature-30-per-cent-britain-2030/
https://www.agriculture.com/news/business/ag-role-in-climate-mitigation-net-zero-emissions
https://returntonow.net/2020/12/29/biden-picks-mr-monsanto-tom-vislack-to-head-the-usda/
https://www.agweb.com/news/policy/politics/government-cameras-hidden-private-property-welcome-open-fields
Kamala: yes, we should eat less meat:
https://news.yahoo.com/snap-expansion-worker-safety-bidens-175300671.html
https://www.lonesomelands.com/new-blog/2021/1/24/americas-family-owned-farms-now-face-the-greatest-threat-to-their-existance
https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2021/01/27/family-farms-continue-power-us-agriculture
Josh Linville (Fertilizer)
https://www.agriculture.com/markets/newswire/us-soybean-crushers-buy-up-extra-beans-as-supply-scramble-looms
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-27/china-is-so-thirsty-for-soy-that-america-could-soon-be-importing
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-ethanol-idUSKBN29V282
https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2020/dec/15/food-giants-seek-to-ban-soybeans-from-deforested-b/
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/22/shipping-container-shortage-is-causing-shipping-costs-to-rise.html
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3116798/chinas-food-security-requires-local-communist-party-members
https://www.scmp.com/economy/global-economy/article/3115004/china-food-security-beijing-calls-biotech-breakthrough
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/china-vegetable-prices-hit-record-104350266.html
Featured Video
Chinese jet fuel and the myth of energy independence
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Review
Former Insiders Criticize Iran Policy as U.S. Hegemony
By GARETH PORTER | CounterPunch | February 27, 2013
“Going to Tehran” arguably represents the most important work on the subject of U.S.-Iran relations to be published thus far.
Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett tackle not only U.S. policy toward Iran but the broader context of Middle East policy with a systematic analytical perspective informed by personal experience, as well as very extensive documentation.
More importantly, however, their exposé required a degree of courage that may be unparalleled in the writing of former U.S. national security officials about issues on which they worked. They have chosen not just to criticise U.S. policy toward Iran but to analyse that policy as a problem of U.S. hegemony. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- What is fueling unrest across the EU?
- Why no power can undermine Iran’s eternal dominance over the Strait of Hormuz
- Is The War Against Iran Over?
- Iran war will leave long-term ‘scar’ on Wall Street, investors warn
- How Iran decimated US power projection in West Asia: Military lessons of 40-day war
- Iran’s report details US-Israeli war crimes in targeting schools, hospitals, livelihoods
- NATO’s Slow Fracture: How Trump’s Iran War Exposed the Instrument of Hegemony
- Chinese jet fuel and the myth of energy independence
- Ukraine Sea Drone Fired From Libya Hit Russian Tanker in Mediterranean
- IRGC: Iranian forces launched no attacks during ceasefire hours
- If Americans Knew
- Military aid to Israel emerges as the latest political litmus test for Democrats
- The only Palestinian children’s rights organization closes following years-long Israeli campaign against it
- ‘I Can’t Forget the Smell’: Lebanese Reel After Israel Kills Over 300 in Single Day
- DNC Shoots Down Resolutions Calling Out AIPAC and Limiting Arms to Israel
- TCN: Is Israel Blackmailing President Trump?
- Israel killed at least 303 Lebanese yesterday – who were they? Daily Update
- Amnesty: Urgent – Protect Lebanese civilians from brutal escalation in Israeli attacks
- Is The War Against Iran Over?
- Inside the Israeli army’s propaganda wing
- Hundreds of Gaza Amputees Stranded in Legal Limbo
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: No Linear Warming Or Glacier Retreat Along Northern Antarctic Peninsula Since 1980s
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
- New Study: CO2 Is ‘Effectively Negligible’ As An Explanatory Climate Change Factor Since 2000
- Former Pfizer Toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz Tells Bundestag Hearing Pfizer Vaccine Should Have Never Been Approved
- Energy Expert: Germany’s Nuclear Phaseout Was A “500 Billion Euro Mistake”
Aletho News 
