"For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."

- Some dude, somewhere, a long time ago.
Humor me for a moment and pretend that the biblical hell exists. The Global Warming proponents among the world's climate scientists are going there. It's a fitting place for people who prostitute their skills and energy to serve the despicable agenda of the global elite; people who use their positions of influence and authority to bamboozle the world and try to convince us that black is white, up is down and that humans are causing global warming on the planet when the Northern Hemisphere has experienced an unprecedented five successive bitterly cold winters. Perhaps if their transition to hell is sufficiently seamless, and, unaware that anything has changed, they'll be able to convince themselves that they were right all along.

Gifted with minds pre-disposed to scientific investigation and given access to data and instrumentation with which they are supposed to objectively explore our reality, these men and women are, more than anyone else, in a position to influence the course of human destiny towards positive or negative ends.

Sadly, many of them have chosen the road to hell.

Take, for example, the recent IPCC 'Climate Report', wherein many 'esteemed scientists' reaffirm the lie that "human impact [on climate change] is 'unequivocal':
Introducing a major report from a high level UN panel of climate scientists, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said, "world leaders must now respond to an "unequivocal" message from climate scientists and act with policies to cut greenhouse gas emissions. The heat is on. We must act."
Do ya think old Ban chose that phrase, "the heat is on" on purpose? Seems likely. After all, despite the fact that "global warming" has been exposed as a scam and that our planet has not been heating for the past 15 years, and despite the fact that many scientists have opted for the more thermically-neutral term 'climate change', 'global warming' is absolutely required if the blame for the turmoil currently gripping our planet and ecosystems is to be laid at the collective doorstep of human beings. That's the reason why Al Gore refuses to let go of the term, and why, in a recent speech, he likened anyone who does not agree that human beings are to blame for the spate of frigid winters, massive downpours and flooding, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tornadoes, typhoons and hurricanes that have swept the planet in recent years, to racists, homophobes and raging alcoholics.

Note Gore's somewhat ominous statement at the end that there needs to be a "price on carbon, a price on denial". Is it just me, or does that sound like Gore wants anyone who can see the 'global warming' scam for what it is sanctioned in some way? Then again, I suppose we shouldn't be surprised, given that Gore stands to benefit financially from carbon taxes. Never let a disgruntled citizen (or the truth) get in the way of making a few billion$.

But the imposition of a carbon tax on industry worldwide goes beyond mere profit. Despite Gore's attempts to make himself look like a well-meaning eco-warrior champion of the people, the reality is that the burden of a carbon tax (as with all other taxes) will ultimately be shouldered by the little people. Any corporation or company that is forced to pay carbon taxes (which is more or less all of them) will undoubtedly pass that expense on down the line in the form of increased costs for the services and products they provide to the people. And what will happen to all the tax that is collected? It'll go straight into the war chest so that the USA, the Brits and the Israelis can continue to despoil the planet and the lives of our children with DU munitions.

Speaking of politicians, there's a small detail about the IPCC that needs to cleared up. Most people think that the IPCC is a United Nations body. The truth is that there is only a small IPCC secretariat at UN headquarters in Geneva that deals with administrative issues such as travel expenses. The main IPCC process is paid for by national governments, and it is those governments that select the scientists who write the first drafts.

Ok, but those IPCC reports are the work of real scientists, at least, right? Well, sort of. After the first preliminary and informal discussions on any prospective report, national-level bureaucrats and activists become involved. In the process of preparing the most recent IPCC Report, officials from Britain, the USA, Brazil and other leading powers stepped in to alter the wording of a section addressing the comparatively slow rise in global temperatures over the past 15 years; the so-called warming "pause". They demanded that the wording be changed to explain the slowdown and wanted to insert clauses emphasising that global warming has not stopped. In short, the IPCC is really a political body that uses selected scientists to, essentially, fix facts around a certain policy. With that knowledge, you won't be surprised to hear that, when asked about the basis on which the IPCC Working Group (WG) came up with the "95% confidence level" about human-made Global Warming, the co-chair of WG1, Professor Thomas Stocker, said, "We're confident because we're confident." There's a Donald Rumsfeld in the making right there.

It should also come as no surprise that Mr. Genocide himself, The Right Honorable Tony Blair, is a vocal supporter and lobbyist for human-made Global Warming. Recently, Tony stated that there should "no longer be any serious doubt in the minds of serious people that this is a serious problem." That a vile war criminal like Blair is eagerly promoting "man-made Global Warming" should be evidence enough that it's a dangerous lie.

Blair made his comments at the opening of the New York Climate Change Week and was speaking as a representative of 'The Climate Group', a non-profit foundation that teams up with big business to tackle climate change issues. Blair was followed to the lectern by Todd Stern, the US special envoy on climate change and Jim Yong Kim, the World Bank president who was even more vocal in rubbishing climate change sceptics than Mr Blair. It's interesting to note that, among the corporate sponsors of the event were global corporations like Phillips, IKEA and Hewlett-Packard. How are we to explain that major multi-national carbon emitters like these are supporting the Global Warming scam when, as we being told, they are to be punished with heavy taxation for their foul emissions? Answer: they won't be paying the taxes.

As noted, it was recently revealed that, in contrast to IPCC predictions, average temperatures on the Earth have barely changed over the last 15 years. While the recent IPCC Report recognises this fact, it dismisses it as insignificant because such "hiatuses" are to be expected, apparently. The British government's Met Office attempted to explain the 'anomaly' by stating that such 'pause' periods are to be expected at least twice per century because the historical record shows this.

There are two problems here. If, as we are being asked to believe, humans and their carbon emissions are responsible for 'global warming', and these emissions come primarily from an industrialized society and an increasing number of people living in such a society, and if the process is cumulative, the last 15 years should logically show a continuing increase in temperatures rather than a pause or stagnation.

Secondly, if the "historical record" spanning centuries is being used to dismiss the pause as normal, then that suggests that the pause in heating, and the heating itself, has nothing to do with human carbon emissions, since there were no such emissions centuries ago.

But logic (or truth) doesn't seem to factor into the 'findings' of the IPCC. They, and their political taskmasters, have an agenda, and they're not about to let silly things like 'facts' stand in their way.

The head of the British Met Office's Hadley Center, Professor Stephen Belcher attempted to explain the "pause" in temperature rise:
"It looks like the earth is continuing to accumulate energy, but it looks like it is being rearranged and hidden from view."
Reading between the lines here, what the good Professor is saying is that the scientists (and politicians) behind the IPCC Report are aware that our planet is "accumulating energy" and they have been, and are being, pressured to say that humans are to blame, but in reality they have no idea why this accumulation of energy is not causing an increase in temperatures, or why, in the last year, the Western Arctic sea ice has shown a huge rebound, or why, four days ago, the Antarctic sea ice hit a 35-year record high.

If the problem is something being "hidden", I would suggest that the Professor should ask his colleagues at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia if they know anything about it, since they have a track record of hiding data related to global warming (or cooling).
The point to remember here (although it should be obvious) is that everyone agrees (or should agree) that our planet in general is in the process of some sort of major shift that carries serious implications for every living thing on the planet (except Tony Blair who has more in common with the living dead than the living). The debate (such as it is) is over who, or what, is to blame. And at the heart of that question lies the real coverup.

Our planet has heated and cooled repeatedly for tens of thousands of years. C02 levels have also risen and fallen during that period and, in fact, ice core data over the last 20,000 years shows that the global temperature increases initially before C02 increases, NOT the other way round, as Al Gore would have us believe. But in any case, it is universally agreed upon that our planet goes through peaks and troughs of temperature as part of a natural cycle that involves solar and cosmic radiation and our planet's path through the solar system. Furthermore, it has been estimated that humans contribute about 4% of all CO2 emissions (global warming nuts accept this but claim that that 4% is 'the straw that breaks the camel's back').

In short, there is NO hard evidence that humans are causing any significant warming of the planet, and therefore, are not responsible for the floods, earthquakes, sinkholes etc. Global warming is supported only by science of the manipulated, cherry-picked, politically-expedient variety.

Apart from making a fast few billion$ and exerting more control over industry, the main reason that the elite of this world want to convince us all that we are to blame for the climate chaos (or 'earth changes'), is so that we continue to look to them for answers to our problems and security. It's ultimately about maintaining control over the population and preventing people from understanding that the increasing climate chaos is part of a cosmic process that no one can do anything about.

Actually, that's not quite true. There is a theory, that is borne out by the historical record, that the onset of major earth changes that set our planet and its inhabitants on a course towards cosmic destruction coincides with 'high' points in the moral decay of human civilization. This social decay usually spreads from the top down. That is to say, the fall of any given human civilization is precipitated by the existence of a massively corrupt and abusive ruling class that has been allowed to 'infect' much of the normal population to the point where values like truth and justice are generally ignored. In that sense, something can be done about the fact that, as a race, humanity sits on the brink of cosmic and climatic catastrophe, but it would require a radical change of guard at the top and a recrudescence of normal human values among the people. Since that's unlikely to happen any time soon, I suggest you just sit back and watch the show.