Cold facts about the sun

Mini ice age on the way

Earth is 15 years from a “mini ice age” that will cause bitterly cold winters during which rivers freeze over, scientists have predicted.

Source: Sun cycle’s cold facts say mini ice age on way – Environment – NZ Herald News

They said fluid movements within the sun, thought to create 11-year cycles in the weather, will converge in such a way that temperatures will fall dramatically in the 2030s, resulting in solar activity falling by 60 per cent as two waves of fluid “effectively cancel each other out”, according to Professor Valentina Zharkova.

Shovelling snow from the driveway would certainly distract our thoughts from global warming.

107 Thoughts on “Cold facts about the sun

  1. Andy on July 14, 2015 at 7:49 am said:

    There was a letter in The Press on Monday requesting that the paper stop publishing letters from “deniers”.

    How did this article slip through the cracks then?

  2. Richard C (NZ) on July 14, 2015 at 11:34 am said:

    Impressive they managed to find dual dynamos. One was known but this development is a major discovery.

    >”cold winters during which rivers freeze over”

    Given river traffic is disrupted by freezing now in parts of the NH this is probably not a major concern. More radical is the growing latitudes move south in the NH and the window shortens. So the major issue becomes food production and stock losses (not to mention energy demand, airport closures, road and rail disruption etc).

    Here we are in optimum sun and climatic conditions but cold events are wiping out stock.

    Peru – Heaviest snowfall in years kills 171,850 alpacas

    http://iceagenow.info/2015/07/peru-heaviest-snowfall-in-years-kills-171850-alpacas/

    Bolivia – At least 75,000 head of cattle may starve [heavy snow, 1.5m deep]

    http://iceagenow.info/2015/07/bolivia-at-least-75000-head-of-cattle-may-starve/

    More of that in the ‘South America’ and ‘Asia’ (China, Mongolia) threads. I don’t think the populace realize what the implications of an event such as this predicted would be. Might be (very) good for Australian wheat growers but NZ is now totally dependent on wheat imports from Australia. With the NH clamouring for grain the prices will hike and there will be no special treatment for us.

    In the NH hardier grains will have to be grown in the north. Like rye. Hands up those whose bread preference is rye (if you can get it).

    BTW, worked in a kiwifruit packhouse last night. 7 degrees inside when I looked, not much more than the chillers and coolrooms.

  3. Richard C (NZ) on July 14, 2015 at 2:31 pm said:

    >”7 degrees inside when I looked, not much more than the chillers and coolrooms”

    Back in June:

    ‘It’s warmer in the chiller than outside’

    Spare a thought for those living in the township of Omarama in the Mackenzie Country. “It’s like a freezer,” they’re saying after a bone-chilling minus 21 degrees was recorded. That’s New Zealand’s coldest in 20 years and not far off the country’s record low of -25 set in Ranfurly in 1903.

    “Minus 20 is something I’ve never experienced. I walked into the chiller, found out it was actually warmer in the chiller than it was outside. So that was a unique experience that’s for sure,” says Terry Walsh of the Omarama garage.

    https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/-it-s-warmer-in-the-chiller-than-outside-another-night-of-record-lows-for-south-island-6345292.html

    Home for the Scrase’s soon, I’m sure they’ll be cozy there. They can always put a chiller out back to warm up in.

  4. Andy on July 14, 2015 at 6:23 pm said:

    Ha ha very funny RC. We did check our new abode today which has stalled in construction due to ice and other cold weather impediments. We took a walk to the golf course behind the section where a small lake is completely frozen over and resisted attempted to fracture the ice even with large rocks being thrown at it.

    This is the front line of “climate change”….

  5. Richard C (NZ) on July 15, 2015 at 11:01 am said:

    Cold facts about the pope:

    ‘The Pope and the Hammer and Sickle’ – By Dennis Prager

    The pope’s acceptance of Morales’ gift — along with his attacks on capitalism during his Latin American tour — further confirms one of the most troubling moral developments of our time: The Roman Catholic Church is currently led by a man whose social, political and economic views have been shaped by Leftism more than by any other religious or moral system.

    It also reconfirms what is probably the single most important development one needs to understand in order to make sense of the contemporary world: The most dynamic religion of the past hundred years has been Leftism — not Christianity or Islam or any other traditional religion. Indeed, regarding traditional religions, Leftism has influenced them — particularly Christianity and Judaism — far more than they have influenced the Left. Mainstream Protestant Christianity, much of Catholicism (especially in Latin America, where Pope Francis lived his whole life before becoming pope), and most of non-Orthodox Judaism have become essentially liberal/Left movements with religious (and in the case of Judaism, ethnic) identities.

    In terms of evil committed, what is the difference between the hammer and sickle and the swastika? Would the pope receive, let alone keep, a fascist, racist or Nazi sculpture with a crucified Christ on it? Of course not. Yet the hammer and sickle represents more human suffering than all of them combined. The number of people enslaved and murdered under the hammer and sickle dwarfs the number of people enslaved and murdered by any other doctrine in history.

    To make things worse, Francis received this gift from a man (Morales) wearing a picture of Che Guevara on his jacket. Is that, too, not worthy of condemnation by the Vatican? Guevara devoted his life to undermining human liberty and to killing innocents in the name of Communism.

    http://patriotpost.us/opinion/36364

  6. Richard C (NZ) on July 15, 2015 at 11:33 am said:

    Washington Post have had a fit over reporting of Zharkova et al:

    ‘News about an imminent ‘mini ice age’ is trending — but it’s not true’

    By Sarah Kaplan

    “Besides, that “Little Ice Age” that occurred during the Maunder minimum, it wasn’t so much a global ice age as a cold spell in Europe,”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/07/14/news-about-an-imminent-mini-ice-age-is-trending-but-its-not-true/

    A “cold spell in Europe”? Well yes it could be described that way I suppose but I suspect the inhabitants at the time, those starving and dying in particular, may have put it differently.

    >”but it’s not true”

    This I imagine, is given added emphasis by the petulant stamping of Sarah Kaplan’s foot.

  7. If the Little Ice Age was a “cold spell in Europe”, why is there a sign at Franz Josef Glacier showing where the glacier extended to during the little ice age?

  8. A response from the Science Media Centre and some “experts”
    http://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2015/07/14/claims-of-a-mini-ice-age-ahead-expert-reaction/

  9. Richard C (NZ) on July 15, 2015 at 1:44 pm said:

    >A response from the Science Media Centre and some “experts”

    Good for chuckles. Could go into detailed dissection but probably not necessary because straight off I see Mullen and Renwick’s consummate baloney:

    [Mullen] – “Dr Zharkova [study author] indicated that solar irradiance may drop by 3 Watts per square meter during the 2030s”

    [Mullen] – “[I] would point out that the downward infrared radiation into the troposphere is increasing every year due to growing greenhouse gas concentration, and this would (at least) partially compensate a shortwave radiation decline, and would entirely negate a more modest decline than the one reported.”

    Mullen obviously doesn’t understand that the IPCC’s climate criteria is radiative forcing “measured at top of atmosphere” (TOA). A solar TSI decline of 3 W.m-2 is a direct effective SW TOA forcing. The current TOA imbalance is only a trendless 0.6 W.m-2 (Stephens et al 2012, Loeb et al 2012, IPCC AR5 Chapter 2).

    But solar SW is accumulating at the surface in the oceanic heat sink.

    The surface imbalance (Sfc) is also 0.6 W.m-2 therefore there is no effective LW forcing between Sfc and TOA. Theoretical LW CO2 “forcing” is now 1.5+ W.m-2 and trending (as Mullen says) therefore CO2 is an ineffective climate forcing at TOA (but Mullen doesn’t understand this obviously, natch, the IPCC fails to address the disparity so why expect climate scientists to understand?)

    In terms of the critical TOA energy budget, a 3 W.m-2 TSI reduction will mean less solar SW accumulating at the surface in the oceanic heat sink, therefore less LW out from Sfc to TOA (OLR) over time i.e. less energy in, less energy out eventually. The TOA imbalance may actually stay much the same for a time or may balance for a time or may go into deficit for a time depending on the timeframe considered (due to oceanic thermal lag of decades).

    In any event, Mullen doesn’t know what he is talking about. There will be no GHG compensation or negation. Renwick even worse.

    [Renwick] – ““If it was correct, it would mean that solar output reaching the earth would drop by 1-2 Watts per square metre — or by about 0.1% — for 2-3 decades.”

    [Renwick] – “The big difference now is that there is a lot more greenhouse gas in the atmosphere than there was in the 1700s (about 40% more CO2 and more than twice the methane) which has added up to more than 2 Watts per square metre increase in the energy absorbed at the ground, compared to the 1700s.”

    As for Mullen (Renwick doesn’t know what he is talking about either) except Renwick has added a clanger. Renwick is dead wrong with “more than 2 Watts per square metre increase in the energy absorbed at the ground” in respect to LW.

    The updated earth energy balance (Stephens et al 2012) has globally averaged energy absorbed at surface (Sfc imbalance) of 0.6 W.m-2 – NOT 2+ W.m-2. Except this is SW in – NOT LW. Solar SW accumulation in the tropical ocean is in the order of 24 W.m-2 so obviously a global average will be less than that but still SW.

    Ought not leave out Oughton.

    [Oughton] – “As far as I know there is not a widely accepted model for how reduced solar cycle activity would cause global cooling on earth”

    Well, he might look up the IPCC’s FAQ – “What is radiative forcing”. Particularly the bit about the TOA budget “controlling” temperature.

    # # #

    These guys are expert clowns, yes, but not so much expert on the earth’s energy flows.

  10. Richard C (NZ) on July 15, 2015 at 1:51 pm said:

    ‘Flawed NASA study: Pacific Ocean Warming Related to Volcanic Heat Flow’

    Written by James Edward Kamis, 14 July 2015.

    Here we explain that the root cause of the 2000-2015 western Pacific Ocean warming is increased heat flow from deep ocean volcanoes, hydrothermal vents, and heat emitting fault zones…not man-made atmospheric global warming. Data supporting this contention are diverse, reliable, and abundant. A summary of key points substantiating a geological heat flow origin to warming in the western Pacific Ocean:

    1) NASA’s man-made global warming deep ocean “hiding” place lies directly above one of the most active sub-ocean geological heat flow regions on earth, the Solomon Island / New Guinea portion of the western Pacific. A visually dramatic example of this geological heat flow is shown in the photo atop this article (Figure 1). It shows the ocean surface expression of the heat plume from a sub-ocean volcano named Kavachi which is located in the Solomon Island Chain. Even more telling are recently updated deep ocean maps which have identified many hundreds of deep sub-ocean volcanoes, hydrothermal vents and fault zones in this limited geographical area. None of these geological features are monitored for heat flow. However this Solomon Island / New Guinea portion of the western Pacific Ocean has recently been temperature mapped utilizing cable pulled deep diving temperature probes. This research project found that this area is extremely warm portion of the Pacific Ocean.

    2) This area has been very geologically active in the late 1990’s and early 2000. There have been numerous sub-ocean volcanic eruptions, nearby land based volcanic eruptions, and major deep ocean fault movements during this time period. This timing matches well with increase in mid ocean depth (100-300 meters) western Pacific Ocean seawater temperature increases as mapped by NASA in the 2000-2015 time period.

    3) All historical El Ninos including the currently emerging 2015 El Nino (Figure 2) have originated at this same deep western pacific Ocean Point source in the Solomon Island / New Guinea area.

    4) The Solomon Island / New Guinea heating source point is fixed / non-moving. Fixed heating source points are associated with fixed geological features such as volcanoes, and not with ever moving atmospheric heat sources. If atmospheric global warming caused the warmed Pacific Ocean seawater as NASA contends, it would not occur in the exact same location for 15 years. Atmospheric and ocean currents are too variable and strong to have deposited this massive heat pulse in the exact same location for 15 years.

    5) NASA states that significant heating does not occur in the Atlantic Ocean, or for that matter in any other ocean. This is extremely telling because global man-made atmospheric warming occurs…well globally. So all of this supposedly “hidden” warmed atmospheric energy has to be somehow captured, concentrated, and then transported to one specific location in the mid-range depths of the western Pacific. “Note that the Atlantic Ocean does not show significant trends at any depth, with warming temperatures in one place counter-balanced by cooling in others.”

    6) Other Deep Ocean Geological Heat Sources have been substantiated. Deep ocean geologically induced heating is proven to have occurred beneath the Arctic and Antarctic Ocean Ice Caps. NASA and NOAA scientists are what might be termed “atmospherically biased”. They force fit all data into an atmospheric context. It’s what they know and what they were taught. Deep ocean geological forces are not well understood and almost completely unmonitored. Lack of geological data and an abundance of atmospheric data lend itself to narrow focused solution thinking. The NASA and NOAA scientists are very bright and dedicated folks, just biased.

    http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/flawed-nasa-study-pacific-ocean-warming-related-to-volcanic-heat-flow.html

  11. Richard C (NZ) on July 15, 2015 at 3:20 pm said:

    [Mullen] – “Dr Zharkova [study author] indicated that solar irradiance may drop by 3 Watts per square meter during the 2030s”

    I find it amusing that Mullen has had to acknowledge this possibility, and I find the responses somewhat lacking credibility. Lets put some perspective on what is being talked about here.

    Solar was held constant from early 2000s out to 2100 in the CMIP5/AR5 modeling specification. Solar was not thought to be a climate factor worth considering even though it was obvious by 2009 that the sun was going into a funk (not a technical term).

    3 W.m-2 is actually only a mid-range scenario when MM/LIA to CWP estimates are used as a basis for future possibilities. The IPCC cite Jones, Lockwood, and Stott (2012) for their contra-solar case in Chapter 9. This was a projection using a CO2-forced model that was already wrong in 2010. They used least-case solar scenarios, dismissing Shapiro et al’s 6 W.m-2 estimate which is the most extreme case scenario. I have Mike Lockwood on email record saying he “didn’t understand their methodology”.

    Jones, Lockwood, and Stott (2012) is this paper:

    ‘What influence will future solar activity changes over the 21st century have on projected global near-surface temperature changes?’
    Gareth S. Jones, Mike Lockwood, and Peter A. Stott (2012)
    http://www.leif.org/EOS/2011JD017013.pdf

    Figure 1 page 3 pdf shows their 3 scenarios – LOO 2.55 W.m-2, KO7 1.26 W.m-2, and LO9 0.98 W.m-2.

    They favour KO7 and LO9 but “do not rule out the possibility of the larger past TSI variations of L00” [2.55 W.m-2]. Keep in mind that they’ve already discarded Shapiro et al’s 6 W.m-2 because it was a bit over their heads, or beliefs, apparently.

    Now we have Zharkova et al coming up with 3 W.m-2 decline in the immediate future which is more than twice KO7 and three times LO9. So what was not deemed a factor of any import is now blowing out.

    The much neglected solar change factor (by the IPCC) is now looming large and the likes of Mullen and Renwick have not had to deal with it before. It’s caught them out and they certainly have to deal with it now. But they’re apparently clueless as to how to apply it to the earth’s energy flows and budget (either that or they’re just toeing the party line).

    The SMC page may assuage some nervousness among the climate credulous thanks to the arguments from authority but the SMC physics is thermodynamically incorrect i.e. dead wrong. Same for the IPCC and their citations e.g. Jones, Lockwood, and Stott. These guys are Lead and Contributing authors of AR5 Chapter 10 Detection and Attribution, hence the neglect (intentional?) of the critical TOA imbalance-forcing disparity and hopelessly inadequate chapter of the report.

    The fallacies of CO2-centric climate science are now being exposed on a regular basis. This from SMC is just another example.

  12. Andy on July 15, 2015 at 4:02 pm said:

    There was a panelist on Jim Mora’s Radio NZ afternoon show yesterday who was “confused” about the latest solar minimum news as he thought we were in a global warming phase.

    Expect more confusion to ensue

  13. Richard C (NZ) on July 15, 2015 at 4:17 pm said:

    [Renwick] – “The big difference now is that there is a lot more greenhouse gas in the atmosphere than there was in the 1700s (about 40% more CO2 and more than twice the methane) which has added up to more than 2 Watts per square metre increase in the energy absorbed at the ground, compared to the 1700s.”

    Renwick must think downwelling longwave infrared radiation (LW down) is a surface heating agent – it’s not. Here are the updated earth’s energy budget diagrams from Stephens et al (2012):

    http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n10/images_article/ngeo1580-f1.jpg
    https://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/stephens2.gif

    “Energy absorbed at the ground” is only 0.6 W.m-2 which has already been demonstrated to be SW (24 approx tropical ocean). And LW up (398) – LW down (345.6) = LW up (52.4) i.e. LW is a cooling agent at the surface.

    James Renwick is either clueless or deliberately disseminating a lie. I can’t work out which.

  14. Maggy Wassilieff on July 15, 2015 at 6:01 pm said:

    You seem to have neglected Prof Sean Oughton’s final comment on the Science Media site…

    “We also need to wait for the research to go through the peer-review process and get published. The National Astronomy Meeting is an important meeting, and presumably this solar activity work is all fine. To judge it properly though, people will want to see the journal article, not just a talk at a conference.

    The paper was published in the leading Astrophysics journal last year

    Shepard, Zharkov & Zharkova 2014 The Astrophysics journal 795:

    There’s a discussion of the paper up on JoNova.

    One can only wonder what Prof Oughton was thinking by agreeing to comment on the Zharkova talk , without checking some background about the author and her research publications.

  15. Richard C (NZ) on July 15, 2015 at 6:06 pm said:

    [Mullen] – “[I] would point out that the downward infrared radiation into the troposphere is increasing….”

    Mullen implies the LW forcing is into the troposphere, he’s right in theory to a degree (Renwick says it’s into the surface, he’s definitely wrong in every respect). I would however challenge Mullen to support his assertion with real-world observations. Problematic given earth’s energy flows are measured and stated in terms of TOA, not TOT. But what Mullen is pointing out is actually irrelevant in terms of critical climate forcing at TOA (see below).

    First though, lets look at Mullen’s “expertise”:

    Dr Brett Mullan
    Principal Scientist – Climate
    Qualifications:
    B.Sc. (Hons, 1st class),University of Auckland, 1972. Sc.D., Massachusetts Inst. Technology, 1979.
    Expertise Keywords:

    climate dynamics
    climate change scenarios
    climate variability
    validation of climate models
    seasonal forecasting
    El Nino southern oscillation
    droughts
    circulation indices
    NZ temperature record
    Pacific convergence zones

    https://www.niwa.co.nz/people/brett-mullan

    OK, ignoring the questionable “NZ temperature record” and “validation of climate models” items for our purposes, he is first and foremost a NIWA-pronounced “climate dynamics” and “climate change scenarios” expert. His statement above indicates that he has not addressed theory vs observations which calls his proclaimed expertise into question (along with the other 2 above).

    I’ll probably repeat this until I’m blue in the face but lets be perfectly clear on the IPCC definition of radiative forcing (not an easy task):

    FAQ 2.1, Box 1: What is Radiative Forcing?

    What is radiative forcing? The influence of a factor that can cause climate change, such as a greenhouse gas, is often evaluated in terms of its radiative forcing. Radiative forcing is a measure of how the energy balance of the Earth-atmosphere system is influenced when factors that affect climate are altered. The word radiative arises because these factors change the balance between incoming solar radiation and outgoing infrared radiation within the Earth’s atmosphere. This radiative balance controls the Earth’s surface temperature. The term forcing is used to indicate that Earth’s radiative balance is being pushed away from its normal state.

    Radiative forcing is usually quantified as the ‘rate of energy change per unit area of the globe as measured at the top of the atmosphere’, and is expressed in units of ‘Watts per square metre’ (see Figure 2). When radiative forcing from a factor or group of factors is evaluated as positive, the energy of the Earth-atmosphere system will ultimately increase, leading to a warming of the system. In contrast, for a negative radiative forcing, the energy will ultimately decrease, leading to a cooling of the system. Important challenges for climate scientists are to identify all the factors that affect climate and the mechanisms by which they exert a forcing, to quantify the radiative forcing of each factor and to evaluate the total radiative forcing from the group of factors.

    https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq-2-1.html

    Nothing at all about “downward infrared radiation into the troposphere”. But given this is the IPCC we should expect a contradiction somewhere, and this is no exception:

    2.2 Concept of Radiative Forcing

    The definition of RF from the TAR and earlier IPCC assessment reports is retained. Ramaswamy et al. (2001) define it as ‘the change in net (down minus up) irradiance (solar plus longwave; in W m–2) at the tropopause after allowing for stratospheric temperatures to readjust to radiative equilibrium, but with surface and tropospheric temperatures and state held fixed at the unperturbed values’.

    https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch2s2-2.html

    So TOA in 2.1, TOT in 2.2. Difference being that TOA is measured, TOT is theoretical. Unfortunately all the theory falls apart at TOA. That is the problem for Brett Mullen (and all of climate science). He may have got the theory right to a degree but that means nothing if the theory fails under scrutiny of the critical criteria (TOA energy budget).

    And if the man-made climate change theory falls apart at TOA, that theory cannot be used to discount solar forcing of climate (as it has been by the IPCC).

  16. Richard C (NZ) on July 15, 2015 at 8:00 pm said:

    >”he thought we [are/]were in a global warming phase.”

    He’s probably not as confused as he thinks he is except this is/was phase peak. It was great, I hope everyone enjoyed it, I did. The confusion should clear in a few years.

    Now we’re heading into a cooling phase, that realization will set in soon enough. I don’t think I will enjoy it as much as warming since I’ll be in my twilight years (if I’m lucky), but upside is that lower UV might not give as many people skin cancer as it is now:

    ‘How Low Can It Go? Sun Plunges into the Quietest Solar Minimum in a Century’
    04.01.09

    “Sunspots are planet-sized islands of magnetism on the surface of the sun, and they are sources of solar flares, coronal mass ejections, and intense UV radiation.”

    “Careful measurements by several NASA spacecraft have also shown that the sun’s brightness has dimmed by 0.02 percent at visible wavelengths and a whopping 6 percent at extreme UV wavelengths since the solar minimum of 1996.”

    http://www.nasa.gov/topics/solarsystem/features/solar_minimum09.html

    ‘Harmful Effects of Ultraviolet Radiation’
    http://enhs.umn.edu/current/5103/uv/harmful.html

    Skin Cancer
    Skin cancers are the most commonly occurring cancers in terms of incidence in the world. There are different types of skin cancer including the nonmelanoma skin cancers, basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), and melanoma. Exposure to UV radiation is thought to be an important factor in each of these cancers as it induces DNA damage, however the types of exposure necessary to cause the different types of skin cancer may vary. For the nonmelanoma skin cancers, cumulative sun exposure is believed to be important, whereas for melanoma the intermittent exposure hypothesis has been postulated. This hypothesis proposes that infrequent intense exposure of unacclimatized skin to sunlight is related to the increasing incidence of melanoma and is more important than chronic sun exposure (1). The incidence of all types of skin cancer is increasing.

    Below is graph with data from nine SEER registries [Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program of the US National Cancer Institute] showing the increasing incidence of age-adjusted rates of melanoma in men and women between 1973-2000:

    http://enhs.umn.edu/current/5103/uv/figure1harmful.gif

    # # #

    UV does not change in concert with TSI and is not investigated by the IPCC to any extent. The IPCC neglects strong paleo-climatologic evidence for the high sensitivity of the climate system to changes in solar activity, including UV. See the next comment on this.

  17. Richard C (NZ) on July 15, 2015 at 8:09 pm said:

    ‘IPCC UNDERESTIMATES THE SUN’S ROLE IN CLIMATE CHANGE’

    Bas van Geel and Peter A. Ziegler (2013)

    ABSTRACT
    For the understanding of current and future climate change it is a basic pre requisite
    to properly understand the mechanisms, which controlled climate change after the
    Last Ice Age. According to the IPCC 5th assessment report (in prep.) the Sun has
    not been a major driver of climate change during the post-Little Ice Age slow
    warming, and particularly not during the last 40 years. This statement requires
    critical review as the IPCC neglects strong paleo-climatologic evidence for the
    high sensitivity of the climate system to changes in solar activity. This high climate
    sensitivity is not alone due to variations in total solar irradiance-related direct solar
    forcing, but also due to additional, so-called indirect solar forcings. These include
    solar-related chemical-based UV irradiance-related variations in stratospheric
    temperatures and galactic cosmic ray-related changes in cloud cover and surface
    temperatures, as well as ocean oscillations, such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation
    and the North Atlantic Oscillation that significant affect the climate. As it is still
    difficult to quantify the relative contribution of combined direct and indirect solar
    forcing and of increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations to the slow warming of
    the last 40 years, predictions about future global warming based exclusively on
    anthropogenic CO2 emission scenarios are premature. Nevertheless, the cyclical
    temperature increase of the 20th century coincided with the buildup and
    culmination of the Grand Solar Maximum that commenced in 1924 and ended in
    2008. The anticipated phase of declining solar activity of the coming decades will
    be a welcome ‘natural laboratory’ to clarify and quantify the present and future
    role of solar variation in climate change.

    3.1. Solar UV radiation, stratospheric ozone and atmospheric circulation

    Solar radiation variability is strongly wavelength-dependent, with higher variability in
    the UV domain. Moreover, variations in UV radiation and TSI are not fully
    synchronized. Measurements show that during on average 11-year solar cycles
    variations in UV radiation are with 2-6% considerably larger than those of TSI (about
    0.1%). Therefore, similar and probably even larger discrepancies between TSI and UV
    radiation than the observed variations may have occurred during longer time frames
    [39,51,52,57].

    Variations in UV radiation affect particularly the stratosphere in which UV-C
    radiation is totally and UV-B partially absorbed by oxygen molecules, producing
    ozone, causing warming of the stratosphere and affecting its dynamics [52,58,59]. As
    the warm stratosphere emits infrared radiation it can warm the much colder upper
    troposphere [50,57]. Moreover, as the stratosphere and troposphere are dynamically
    coupled across the temperature inversion of the tropopause, warmer stratospheric air
    masses can be inserted into the troposphere at the polar jet front [60] (fig. 3). By this
    mechanism, variations in UV radiation, ozone production and the stratospheric
    temperature may have a direct bearing on the Earth’s climate.

    A chemical-atmospheric model indicates that during the peak of solar cycles a 1%
    increase in UV radiation causes a 1–2% increase of the stratospheric ozone
    concentration [58,59]. Moreover, satellite measurements suggest that during the
    maximum of solar cycles the temperature of the upper stratosphere (40-50km)
    increases by about 1K [50,61]. Climate models indicate that warming of the
    stratosphere, particularly in low latitudes where the incidence of solar irradiation is
    nearly vertical, strengthens stratospheric winds while the tropospheric jet streams are
    displaced pole-ward. Since the position of the jets determines the latitudinal extent of
    the Hadley Cell circulation, their pole-ward shift causes also a pole-ward displacement
    of the mid-latitude storm tracks [50,61]. This concept is compatible with the results of
    a coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation model and marine sediment core data,
    which indicate that solar-induced stratospheric ozone variations strongly influence
    mid-latitude troposphere dynamics [62].

    Since with decreasing solar UV-irradiance and an increasing GCR flux the ozone
    content of the stratosphere decreases [51,63], the stratosphere begins to cool and, by
    cooling the upper troposphere, affects the climate. Prolonged low solar UV-irradiance
    may therefore foster climate deterioration in the northern hemisphere and an increase
    in extreme weather events due to greater temperature differences between the oceans
    and the upper atmosphere [64].

    The climate deterioration that occurred around 850 BC involved not only a
    decrease in TSI and but also an increase in the GCR flux, as indicated by the observed
    strong increase in atmospheric 14C and 10Be. Simultaneously a decline of solar UV
    irradiance caused a decrease in stratospheric ozone concentrations and a cooling of the
    lower stratosphere. Consequently the latitudinal extent of the Hadley Cell circulation
    decreased and mid-latitude storm tracks were displaced equator-ward [3].

    Download full-text
    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/275459414_IPCC_Underestimates_the_Sun%27s_Role_in_Climate_Change

  18. Richard C (NZ) on July 15, 2015 at 8:39 pm said:

    [van Geel and Zeigler] – “Measurements show that during on average 11-year solar cycles
    variations in UV radiation are with 2-6% considerably larger than those of TSI (about
    0.1%). Therefore, similar and probably even larger discrepancies between TSI and UV
    radiation than the observed variations may have occurred during longer time frames
    [39,51,52,57].”

    OK, that possibility is what the IPCC discount to nothing (along with a myriad of other solar papers). [39,51,52,57] are these:

    39. Shapiro, A.I., Schmutz, W., Rozanov, E., Schoell, M., Shapiro, V. and Nyeki, S., A new
    approach to long-term reconstuction of the solar irradiance leads to larger historical solar
    forcing. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 2010, 529, A67.

    52. Krivova, N. A., Vieira, L. E. A. and Solanki, S. K., Reconstruction of solar spectral
    irradiance since the Maunder minimum, Journal of Geophysical Research, 2010, 115,
    A12112, doi:10.1029/2010JA015431.

    53. de Jager, C., Duhau, S. and van Geel, B., Quantifying and specifying the solar influence
    on terrestrial surface temperature, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics,
    2010, 72, 926-937.

    57. Haig, J.D., Winning, A.R, Toumi, R. and Harder, J.W., An influence of solar spectral
    variations on radiative forcing of climate. Nature, 2010, 167, 696-699.

    # # #

    I’m inclined to agree with van Geel and Zeigler that “The anticipated phase of declining solar activity of the coming decades will be a welcome ‘natural laboratory’ to clarify and quantify the present and future
    role of solar variation in climate change”, something the IPCC will not be able to wave away so easily.

    The UN will be frantic to have their CO2 mitigation demands implemented before this happens of course.

  19. Richard C (NZ) on July 15, 2015 at 9:50 pm said:

    >”But they [Mullen and Renwick are] apparently clueless as to how to apply it [solar change] to the earth’s energy flows and budget (either that or they’re just toeing the party line).”

    >”James Renwick is either clueless or deliberately disseminating a lie. I can’t work out which.”

    Some indication in the case of Renwick:

    ‘11% cut … follow us down the path to catastrophe’

    Wednesday 8 Jul 15 11:30am

    New Zealand will face droughts, floods, fires, social upheaval and catastrophic global economic damage if the world follows the country’s lead on cutting greenhouse gas emissions, says one of our leading climate experts.

    Dr James Renwick – Professor of Physical Geography at Victoria University, an International Panel on Climate Change lead author, and formerly the chief scientist at the National Institute on Water and Atmosphere – says that cutting emissions at the rate that New Zealand proposes would lead to at least 3deg of warming by the end of the century.

    http://www.carbonnews.co.nz/story.asp?storyID=8839 [subscriber access]

    Full text at Hot Topic
    http://hot-topic.co.nz/renwick-on-nzs-11-cut-follow-us-down-the-path-to-catastrophe/

    Obvious where this “leading climate expert” is coming from. Scientific misconceptions get relegated to the back seat – out in the carpark.

  20. Alexander K on July 16, 2015 at 11:13 am said:

    When I were a lad, I used to enjoy listening to the men I worked with on farms during weekends and school holidays: I saw that they seemed much more connected to the world of science and reality than the slightly-odd adults who, as one poet put it, ‘couldn’t get a job in the Post Office’ that we were forced to suffer at school. Most of the men I worked with, post-WWII, had been overseas in various theatres of conflict and had learnt hard lessons about how the world works and the lengths politicians will go to in order to sell the population dodgy deals, which is why I have always been suspicious of the various churches and the UNIPCC. When politicians want to sell me stuff, I really need to know the underlying facts.
    Like Richard C, as the world cools ever so gradually, I will look back on the warmer years with some fondness as my ageing bones don’t actually like the cool or tolerate it as well as warmth.

  21. Richard C (NZ) on July 16, 2015 at 1:51 pm said:

    >”the lengths politicians will go to in order to sell the population dodgy deals, which is why I have always been suspicious of the various churches and the UNIPCC.”

    Fortunately, in the case of the papal encyclical at least, plenty of people are seeing it for what it is – and putting it bluntly:

    An Apostate Pope?

    Written by Merv Bendle, Quadrant Online on 15 July 2015.

    Pope Francis is playing with fire. It seems that the converging crises engulfing the Catholic Church and the need to cultivate a supportive global constituency based on the Third World may have pushed the Pope to both ignore the free-market basis of functioning economic systems and desert the fundamental principles of Christianity.

    Caught in a perfect storm of scandal and relevance, Francis appears prepared to capitulate to the neo-Marxist paganism that underlies the Deep Green ideology of the global environmental movement and assume a vanguard role in constructing a global welfare state, established to mitigate the alleged effects of climate change. This capitulation has two dimensions: economic and theological, as will be discussed below.

    [,,,]

    This is a heady ideological concoction: eco-apocalypticism, global revolution, neo-Marxism, anti-Westernism, cargo cults, the politics of resentment, a global welfare state, economic illiteracy, neo-paganism, Goddess worship, fascism, and a betrayal of the Christian faith. Nevertheless, it appears an exhausted and demoralized Church is trying to re-establish its central position in world affairs by dumping its traditional faith to hook up with the neo-paganism and neo-Marxism of radical environmentalism.

    Merv Bendle is a frequent contributor to Quadrant Online. He has a PhD in Comparative religion.

    http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/an-apostate-pope.html

  22. Richard C (NZ) on July 16, 2015 at 2:10 pm said:

    Bendle on the Vatican’s totalitarian ideology derived from Marxism-Leninism, anti-capitalist and Deep Green ideologue Naomi Klein, and Deep Green Nazi National Socialism.

    ***************************************************************************************
    It is hard to credit that Francis, or any person of intelligence and a presumed advanced awareness of the human capacity for wickedness, could imagine that a trillion dollar global fund could or should be created by pillaging the Western middle classes and then funnelling that swag to the masses in Botswana, Bolivia, Swaziland, South Africa, the Philippines and innumerable other supplicant nations without seeing corruption, incompetence, and maladministration on an utterly unprecedented scale.

    In fact, economically the encyclical is merely a re-hash of the familiar Marxist-Leninist diatribes against Western imperialism that have been the lingua franca of the international Left for 150 years. Consequently, in its hysterical utopianism it invokes the same totalitarian ideology that provided a rationale for the catastrophic forms of centralized state economic planning that crippled the economies, devastated the environment, and systematically enslaved and killed scores of millions of people in the Soviet Union, Communist China, Cambodia, and other communist states.

    Operating under the thrall of Marxism-Leninism, an earlier generation of economically illiterate ideologues attempted to run the economies of those benighted states (intended to be utopias of peace and social justice) via bureaucratic diktat and brought only carnage and disaster. Disturbingly, it appears that the Pope’s encyclical proposes that this murderous and dictatorial approach be pursued on a global scale, using the notoriously corrupt United Nations as its vehicle or model.

    Such draconian action is justified, according to Pope Francis, because it is not communist or fascist (or Islamist) totalitarianism that has proven to be the problem of the modern world. Neither is it endemic corruption, or ethnic, tribal and religious hatreds, or theocratic Messianism and obscurantism that are stopping nations from achieving their potential.

    Rather, it is free market capitalism that is the “root cause” of all of the world’s problems.

    [..]

    Francis made his radical ideological and political commitments crystal clear by embracing the views of anti-capitalist and Deep Green ideologue Naomi Klein. Indeed, it’s been observed that in Laudato si’ and his public statements Francis “sounded like Naomi Klein in a cassock“. Klein is a self-defined “secular Jewish feminist” who appears to fancy herself as a modern day Rosa Luxemburg, dedicated to leading the people into the golden age of communism. She has recently published a widely promoted polemical tome, immodestly titled This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate, in which she advocates “managed de-growth” on a global scale, ostensibly to combat climate change.

    In fact, Klein has made it clear that she joined the climate change crusade as a means to the end of mobilizing the global masses in a rebellion against capitalism. This followed a conversion experience in Geneva that she describes in This Changes Everything. There, a Bolivian economist explained how climate change panic meant his nation could now portray itself as ‘climate creditor’, morally empowered to demand money, technology and aid from the richer ‘climate debtor’ nations of the West.

    Suddenly, Klein realized how the threat of climate change could be used to realign contemporary politics and serve as the basis of a populist campaign to reverse the neoliberalism that had reigned supreme since Thatcher and Reagan. In effect, climate change was to become the Trojan Horse through which the policies of deregulation, free trade, privatization, fiscal austerity, tax reductions, plus individual responsibility and a reduced public sector could be subverted and reversed, and a global welfare state established, financed by the Western middle classes.

    After her book was published Klein was invited by the Pope to be a principal speaker in July at People and Planet First: The Imperative to Change Course, a two-day conference designed to shape an action plan around Laudato si,’ organized by the International Alliance of Catholic Development Organisations and the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. In Rome, Klein promoted the radically interventionist and regulative nature of her strategy:

    “It means policies that directly regulate how much carbon can be extracted from the earth. It means policies that will get us to 100 per cent renewable energy in two or three decades – not by the end of the century. And it means allocating common, shared resources – like the atmosphere – on the basis of justice and equity.”

    “Justice and equity” (and access to the atmosphere), as defined by Klein and her supporters!

    As with other totalitarian thinkers, Klein longs for the power to achieve the total mobilization of the earth’s people in the pursuit of her vision of a perfect world:

    “The stakes are so high, time is so short and the task is so large that we cannot afford to allow those differences to divide us. When 400,000 people marched for climate justice in New York last September, the slogan was ‘To change everything, we need everyone’.”

    Klein compares this level of mobilization to that achieved in total war, involving “the rationing and industrial conversions that were once made in wartime [and in] the anti-poverty and public works programs launched in the aftermath of the Great Depression and the Second World War.” This total mobilization, she explains in This Changes Everything, will right the wrongs of imperialism across the globe: “Climate change is our chance to right those festering wrongs at last – the unfinished business of liberation” from the historical depredations of the West. Co-opted as a vehicle for global socialist transformation, the climate change campaign will “become a catalysing force for positive change” in every area of life on earth. It will:

    “Demand the rebuilding and reviving of local economies … reclaim our democracies from corrosive corporate influence … block harmful free trade deals, [invest] in mass transit and affordable housing … remake our sick agricultural system … open borders to migrants … respect Indigenous land rights … bring jobs and homes [and] clean water [and] help to end … inequality within our nations and between them”

    The costs of remaking the world in this fashion will be carefully calibrated to target the global middle classes, demanding “sacrifice from those of us who can most afford to make do with less”. And their sacrifice will be justified because Klein’s strategy for a global economic shutdown will “save countless lives and prevent so much suffering”. Unfortunately, at no point in her massive tome does Klein even come close to defining “anything like an alternative economic system” to make any of this work, as even a sympathetic reviewer laments.

    However, there is more to Klein than warmed-over Marxism-Leninism and reactionary welfare state policies, and it is here that Francis faces an unprecedented danger: theologically he appears to be capitulating to the neo-paganism of the environmental movement, the core of which is a radical devaluation of human life.

    As Klein observes in a recent article in The New Yorker , “A Radical Vatican”, in Laudato si’ Francis asserts that “the Bible has no place for a tyrannical anthropocentrism unconcerned for other creatures.”

    “You don’t get much more human-centred than the persistent Judeo-Christian interpretation that God created the entire world specifically to serve Adam’s every need. As for the idea that we are part of a family with all other living beings, with the earth as our life-giving mother, that too is familiar to eco-ears. But from the Church?”

    Klein sees the Pope’s concessions in this area as a great victory for neo-paganism and places it in the context of the Goddess worship that is endemic amongst New Agers, feminists, and radical environmentalists. For them, Christianity has always waged a war against both nature and women, violently subduing ‘the force of the feminine in nature’, conceived as Gaia, or earth goddess. Indeed, according to Klein, this hostility has historically been Christianity’s principle mission: “replacing a maternal Earth with a Father God, and draining the natural world of its sacred power, were what stamping out paganism and animism were all about.”

    […]

    Unfortunately, aside from being fundamentally misanthropic, the neo-paganism of the Deep Greens with whom Francis appears to be aligning himself has its roots in Nazism and other forms of fascism. This is made clear in such recent books as How Green Were the Nazis?: Nature, Environment, and Nation in the Third Reich (2005), by Franz-Josef Brüggemeier, Mark Cioc, and Thomas Zeller. As they point out, Nazi environmentalists like Ernst Lehmann defined National Socialism in Deep Green terms, as made clear in Biologischer Wille. Wege und Ziele biologischer Arbeit im neuen Reich (1934):

    “We recognize that separating humanity from nature, from the whole of life, leads to humankind’s own destruction and to the death of nations. Only through a re-integration of humanity into the whole of nature can our people be made stronger. That is the fundamental point of the biological tasks of our age. Humankind alone is no longer the focus of thought, but rather life as a whole . . . This striving toward connectedness with the totality of life, with nature itself, a nature into which we are born, this is the deepest meaning and the true essence of National Socialist thought.”

    This close link between radical environmentalism and fascism is readily acknowledged by contemporary environmentalists. As Janet Biehl and Peter Staudenmaier, have warned in Ecofascism: Lessons from the German Experience (1995), the movement’s inherent authoritarianism could easily propel it into despotism:

    “An emancipatory ecological politics demands an acute awareness and understanding of the legacy of classical eco-fascism and its conceptual continuities with present day environmental discourse.”

    And as Peter Hay willingly observes in Main Currents in Western Environmental Thought (2002):

    “Ecological ideas appealed to the Nazis because they, too, believed that the laws of nature were immutable, and … with their economics of state-managed rather than market capitalism, they approved ecology’s opposition to the laissez-faire market.”

    As he points out, this attitude lives on not only among contemporary neo-Nazis, but throughout radical environmentalism. They all blame the ecological crisis (and most other evils in the world) on the United States: “American cultural imperialism is genocidal of other cultures … and its technological imperialism is destroying the global environment.”

    ****************************************************************************************

    UN megalomaniacal ideologue Cristiana Figueres must be thrilled now the pope has joined the party.

  23. Alexander K on July 16, 2015 at 4:39 pm said:

    Excellent research, Richard C!
    The Catholic church really is in big trouble in cold-bloodedly divorcing itself from accepted mainstream Christian theology and aligning itself with the Marxist Greens, as Pope Francis’s encyclical makes clear.
    While I decided I didn’t need an imaginary friend to lean on many years ago, I recognise the comfort blanket that the faith is for many of my friends who could not accept my reasoning.
    This current nonsense makes for an object lesson on how deeply Martin Luther must have been angered/dismayed by the church’s selling of ‘penitence’ and illustrates the power of the Green’s religosity which certainly is anything but science.

  24. Andy on July 16, 2015 at 5:45 pm said:

    It’s not just the Catholics. The Anglicans are also jumping on the eco-bandwagon.
    I also have a friend whose daughter goes to a Quaker school.

    They have ditched some of their principles in favour of “sustainability” and other fashionable stuff.

    I’m not sure how sustainable giving Iran the green light to develop nukes is, but that’s another story in the weird and wonderful world of “progressive” politics

  25. Richard C (NZ) on July 16, 2015 at 5:46 pm said:

    >”Excellent research”

    I didn’t know there was such a thing as a PhD in Comparative religion but whatever it is, Bendle provides much context to the forces at work in this world.

    Let’s face it, these are not trivial forces:

    “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun” – Mao Zedong, August 1927

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_power_grows_out_of_the_barrel_of_a_gun

  26. Richard C (NZ) on July 16, 2015 at 6:47 pm said:

    >”Let’s face it, these are not trivial forces”

    From the Wiki link above following Mao’s ““Political power” quote repeated 6 November 1938:

    “Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party. Yet, having guns, we can create Party organizations, as witness the powerful Party organizations which the Eighth Route Army has created in northern China. We can also create cadres, create schools, create culture, create mass movements. Everything in Yenan has been created by having guns. All things grow out of the barrel of a gun. According to the Marxist theory of the state, the army is the chief component of state power. Whoever wants to seize and retain state power must have a strong army. Some people ridicule us as advocates of the “omnipotence of war”. Yes, we are advocates of the omnipotence of revolutionary war; that is good, not bad, it is Marxist. The guns of the Russian Communist Party created socialism. We shall create a democratic republic. Experience in the class struggle in the era of imperialism teaches us that it is only by the power of the gun that the working class and the labouring masses can defeat the armed bourgeoisie and landlords; in this sense we may say that only with guns can the whole world be transformed. We are advocates of the abolition of war, we do not want war; but war can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun.”

    — Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung, Vol. II, pp. 224-225

    Now the Chinese State is the “armed bourgeoisie” and wont be putting the gun down anytime soon. It was landlord for a time too but private ownership has become the preferred proposition. So much for socialism there.

    The UN FCCC is on a quest that “the whole world be transformed” too but they don’t have guns. They’re left with coercion. The pope has thrown in his lot so now they have “moral” exhortation but still no guns. The governments they are trying to coerce have the guns, including China, who have tasted capitalism and like it a lot.

    Consequently, this particular ideological cause is using the tool of “subversion” in the West:

    Subversion

    “Subversion refers to an attempt to transform the established social order and its structures of power, authority, and hierarchy. Subversion (Latin subvertere: overthrow) refers to a process by which the values and principles of a system in place, are contradicted or reversed. More specifically, subversion can be described as an attack on the public morale and, “the will to resist intervention are the products of combined political and social or class loyalties which are usually attached to national symbols. Following penetration, and parallel with the forced disintegration of political and social institutions of the state, these loyalties may be detached and transferred to the political or ideological cause of the aggressor”.[1] Subversion is used as a tool to achieve political goals because it generally carries less risk, cost, and difficulty as opposed to open belligerency. Furthermore, it is a relatively cheap form of warfare that does not require large amounts of training.[2] A subversive is something or someone carrying the potential for some degree of subversion. In this context, a “subversive” is sometimes called a “traitor” with respect to (and usually by) the government in power.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subversion

    Whatever tool, gun or subversion, the driving force remains the same:

    “You Americans are so gullible! We don’t have to invade you! We will destroy you from within, without firing a shot! We won’t have to fight you; we’ll so weaken your economy, until you fall like overripe fruit into our hands.”

    ~ Nikita Khrushchev, 1954

    “We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have Communism.”

    ~ Nikita Khrushchev, 1959

    “Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!”

    ~ Nikita Khrushchev, 1956

    Obama Was Predicted 50 Years Ago . . . by Khrushchev!
    http://www.tpnn.com/2014/11/17/obama-was-predicted-50-years-ago-by-khrushchev/

    # # #

    Problem is, world governments are funding their own subversion on our behalf.

  27. Mike Jowsey on July 16, 2015 at 7:47 pm said:

    Maggy Wassilieff: Well spotted, and good call.

    Alexander: I detect you may have been consuming The Hitch, perhaps as much as I. “While I decided I didn’t need an imaginary friend to lean on many years ago, I recognise the comfort blanket that the faith is for many of my friends who could not accept my reasoning.”

  28. Andy on July 17, 2015 at 9:23 am said:

    Most people have an imaginary friend or two. “Manbearpig” is one such example.

  29. Richard C (NZ) on July 17, 2015 at 9:42 am said:

    CLIMATE CHANGE: WHEN TWO TRIBES GO TO WAR

    By Ian Wishart

    […]

    As a former believer in global warming in my days as a senior producer in radio and TV in the eighties and nineties, I had transitioned to a climate sceptic in the 2000s, so I re-examined my own journey.

    I had ‘believed’ in the early stages because the scientific theory appeared to be plausible. Sure, I was a member of the liberal media and a paid-up member of Greenpeace for more than a decade – I’d been attracted to the group because I’d been one of the first journalists on the scene of the 1985 Rainbow Warrior bombing, and because of their stance on driftnet fishing and whales. I donated reasonably heavily to the cause. However, I was also an investigative journalist who’d been trained to ‘test the evidence’.

    That’s what eventually forced my transition. As a senior editor and former political spinmeister, I recognised a PR campaign when I saw it and increasingly the evidence for human-caused global warming was become scantier whilst the PR hype grew louder – which I knew was standard practice when the evidence is weak.

    […]

    I should have realised then that I was dealing with a group that actually didn’t care about the evidence.

    Six years ago, I thought the motivation might be money and power. For some it clearly is, but for the scientist-activists, environmental lobbyists and well-meaning members of the public, something more was clearly at work. Climate change is a declaration of Faith; Faith in Gaia. Until sceptics truly understand what is really driving the climate change movement, they will never truly engage with it.

    While the Sceptics Tribe constantly addresses the science in the debate, the Climate Tribe doesn’t. That’s why they are always saying, “the science is settled”, because debating it makes them uncomfortable, it shakes their faith, and they don’t want their faith shaken, so they react the way religious cults have always reacted when under pressure: they circle the wagons and try and crush dissenters. The backlash against climate sceptics today is similar to the Spanish Inquisition – it is a religious-style reaction to what should be a scientific testing process. Like the Church of old, people are urged to shun the heretics, and told not to believe them.

    […]

    The Climate Tribe is far more about common purpose now than it is about science. The science was simply the means to the end. The end is controlling society for “the common good”. It’s a feelgood motivation. That’s why the public buy into it, and that’s why believers feel threatened whenever anyone tries to challenge it – the challenge is seen not as debating the science of climate change, but a direct attack on the Tribe and its deeper purpose.

    To change the outcome, you cannot just “debate the science”. You have to deprogram members of the Tribe.

    “You take the blue pill,” Morpheus told Neo in The Matrix, “the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill, you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes…”

    http://www.investigatemagazine.co.nz/Investigate/14691/climate-change-when-two-tribes-go-to-war/

  30. Andy on July 17, 2015 at 9:52 am said:

    Ian Wishart is absolutely correct in the above. It is completely pointless debating science with the True Believers. Most of them don’t have the foggiest about what the science says anyway, including some that hold academic positions in the subject

  31. Richard C (NZ) on July 17, 2015 at 10:49 am said:

    >”It is completely pointless debating science with the True Believers”

    Much time can be saved by getting a handle on a person’s place in the spectrum in the first instance I’ve found. Not worth the effort of any scientific presentation when a mind is locked shut. But not all are.

    But at the UN it’s never been about the science.

    Wishart:

    “This being can only channel His energies through the mass consciousness or through a group conscious entity, such as the U.N.”, wrote Alice Bailey, whose disciples included UN Secretary-Generals Dag Hammarskjold, U Thant and Assistant Secretary General Robert Mueller.

    That era is now past (I hope) but it was one of the things that focused my attention on the UN long before climate change. I found that era quite disturbing (still do). There’s a new regime in place now that is much more overtly social reorganization than esoteric based (maybe, don’t really know).

    Much info on Alice Bailey available but in terms of the UN, this is what the Wishart quote was about (i.e. know your enemy):

    Lucis Trust – The Spiritual Foundation Of The United Nations

    The Lucis Trust

    The Lucis Trust is the Publishing House which prints and disseminates United Nations material. It is a devastating indictment of the New Age and Pagan nature of the UN.

    Lucis Trust was established in 1922 as Lucifer Trust by Alice Bailey as the publishing company to disseminate the books of Bailey and Blavatsky and the Theosophical Society. The title page of Alice Bailey’s book, ‘Initiation, Human and Solar’ was originally printed in 1922, and clearly shows the publishing house as ‘Lucifer Publishing CoIn 1923.’

    Bailey changed the name to Lucis Trust, because Lucifer Trust revealed the true nature of the New Age Movement too clearly. (Constance Cumbey, The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow, p. 49). A quick trip to any New Age bookstore will reveal that many of the hard-core New Age books are published by Lucis Trust.

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_lucytrust04.htm

    “Evidence of the growth of the human intellect along the needed receptive lines [for the preparation of the New Age] can be seen in the “planning” of various nations and in the efforts of the United Nations to formulate a world plan… From the very start of this unfoldment, three occult factors have governed the development of all these plans”

    [Alice B. Bailey, Discipleship in the New Age (Lucis Press, 1955), Vol. II, p.35.]

    Hence my unease.

  32. Richard C (NZ) on July 17, 2015 at 11:05 am said:

    [Wishart] – “I should have realised then that I was dealing with a group that actually didn’t care about the evidence.”

    Or any other reasoning. Case in point:

    EPA Chief Admits Obama Regs Have No Measurable Climate Impact: ‘One one-hundredth of a degree?’

    EPA Chief McCarthy defends regs as ‘enormously beneficial’ – Symbolic impact

    By: Marc Morano – Climate Depot July 15, 2015

    U.S. House Science Committee July 9, 2015

    Via: The HARRY READ ME File: Testifying before Congress, EPA’s McCarthy defends the Agency’s climate regs as ‘enormously beneficial’ when asked about the rules climate benefit of reducing global temps by just one one-hundredth of a single degree Celsius.

    CHAIRMAN LAMAR SMITH: “On the Clean Power Plan, former Obama Administration Assistant Secretary Charles McConnell said at best it will reduce global temperature by only one one-hundredth of a degree Celsius. At the same time it’s going to increase the cost of electricity. That’s going to hurt the lowest income Americans the most. How do you justify such an expensive, burdensome, onerous rule that’s really not going to do much good and isn’t this all pain and no gain.

    ADMINISTRATOR GINA MCCARTHY: “No sir, I don’t agree with you. If you look at the RIA we did, the Regulatory Impact Analysis you would see it’s enormously beneficial.

    CHAIRMAN SMITH: “Do you consider one one-hundredth of a degree to be enormously beneficial?”

    ADMINISTRATOR MCCARTHY: “The value of this rule is not measured in that way. It is measured in showing strong domestic action which can actually trigger global action to address what’s a necessary action to protect…”

    CHAIRMAN SMITH: “Do you disagree with my one one-hundredth of a degree figure? Do you disagree with the one one-hundredth of a degree?”

    ADMINISTRATOR MCCARTHY: “I’m not disagreeing that this action in and of itself will not make all the difference we need to address climate action, but what I’m saying is that if we don’t take action domestically we will never get started and we’ll never…”

    CHAIRMAN SMITH: “But if you are looking at the results, the results can’t justify the cost and the burden that you’re imposing on the American people in my judgement.”

    Read more: http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/07/15/epa-chief-admits-obama-regs-have-no-measurable-climate-impact-one-one-hundredth-of-a-degree-epa-chief-mccarthy-defends-regs-as-enormously-beneficial-symbolic-impact/#ixzz3g6VyXQTZ

  33. Richard C (NZ) on July 17, 2015 at 11:22 am said:

    I had a maths teacher at High School who would start each class by writing up a quote from someone who’s words he considered spiritually enlightening and worthwhile dwelling on – therefore we in maths class should too. UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold was one of those.

    Didn’t seem to improve my maths unfortunately. Years later I found out he had given up on them all in favour of Christianity.

  34. It’s a shame your maths teacher couldn’t focus on inspiring mathematicians, or which there are many, rather than New Age UN cronies

    Good maths teachers that inspire kids are very rare. I’m lucky to have had two of those, one of whom wrote the textbooks we used

  35. Richard C (NZ) on July 17, 2015 at 1:34 pm said:

    The UN wants $100bn a year for the Green Climate Fund (a “very, very small sum” – Figueres) but the UK DECC has already overspent its budget by £1.5bn to support renewable energy projects over the next five years:

    Britain Faces Multi-Billion Black Hole In Renewables Subsidies
    http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/britain-faces-multi-billion-black-hole-in-renewables-subsidies.html

    What’s the problem?. Meanwhile the EU and ECB seem to be finding Greece’s €86bn eurozone bailout a bit time consuming:

    ‘Greece debt crisis: Eurozone backs €7bn bridging loan’

    What happens next?

    # EU member states to back eurozone decision on €7bn bridge loan to clear Greece’s immediate debts (expected Friday)
    # German parliament to back negotiations on €86bn eurozone bailout deal (Friday)
    # Greek parliament to pass further reforms (22 July)
    # Lengthy eurozone talks to start on bailout through European Stability Mechanism

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33546352

    Riots ensuing. I don’t know why they don’t just get Christiana Figueres on the job.

  36. [“That era is now past (I hope) but it was one of the things that focused my attention on the UN long before climate change. I found that era quite disturbing (still do). There’s a new regime in place now that is much more overtly social reorganization than esoteric based (maybe, don’t really know).”]

    FROM TOTALITARIA:

    Surely, you mutter, this is just mumbo-jumbo, a bunch of airy-fairy types wearing tinfoil hats jumping around in a circle underneath the debating chamber whilst flinging feathers and gold dust into the air and chanting something suitably exotically Eastern; file it under “mostly harmless”.

    Again, you are missing the point. It’s not the “efficacy” of the Luciferian prayer rituals that is at issue, it is the fact that the Lucifer disciples long ago captured the hearts and minds of UN policy bureaucrats, thus ensuring that their belief system is entrenched in UN policies worldwide.

    You are probably also seriously underestimating just how widespread this belief system now is.

    When Global Governance comes in the next decade as they are planning, it will come with this baggage.
    In 2007 the Canada Free Press published an opinion piece, noting that the new UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s very first act, after being elected to the top position that week, was to visit the Lucifer chapel:
    “The bizarre brainchild of the late Dag Hammarskjöld, the UN Meditation Room is built in the shape of a truncated pyramid,” reported Judy McLeod in the Free Press.

    “In the center is an altar made out of magnetite, the largest natural piece of magnetite ever mined. For meditation purposes it is probably the most ideal spot on the planet, since the magnetite altar has its foundation straight down, built into the bedrock of the land below; tapping into the energies of the earth itself. The mysterious mural also helps the worshippers tune into esoteric energies, and helps facilitate a state of altered consciousness.

    “No self-respecting Christian would come to pray at the Meditation Room whose custodian is the Lucis Trust, formerly known as the Lucifer Publishing Co. The room was a favourite haunt of former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who was married to his Swedish wife there.

    “That’s where Ban headed right after the welcoming applause accorded him by dozens of UN staffers.”

    Odd, if it is just mumbo-jumbo, that Secretaries-General of the UN bow their knees regularly at an altar dedicated to Lucifer.

    end of extract

  37. Andy on July 17, 2015 at 4:34 pm said:

    Ian Wishart – I have read both Totalitaria and AirCon.

    Both excellent reads, thanks!

  38. Richard C (NZ) on July 17, 2015 at 6:40 pm said:

    [Klein from upthread] – “When 400,000 people marched for climate justice in New York last September, the slogan was ‘To change everything, we need everyone’.”

    As I recall, given the photo documentation of the wall of placards, a typical observation might have been – “Gee, there sure are a lot of communists here”.

  39. Richard C (NZ) on July 17, 2015 at 7:14 pm said:

    [Bendle on Klein from upthread] – “In effect, climate change was to become the Trojan Horse through which the policies of deregulation, free trade, privatization, fiscal austerity, tax reductions, plus individual responsibility and a reduced public sector could be subverted and reversed.”

    Have already linked to Subversion upthread. I’m convinced this is the keyword on so many levels in respect to how climate change is being used by all the fellow travelers.

  40. Mike Jowsey on July 17, 2015 at 8:06 pm said:

    The claws of socialism. The common good. Big Brother is watching you. George Orwell turns in his grave. All on the sixpence of CO2. Somebody write a book, please!

  41. Richard C (NZ) on July 17, 2015 at 10:24 pm said:

    >”UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s very first act, after being elected to the top position [2007], was to visit the Lucifer chapel:”

    Not sure whether to thank you or not for this Ian. A bit unsettling because if I had seen this before (can’t remember if I have or not) it hasn’t stuck in my mind. I was aware of Kofi Annan’s proclivity but I don’t think Ban Ki-moon’s visit that one time tells us much, probably why the thought hasn’t stuck if it occurred.

    I do agree with “You are probably also seriously underestimating just how widespread this belief system now is” but it’s hard to know how much Ban Ki-moon adheres/subscribes to the basis of it. I suspect his action is more ceremonial than anything. although ceremony is telling (Wiki “A ceremony is an event of ritual significance, performed on a special occasion”).

    So about those UN ceremonies:

    Statement
    Secretary-General’s [Ban Ki-moon’s] remarks to introduce His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI to the General Assembly of the United Nations New York, 18 April 2008
    Your Holiness,

    Excellencies,

    I am deeply grateful to His Holiness for accepting my invitation to visit the United Nations — home to all men and women of faith around the world. Your Holiness, welcome to our common home.

    The United Nations is a secular institution, composed of 192 States. We have six official languages but no official religion. We do not have a chapel — though we do have a meditation room.

    But if you ask those of us who work for the United Nations what motivates us, many of us reply in a language of faith. We see what we do not only as a job, but as a mission. Indeed, mission is the word we use most often for our work around the world — from peace and security to development to human rights.

    Your Holiness, in so many ways, our mission unites us with yours.

    You have spoken of the terrible challenge of poverty afflicting so much of the world’s population, and how we cannot afford indifference and self-centred isolation.

    You have encouraged the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, and called for progressive and agreed-upon nuclear disarmament.

    You have spelled out that those with greater power may not use it to violate the rights of others, and stated that peace is based on respect for the rights of all.

    You have spoken of water resources and climate change as matters of grave importance for the entire human family.

    You have called for an open and sincere dialogue, both within your Church and between religions and cultures, in search of the good of humankind.

    Finally, you have called for trust in, and commitment to, the United Nations. As you have said, the UN is “capable of fostering genuine dialogue and understanding, reconciling divergent views, and developing multilateral policies and strategies capable of meeting the manifold challenges of our complex and rapidly changing world.”

    Your Holiness, these are fundamental goals we share. We are grateful to have your prayers as we proceed on the path towards them.

    Before leaving the UN today, you will visit the Meditation Room. My great predecessor, Dag Hammarskjöld, who created that room, put it well. He said of the stone that forms its centerpiece [and I quote]: “We may see it as an altar, empty not because there is no God, not because it is an altar to an unknown God, but because it is dedicated to the God whom man worships under many names and in many forms.” End quote.

    Excellencies,

    Whether we worship one God, many or none — we in the United Nations have to sustain and strengthen our faith every day. As demands on our Organization multiply, we need more and more of this precious commodity.

    I am profoundly grateful to his Holiness Pope Benedict XVI for bestowing some of his faith on us — and for placing his trust in us. He possesses both of these in abundance. May we be strengthened by his visit today.

    Thank you very much.

    http://www.un.org/sg/STATEMENTS/index.asp?nid=3102

    OK, plenty to get your head around e.g. “you [Pope Benedict XVI] have called for trust in, and commitment to, the United Nations”. I thought Christianity was about trust in, and commitment to, God. Turns out when I read God I should think United Nations if I’m to follow the Pope’s line of exhortation.

    But this is exactly the UN’s religion even though they profess secular non-denomination. From the Lucis Trust link upthread: Sri Chinmoy, the New Age guru, meditation leader at the UN, wrote:

    “the United Nations is the chosen instrument of God; to be a chosen instrument means to be a divine messenger carrying the banner of God’s inner vision and outer manifestation.”

    Gee, ok, not something I’ve ever read in a Christian bible and I don’t think any other religion holds the UN in such high regard either (except New Age, Deep Green, etc). But back to the ceremonies:

    “Before leaving the UN today, you [Benedict] will visit the [UN] Meditation Room”

    This is homage (special honour or respect shown publicly) to the UN’s religious sanctum.

    “I [Ban Ki-moon] am deeply grateful to His Holiness for accepting my invitation to visit the United Nations — home to all men and women of faith around the world. Your Holiness, welcome to our common home.”

    This is subversion.

    Even so, I’m still not convinced Ban Ki-moon is necessarily Luciferian. More of an oaf from what I’ve seen, but a forceful and vociferous puppet (a useful idiot) of all his whisperers, like his “special adviser” Jeffrey Sachs. This characteristic is probably why he got the job I think.

    Secretary-General’s MDG ADVOCACY GROUP

    Jeffrey D. Sachs, United Nations Secretary-General’s Special Adviser on the MDGs (United States)

    Jeffrey D. Sachs is Director of the Earth Institute, Quetelet Professor of Sustainable Development, and Professor of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University. He is also Special Advisor to United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

    http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/advocates/members/jeffrey-sachs.shtml

    THE EARTH INSTITUTE COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

    Prof. Jeffrey Sachs, Director

    Jeffrey D. Sachs is the Director of The Earth Institute, Quetelet Professor of Sustainable Development, and Professor of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University. He is Special Advisor to United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on the Millennium Development Goals, having held the same position under former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

    http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.edu/articles/view/1804

    Barack Obama is a graduate of Columbia University (New York) and Harvard Law School:

    ‘What Obama and I Learned at Columbia: How to Destroy America From Within’

    Wayne Allyn Root, Nov. 11, 2013

    It’s always about lying to coverup the Marxist agenda of destroying the middle class, redistributing wealth, and putting big government in control of our every move. Why the lies? We were taught at Columbia that “It’s for the greater good” and “We know what’s best for those people” and ”The ends justify the means.”

    http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/what-obama-and-i-learned-at-columbia-how-to-destroy-america-from-within/

    Columbia is the American Goddess. Columbia is everywhere in the USA (think District of Columbia). Everything you need to know about the Goddess Columbia:
    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_washingtonDC09.htm

    To my mind it is the background of Ban Ki-moon’s “special advisers” that is more pertinent in Ban’s case than the UN ceremonies Ban might preside over. I wouldn’t say that of some of his predecessors.

  42. Richard C (NZ) on July 17, 2015 at 10:49 pm said:

    >”To my mind it is the background of Ban Ki-moon’s “special advisers” that is more pertinent in Ban’s case”

    Maybe the same can be said of Pope Francis – think Schellnhuber, Edenhofer, and Klein.

  43. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 12:43 am said:

    Some names from Columbia University stand out more than others:

    ‘The Story Unfolds 2: Obama, Biden, Brzezinski, Carter…and the Trilateral Commission?’
    ~~By American Lassie, October 27, 2008

    Let’s go to Obama’s years at Columbia University. Why is there such a secret about his transcript and the courses he took? Who were his instructors? Wonder of Wonders. At the same time of Obama’s attendance at Columbia, ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI was also at the Columbia as head of the “Institute of Communist Affairs.” (More on ZB later.)

    Obama’s senior thesis reportedly was entitled “Soviet Nuclear Disarmament.” His dissertation has disappeared from Columbia’s archives and the Obama campaign professes to have no copies of it. His degree, received in 1983, was in political science. Back to Brzezinski —

    Brzezinski was national security adviser under Jimmy Carter. He left Columbia to found the TRILATERAL COMMISSION along with David Rockefeller. The Trilateral Commission is a private organization with members from the U.S., Europe and Japan. (The Japanese presence has grown to include other nations in Asia.)

    In his book “Between Two Ages”, Brzezinski writes:

    “Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man and a victory of reason over belief” (Page 72). He called for a deliberate management of the American future (Page 260), a “Community of Nations” (page 296) and a “World Government” (Page 308).

    https://insightanalytical.wordpress.com/2008/10/27/the-story-unfolds-2-obama-biden-brzezinski-carterand-the-trilateral-commission/

    So Columbia University houses the Earth Institute and Institute of Communist Affairs, among others. Out of which we get the Brzezinski’s, Sachs’s, and Obama’s of this world.

  44. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 10:47 am said:

    Trade And Climate Change – Tim Groser
    Friday, 17 July 2015, 9:17 am
    Speech: New Zealand Government

    Ireland And New Zealand Agriculture: Trade And Climate Change

    Climate Change: The Setting for Paris

    “It is in the context of the last of these human needs – food security – that I want to focus on the role of agriculture in climate change.”

    Agriculture – Its Role in Developing Countries

    “Eventually, something has to give here. The ‘Science’ in climate change – or rather, the key point about the influence of anthropogenic greenhouse gases on climate change – may indeed by ‘settled’ in broad scientific terms. But the politics of climate change around this – including the metrics and methodologies – are not.”

    Agriculture Emissions: The Kyoto Model

    “The Kyoto modality – taking five other Greenhouse Gases and converting them to carbon dioxide equivalents in what economists would call ‘a fungibility model’ – is elegant, sophisticated and logical for industrial economies trying to get their energy and industrial processes on a lower emissions pathway. It does not make a lot of sense to an economy with relatively large agriculture emissions.

    At one level, there is an important debate amongst experts that the ‘apples for apples’ metric they used – 100 year GWPs (Global Warming Potential) – is flawed, precisely because it does not prioritise action on carbon dioxide, which is the essence of the climate change problem which is all about the long term, not the short term.”

    Biological Emissions

    “But our underlying problem with the existing Kyoto approach has not gone away. Until such time as our farmers can access technologies that allow them to maintain production at far lower emissions, putting a price on biological emissions just raises tax revenue and at the margin depresses our agriculture production and thus depresses New Zealand exports. We don’t want to do that – we are trying to raise the ratio of exports to GDP, not reduce it.”

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1507/S00274/trade-and-climate-change-tim-groser.htm

    # # #

    >”The ‘Science’ in climate change – or rather, the key point about the influence of anthropogenic greenhouse gases on climate change – may indeed by ‘settled’ in broad scientific terms”

    Or it may not. Looking more and more like not.

    >”carbon dioxide, which is the essence of the climate change problem”

    The essence of the climate change problem is that it isn’t a problem. But political platitudes are necessary for European trade unfortunately. But hey, give the guy some credit for putting NZ’s case in terms of biological emissions and food security rather than industrial emissions. Because he has to make some noise in Europe, like it or not.

  45. Colombia University also has links to the far left group “Weather Underground” who bombed various places in the USA during the 1970s.

    Kathy Boudin was one that was convicted for her part in the Brinks robbery which resulted in the deaths of two policemen and a security guard.
    They were also involved in a bombing of the Pentagon

    Boudin is now an adjunct professor at Colombia University
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy_Boudin

    During the first election campaign, US conservatives tried to make a link between the Weather Underground’s Bill Ayers and Obama, which the latter denies and has denounced the group’s actions.

  46. Speaking of crime, (and not related to the Sun, sorry), the Greenpeace activists who caused $30,000 of damage at Kingsnorth power station in the UK have been cleared of any crime as they were acting on behalf of “climate change”
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/sep/11/activists.kingsnorthclimatecamp

    This presumably opens the door to activists damaging cars and other personal property on the same basis

  47. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 12:27 pm said:

    >”Colombia University also has links to the far left group “Weather Underground” who bombed various places in the USA during the 1970s.”

    Formation 1969
    Type
    Marxism–Leninism,
    Communism,
    Anti-imperialism,
    New Left

    The origins of the Weathermen can be traced to the collapse and fragmentation of the Students for a Democratic Society following a split between office holders of SDS, or “National Office”, and their supporters and the Progressive Labor Party (PLP). During the factional struggle National Office leaders such as Bernardine Dohrn and Mike Klonsky began announcing their emerging perspectives, and Klonsky published a document titled “Toward a Revolutionary Youth Movement” (RYM).[4]

    RYM promoted the philosophy that young workers possessed the potential to be a revolutionary force to overthrow capitalism, if not by themselves then by transmitting radical ideas to the working class.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_Underground

    Bernardine Dohrn married Bill Ayers. These people must be aging now but the movement (“Type” above) never went away, there’s just a new generation with the same aims but different approach.

    Goes back to my argument upthread. WU used guns and failed. The modern incarnation uses subversion and is having far greater success (in their terms). Climate change has been an ideal vehicle for them, it’s attracted the Roman Catholic church via Bergoglio via Liberation Theology (sort of). That’s a major advance that guns never achieved.

  48. Interestingly, Spiked Online is an online magazine that was formed from a paper called “Living Marxism”, and its editor Brendan O’Neill was a member of the RCP – The Revolutionary Communist Party.

    He describes the RCP as very much one of open discussion and free thinkers, which maybe explains their evolution into libertarianism and strong proponents of free speech and opposition to excessive state involvement in people’s lives.

  49. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 12:48 pm said:

    Ban Ki-moon’s homage to the UN’s religious sanctum doesn’t necessarily make him an earth worshipper anymore than Luciferian either, even given it’s obvious earth connection. His upbringing was Buddhist but he refuses to discuss his religion. His action though speaks louder than words. He made a declaration “Hey everyone, look, this is where my allegiance is”. He’s bought into the UN religion whatever it’s roots. The roots to him may be essentially humanitarian, that does seem to come across.

    But by buying in he’s bought into whatever other roots there are that he may not have even thought of. That makes him malleable, which comes across too.

  50. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 1:12 pm said:

    Andy, did you see Tim Groser’s speech from Scoop upthread at 10:47 am?

    “If we set up a binary choice between climate change and food security, there is no possibility of developing countries prioritizing climate change, whatever the predictions of IPCC computer models may say.”

    “The ‘Science’ in climate change – or rather, the key point about the influence of anthropogenic greenhouse gases on climate change – may indeed by ‘settled’ in broad scientific terms. But the politics of climate change around this – including the metrics and methodologies – are not.”

    This wasn’t off-the-cuff, this is what policy wonks and ag research have been working on for some time.

  51. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 1:25 pm said:

    >”RCP ……..opposition to excessive state involvement in people’s lives”

    It does get a bit confusing at times (for me anyway). Zbigniew Brzezinski upthread had a strategy for the destruction of Russia:

    ‘The outrageous strategy to destroy Russia’, by Arthur Lepic
    http://www.voltairenet.org/article30038.html

    I find that difficult to reconcile with his other aspects.

  52. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 1:31 pm said:

    Been getting it’s and its wrong lately – sloppy.

  53. Mike Jowsey on July 18, 2015 at 3:29 pm said:

    “Been getting it’s and its wrong lately – sloppy.”
    Nobody’s perfect RC. Andy got peoples’ lives wrong, but hey, the dialogue is what counts. (Maybe RT would have another pov, but I am simply enjoying the research and sharing of information here – albeit disturbing).

  54. Mike Jowsey on July 18, 2015 at 3:39 pm said:

    Germaine to the evolving topic herein:
    Where Pope Francis Got His Advice on Global Warming
    “On behalf of legitimate scientists everywhere, I apologize for the bad advice Pope Francis has received about global warming and CO2.”
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/07/17/where-pope-francis-got-his-advice-on-global-warming/

  55. About that Buddhism thing. Buddhism was rewritten from the ground up in the 1870s, and transformed from near extinction into the must-have artifact in every “contemporary” Western home and TV show.

    From Totalitaria:

    The Lucifer doctrine derives from Theosophy, whose two major writers were Helena Blavatsky and Alice Bailey. Contrary to popular belief, most modern Buddhism in the West, particularly the Zen strain, is not authentic Buddhism but a hybrid largely influenced by Theosophy.299 In other words, modern Buddhism is the occult in drag, made palatable by its seeming exoticness.

    299 “The Making of Buddhist Modernism” by David L. McMahan, Oxford University Press, 2008, see also “The Divinity Code” by Ian Wishart, Howling At The Moon Publishing, 2007. In 1995, scholar Robert Sharf wrote, quite pointedly: “The popular ‘lay image of Zen, notably the notion that Zen refers not to a specific school of Buddhism but rather to a mystical or spiritual gnosis that transcends sectarian boundaries, is largely a twentieth-century construct. Beginning with the persecution of Buddhism in the early Meiji (haibutsu kishaku) Zen apologists have been forced to respond to secular and empiricist critiques of religion in general, and to Japanese nativist critiques of Buddhism as a ‘foreign funerary cult’ in particular. In response, partisans of Zen drew upon Western philosophical and theological strategies in their attempt to adapt their faith to the modern age.” See http://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/CriticalZen/whose%20zen_sharf.pdf

    The criticism has often been made that climate change policy is almost religious in the way it is being rolled out. It is, and that’s because it is central to the Gaia Earth-worship and Lucifer “consciousness-raising” that the UN is trying to engender. Around half the planet “believe” in climate change, almost in the religious sense, including most of the mainstream media. They “believe” it because it is being pushed as a doctrine of faith, disguised as science, by the Lucis Trust and its followers worldwide. If you want proof of their power to persuade, and therefore the danger inherent in their ideas, it is staring you in the face. They are “mostly harmless” only in the same sense that a cyanide pill is.

    end extract

  56. More from Totalitaria:

    Then there’s the strange case of Lumbini, in mountainous Nepal. Virtually every UN Secretary-General in history has made a pilgrimage to Lumbini, a remote archaeological site 10 hours’ drive from the Nepalese capital, Kathmandu, in the foothills of the Himalayas. Most readers will be unaware that Lumbini is the reputed birthplace of Buddha.310

    Dag Hammarskjöld visited Lumbini in March 1959, and paid homage in a haiku verse:

    “Like glittering sunbeams/The flute notes reach the gods/In the birth grotto.”311

    U Thant made the UN leader’s pilgrimage in 1967 and called it “one

    310 Most scholars believe it was a different site, but the UN has honed in on Lumbini. The site is sacred to the Theravada strain of Buddhism which is directly linked to the Lucis Trust, as you will discover later in this book.
    311 “United Nations Secretaries-General and Lumbini”, UNESCO document, http://www.unesco.org/new/index.php?id=66087
    THOUGHT CONTROL & THE NEW RELIGION | 229

    of the most important days in my life”, when he wrote his memoir in 1977, View From The UN.
    Kurt Waldheim’s312 tour in 1981 resulted in an announcement that the UN would spend donations on a “Lumbini Master Plan” to regenerate the ruins as a spiritual focal point for humanity.

    “Through the efforts of the Government of Nepal and with financial assistance from the United Nations Development Program, a Master Plan has been completed by the Japanese architect Kenzo Tange. However, a necessary is to make these plans a reality. It is my hope, therefore, that government, private institutions and individuals will make generous contributions towards this most worthy undertaking.”

    In 1989 the next Secretary-General, Javier Perez de Cuellar, spoke in glowing terms of Lumbini:
    “For all mankind Lumbini has special meaning as a place of meditation and spiritual renewal, a center of culture exchange and a symbol of peace. Buddha’s message of compassion and devotion to the service of humanity is more relevant today than at any other time in history.”

    De Cuellar added that the UN saw the site playing a key role in “the spiritual and cultural heritage of humanity.”

    Kofi Annan, in 1998, spoke also of how “Lumbini provides yet another illustration of the inter-connectedness of all people, across borders and across time. As a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage site, Lumbini reminds us how much the world’s religions can teach us, Buddhists and non-Buddhists, believers and non-believers alike.”

    The current Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon visited 2008 and said:
    “I am awestruck by the beauty and profound significance of this site, the birthplace of the Lord Buddha. Being here, I am reminded of his amazing life journey from sheltered prince to founder of one of the world’s great religions. And I am moved by his example of voluntarily leaving behind comfortable circumstances to confront the painful realities of life and to help others overcome them. Above all, as Secretary-General of the United Nations, I am all the more inspired to work for peace throughout the world. I sincerely hope that we can learn from his lessons, from his teach

    312
    Waldheim had been suspected by a UN War Crimes Tribunal in 1948 of being a Nazi war criminal but they did not have sufficient evidence. Incredibly he became UN Secretary-General despite those suspicions. In 1986 the truth about Waldheim’s past came out. “Kurt Waldheim dies at 88; ex-UN chief hid Nazi past”, NY Times, 14 June 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/14/world/europe/14iht-waldheim.3.6141106.html?_r=0
    230 | TOTALITARIA

    ings and his philosophy to bring peace, stability, harmony, reconciliation and friendship among people of different beliefs, different religions and cultures. This is exactly what human beings should promote and pursue for a better world, a more peaceful, more prosperous world.”

    Sharp-eyed readers will have spotted Ban Ki-moon’s reference to “Lord Buddha”. You won’t find a UN speech where Ban refers to “Lord Jesus”. The UN’s commitment to religious neutrality only goes so far.313

    The United Nations agency co-founded by Robert Muller, UNESCO, has listed Lumbini as a world heritage site. The UNESCO page also refers to the site not in neutral archaeological terms but spiritual ones, again giving Buddha a spiritual honorific:

    “Lumbini, the Birthplace of the Lord Buddha.”

    In the UN list of World Heritage sites, each has a number. Wait till you see what the number of this particular world heritage site is:

  57. Mike Jowsey on July 18, 2015 at 4:02 pm said:

    Ian W – I find all religions equally delusional. I.e. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact.

  58. Mike, the debate about the merits of any or all religions is not the point of the above posts…rather it is to illustrate that the people controlling the climate change/global governance agenda have the particular beliefs above, and much more that I haven’t disclosed. The response from my atheist friends has been, “they’re all moonbats, who cares?” which overlooks the elephant in the room: these people already have some control over your life, if they swing enough public behind them they will end up with total control of your life at the macro level.

    Laugh at them now, at your peril…

  59. Mike Jowsey on July 18, 2015 at 4:21 pm said:

    Ian, quite so. Thank you for the admonishment. However, I watch helpless as the unelected power-brokers feather the nest of their empire. What can a humble cherry farmer do in a backwater country except marvel at their delusions?

  60. Mike Jowsey on July 18, 2015 at 4:24 pm said:

    By the way, the humble cherries are farmed. The farmer is not as humble, especially after a glass of Merlot Cabernet. 😉

  61. TOTALITARIA:

    Speaking in 2000, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan again acknowledged that spiritualism drove the United Nations from its core:

    “For many of us, the axiom could well be. ‘We pray, therefore, we are’.” Then, borrowing a quote from Martin Luther King, Annan added, “This says to us that our world is geographically one. Now, we are faced with making it spiritually one. Through our scientific genius we have made of the world a neighborhood; now through moral and spiritual genius, we must make it a brotherhood.”

    Why is it the job of the United Nations to make all humanity “spiritually one”?

    If you want to know just how deep all this goes, consider this: The Lucis Trust has published a ‘prayer’ purportedly given to Alice Bailey in 1945 at the same time as the UN was being established, by the 2000 year old spirit creature Djwhal Khul. It is called “the Great Invocation” and it is a prayer

    ONE RING TO RULE THEM ALL, AND IN THE DARKNESS BIND THEM | 233

    to the entity Lucifer/Satan/Maitreya/Whatever to return to Earth as ruler.

    At one point a few years back, the Lucis Trust was slightly more open about its plans to institute a replacement world religion through the UN, posting this Alice Bailey morsel on its website:

    “The Great Invocation if given widespread distribution, can be to the new world religion what the Lord’s Prayer has been to Christianity and the 23rd Psalm has been to the spiritually minded Jew.”

    That paragraph can now only be located through the Internet Archive system. The “invocation”, or spell, has certainly gained wide distribution. It was the opening ‘prayer’ for the pre-conference of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio – the one that ramped up the climate change steamroller. The Great Invocation has even been endorsed by the UN as a prayer for International Peace Day:

    “Please add the radiations of your mind and heart to a Global Vigil of Invocation, Meditation and Prayer in support of International Day of Peace, 2013. To support this Day on a spiritual level, there will this year be a wide variety of initiatives for silence, meditation and prayer. The UN continues its important focus, inviting the people of the world to observe a minute of silence at 12 noon local time, setting up a wave of silence beginning in New Zealand and flowing around the world to end in Samoa almost 48 hours later. A range of movements are collaborating for the first time with the vision of co-creating the Largest Globally-Synchronized Meditation and Prayer for Peace in human history.

    “Will you or your group commit yourself to … beginning and ending the period with a sounding of the Great Invocation, or the Peace Invocation ‘May Peace Prevail on Earth’, or an invocation or prayer for world peace of your choice? Imagine the rhythmic pulse of invocation flowing from around the globe every 15 minutes.”

    What exactly is the Great Invocation? Whilst its proponents would never say as much, it is a prayer inviting the emergence of the Anti-Christ:

    “Let light stream forth into human minds./Let Light descend on Earth…./May the Coming One return to Earth.”

    Who is “the Coming One”? The clue is the “light”. He’s Lucifer, the morning star, the son of dawn, the serpent – as Blavatsky wrote. He is why a six and a half tonne block of iron ore is bathed in light from an unseen source above, immediately beneath the UN debating chamber, an altar, as the UN Secretary-General called it “to the God of all”.

    You couldn’t write a movie with a script like this, no Hollywood producer would believe it. Yet there it is: the United Nations, the entity that desperately wants our politicians to sign global treaties for a global governance structure, holds within it, in pride of place, an altar to Satan.

    You’ll recall the UN Secretary-General was a follower of Alice Bailey and Helena Blavatsky’s Luciferianism, and that Blavatsky wrote “It is Satan who is the god of our planet and the only god.”317

    By a process of elimination, there is no other entity the UN temple could be dedicated to.

    The climate change Earth Summit at Rio in 1992 was kicked off in its preliminary session, a Sacred Gathering, with a prayer to Satan. It was the largest gathering of world leaders in history. Little wonder the climate debate has such religious overtones. An attempt to stir up the biggest changes in human consciousness in history is being done in the name of Lucifer. You could be forgiven for thinking the world truly is going to Hell in a handcart.

    Again, and this point cannot be overstressed: regardless of whether you believe any of the supernatural jargon, the people ultimately controlling this and driving the UN process do, and so far they’re winning.

    The Lucis Trust, incidentally, mocks ordinary members of the public and politicians who don’t truly know what they’re saying when they repeat the Great Invocation spell. In an Alice Bailey publication several years ago, they said the Invocation would be understood in three different ways: 1. cattle class, 2. Esoteric and initiates, 3. By the Masters of the Hierarchy…

  62. If they find out about your cherries Mike, you’ll be forced to sacrifice them, probably in a ceremony involving duck feathers, bat fur and pixie dust

  63. “…you will visit the Meditation Room. My great predecessor, Dag Hammarskjöld, who created that room, put it well. He said of the stone that forms its centerpiece [and I quote]: ‘We may see it as an altar, empty not because there is no God, not because it is an altar to an unknown God, but because it is dedicated to the God whom man worships under many names and in many forms’.”

    Even the US Catholic News was fooled by it, reporting how the Meditation Room was an icon for the world.327 The Pope, said the paper, wrote in the visitors’ Golden Book at the Meditation Room. The symbolism of the head of the Catholic church appearing before the Lucis Trust’s Lucifer-dedicated altar in the UN must have had the adepts chuckling.

    Even so, maybe Benedict suspected something. He had been scheduled to remain there for five minutes but, “emerged about a minute later walking briskly to the delegates entrance.”328 Maybe a minute inside Lucifer’s temple was enough to tell the Pope where he was, enough to send a chill up his spine. Not only did he leave the Meditation Room rapidly, he left the entire UN building, cutting short his UN visit by a staggering 22 minutes.329

    What did Pope Benedict know that you don’t?
    327

  64. Mike Jowsey on July 18, 2015 at 4:39 pm said:

    Much more likely to tax the living joy out of them and me. But then the bartering begins, the cyber currencies, the upwelling of revolution against the nightmare of utopian dictatorship. We live in interesting times. And thanks Ian for shining some light on the motivations of this rabid elite.

  65. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 5:08 pm said:

    >”albeit disturbing”

    Don’t let it disturb you Mike, you’ve got a good thing going producing cherries, honey, horses and stuff. But worth keeping an eye on all the contestants wanting control of the world (as they do). Include Deep Green, International Communism, ISIS, Federal USA or EU, Roman Catholicism, UN org, various combinations of same, and so on.

    Doesn’t mean we have to give in to anyone or let them diminish our enjoyment of good things.

    >”bad advice Pope Francis has received”

    He’s the head of one of the contestants, a powerful leader but no guns nowadays (Roman Pope used to have military power before Napoleon put a stop to that). This one’s different though because there’s a prophecy attached, a premise – the biblical book of Revelation. No different than the scientific investigation of man-made climate change (or any scientific process): premise – theory – observation.

    Here’s the biblical premise (entire chapter for context at link):

    Revelation 13
    18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+13&version=KJV

    Here’s one theory:

    ‘The Biblical Interpretation of the Number 666’, by Ralf Myers (SDA church, RC’s went after their blood – literally) http://www.666beast.net/

    At Pope John Paul II the “count” was 665. Theory looking good, premise looking good. Benedict XVI didn’t fit the theory because a new name was needed to take the count to 666. Theory broke, premise suspect. Benedict abdicated, probably declared anti-pope eventually so his name is annulled. Count is back to 665. Premise and theory back on again. Along came new name Francis, count 666. Theory confirmed? premise/prophecy fulfilled? Nope.

    Here’s Myers’ update re Benedict and Francis http://www.666beast.net/Update.htm

    Francis just doesn’t fit. But given the course of his papacy (socialist, apostate) I can’t see him lasting much longer, anti-pope status eventually, count back to 665. Managing to wreak havoc in the meantime though (well, his “advisers” are). Possibly theory/interpretation erroneous and premise void but far too early to call.

    Thing is, this premise and theory is getting very close to valid in terms of what we are observing. What next? I’m very interested in what happens to Francis and what transpires. Francis has thrown in with the UN FCCC, this seems to be a model for what comes next in the Rev 13 premise/prophecy but not by Francis and not with the UN and on a very much different level. Seems to me this prophecy cannot be thrown out yet i.e. it’s still in-the-money.

    Meantime all the usual suspects will be scrabbling to control us while we get on with worthwhile things.

  66. As a further illustration of just how much impact the Satanists have had on UN organisations, a senior World Bank official named Richard Barrett addressed the Lucis Trust’s World Goodwill conference in 1996.

    Barrett revealed he had been invited to establish a “spiritual unfoldment335 society” at the World Bank, based on New Age and Alice Bailey doctrine. Very quickly, the meetings were attracting 40 to 50 World Bank HQ staff at a time, and “within a few months” the Luciferian offshoot was so “perfectly respectable” within the Bank that “we began to announce our meetings on the internal email system.”336

    Barrett then hatched the idea of the World Bank hosting “an international conference on spiritual values and sustainable development”.

    That conference, staged at the World Bank on 2-3 October 1995, attracted more than 400 delegates from around the world. As the professional journal Environmental Conservation reported in its March 1996 issue, the gathering attracted “diplomats…eminent environment and political scholars, ethicists and theologians…NGOs” and a range of other hangers-on. All of them being subtly indoctrinated with Lucis Trust teachings.337

    No less a personage than the head of the World Bank, James Wolfen

    335
    An occult term meaning progressive revelation, coined by Satanist Helena Blavatsky in “Deity, Cosmos & Man”, part 2, Chapter 11, http://www.blavatskytrust.org.uk/html/deity%20cosmos%20and%20man/dcm%20p2%20ch11.htm
    336 http://web.archive.org/web/19990224010437/http://www.lucistrust.org/goodwill/wgnl972.htm
    337 “Ethics and spiritual values etc.” Arthur Westing, Environmental Conservation / Volume 23 / Issue 01 / March 1996, pp 89-89 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0376892900038297
    THE DAY THE MUSIC DIED | 249

    sohn, acknowledged that spiritual values would henceforth guide World Bank policy and decisions.338

    Barrett revealed that since the international conference, the World Bank appointed him to “the position of Values Coordinator in the newly formed Department of Institutional Change. We have created a Values Circle…the greatest need we have, right now, is for each of us who cares about the future of humanity and the planet to bring this consciousness into our workplaces and begin the process of transforming our organisations.”339

    In short, the infection has jumped from the United Nations to the World Bank as well.

    In truth, it has gone a lot further than that, as you’re about to see.
    338

  67. Pope Benedict wasn’t the first Pope to have contact with the occult team running the United Nations, however. We’ve already seen Pope John XXIII named as a co-founder of the New Age Temple of Understanding at the UN. Whether that was because John was spiritually naïve, or because it was deliberate, we may never know. What we do know is the occultist UN Secretary-General U Thant may have put the Pope up to it.

    It was Thant who also persuaded John’s successor, Pope Paul VI, to become the first Pontiff to address the United Nations General Assembly in October 1965.

    “One of Mr Thant’s personal triumphs was the visit of Pope Paul VI to UN Headquarters in 1965,” reported newspapers.330 “It was Mr Thant’s idea…he often injected religious notes in his remarks. He maintained a warm friendship with both Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul, visiting them occasionally and exchanging messages with them.

    “He believed that all ideologies should be able to coexist peacefully and that they would eventually be synthesised.” [emphasis added]

    Pope Paul VI is also listed as a “founding friend” with U Thant and Pope John XXIII of the New Age Temple of Understanding,331 although the extent of the two popes’ involvement or understanding is not known.

    In his lengthy address to the UN General Assembly, Pope Paul VI at times sounded like he was worshipping the United Nations itself:

    “Gratitude to you, glory to you, who for 20 years have laboured for peace. Gratitude to you, glory to you for the conflicts which you have prevented…We feel that you thus interpret the highest sphere of human wisdom, and, we might add, its sacred character…Is there anyone who does not see the necessity of coming thus progressively to the establishment of a world authority, able to act efficaciously on the juridical and political levels?”332

    Not only was Pope Paul the first Pontiff to speak at the United Nations, he was the first head of the Catholic Church to have prayed at an altar dedicated to Lucifer in the UN Meditation Room.
    Under the subheading “Prays before block of iron”, the Boston Globe records:333

    “At the UN building on the East River front, Secretary-General U Thant, a Buddhist from Burma, met the sovereign of the church and walked at his side 50 yards through the vaulted lobby to the meditation room, where the Pope faced a plain block of iron ore, five feet high and two feet wide, bathed in a white light, with no inscription and no suggestion of any religious symbol, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Moslem or any other.

    “In the bare Meditation Room, the Pope and U Thant stood silently with closed eyes.”

    The Globe records the prayer at the iron ore altar as one of the “Holy Father’s five great moments”.
    That was 1965. Fast forward nearly five decades and the New Age…

    330 “UN Secretary-General Leaves Office”, Toledo Blade, 26 December 1971, p23
    331 http://templeofunderstanding.org/who-we-are/founding-friends/
    332 http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedailymirror/files/1965_1005_pope07.jpg
    333 “A 14 Hour Triumph – a Day Without Parallel”, by Laurence Winship, Boston Globe, 5 October 1965, p1

  68. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 5:35 pm said:

    >”Include Deep Green, International Communism, ISIS, Federal USA or EU, Roman Catholicism, UN org, various combinations of same, and so on.”

    Forgot Luciferian/Satanism but Ian’s covered that. Christian theologians would say the previous list is redundant with this addition.

  69. Richard…let your fingers do the walking and find the world heritage site number of Lumbini….

  70. Andy on July 18, 2015 at 6:17 pm said:

    Mike writes:


    Nobody’s perfect RC. Andy got peoples’ lives wrong, but hey, the dialogue is what counts.

    I’d be interested to hear more about what you think I got wrong, Mike; I have a thick skin 🙂

    On the subject of religion, I am not a religious person but I don’t accept that 3000 years of Judeo-Christianity has no value, that we have replaced with a belief in…..nothing..

    Furthermore, there are men far more intelligent than me, e.g Freeman Dyson, who basically invented Quantum Field Theory with Richard Feynman, that are observant Christians, so I try to keep an open and humbled mind on this topic.

    Live well and do good, not a bad motto for life?

  71. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 7:28 pm said:

    >”Richard…let your fingers do the walking and find the world heritage site number of Lumbini….”

    Ref: 666rev
    http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/666

    Heh.

  72. Mike Jowsey on July 18, 2015 at 8:14 pm said:

    Andy. apostrophes confound. It’s of no relevance.

    3000 years of religious dictatorships replaced with a belief in… nothing more than reason, the freedom of enquiry, thought, expression. Spare me your sentimentality for blind faith.

    As for those eminently more eminent such as Freeman Dyson, I might disagree with their archaic, contrary, hypocritical and wishful beliefs but I would defend with my life their right to believe them. Just don’t teach it to my grandchildren as preordained fact. Religion, much less than having no value, poisons the enquiring mind. In fact, poisons everything, as Christopher Hitchens would propound.

    By the way, your Freeman Dyson reference reminds me of a marvelous physicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, worthy of your time I would submit.

  73. Andy on July 18, 2015 at 8:30 pm said:

    Mike, I don’t have any time for “archaic” belief. I also am interested in the Dark Ages that formed between the periods of Greek ancient civilisations and the Enlightenment that saw the explosion of scientific and mathematical thought that occurred in the 17th-20th Centuries. Many would argue that these latter periods were times when religious straightjackets were removed that allowed these free thinkers to flourish, a viewpoint that I largely concur with

    However, I don’t see this process continuing. We seem to be entering a new Dark Ages surrounded by New Age mysticism, leftism, political correctness and and cultural relativism that seems to think that Islamic cultures that stone rape victims to death and execute gays has as much worth as our own.

  74. Mike Jowsey on July 18, 2015 at 8:54 pm said:

    Andy, your first paragraph holds no disagreement with me. Nor does your second, but It rather rests my case vis-a-vis religion. “…cultural relativism that seems to think that Islamic cultures that stone rape victims to death and execute gays has as much worth as our own.” Whilst I agree that this particular religion holds bronze age norms at its core, fundamental Christianity could also be so accused. I am vague these days on specific scriptural reference, but I think it is Deuteronomy that bestows duty to burn the witch.

    Here’s an hypothesis if you care to engage in this forum. “Religion poisons everything”. Falsify that if you dare.

  75. Andy on July 18, 2015 at 8:57 pm said:

    Whist we are at it, De Grasse Tyson is a well-know “science communicator” who has trivialised the global warming issue for the consumption of the public, with little academic background of worth

    Freeman Dyson, on the other hand, is a person who has not only produced original and profound work in Quantum Mechanics, but who has also asks serious questions about the AGW theory and the role of the carbon cycle.

    Needless to say, Freeman Dyson is characterised by DeSmogBlog as a “denier” (despite stating that human caused climate change is a trivially true fact)

    But then Dyson is a Christian, so we need to marginalise him and demand him to bake a Gay Cake or a Gay Pizza

  76. Mike Jowsey on July 18, 2015 at 9:13 pm said:

    Non-sequitur my friend. Neil deGrasse Tyson’s views on CAGW are not a factor in this debate.

    Okay, you want profound quantum mechanics, try Lawrence Krauss, also an atheist. Probably an adeist.

  77. Mike Jowsey on July 18, 2015 at 9:25 pm said:

    A recent presentation by Krauss: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cIbfbl8124

  78. Andy on July 18, 2015 at 9:26 pm said:

    Since I am a religious agnostic, Mike, this is probably a pointless debate,

    I merely acknowledge that people can have different viewpoints on various issues that are beyond rational comprehension, and as long as any party doesn’t feel the need to force their views on any others then I am happy

    Live long and prosper, my friend…

  79. Mike Jowsey on July 18, 2015 at 9:44 pm said:

    Aahhhh. Okay, I’ll bow out for now in deference (only). Thank you for your blessing in friendship. My response is “Live for you, your loved ones and humanity. Without one of these your life is empty”.

  80. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 10:53 pm said:

    >“He [U Thant] believed that all ideologies …………would eventually be synthesised.”

    By subversion, coercion, and if necessary, force would not be out of the question if it could possibly be employed. Well on the way I think. ISIS isn’t complying at this stage though. They’re doing a bit of their own synthesising by force.

    >”Why is it the job of the United Nations to make all humanity “spiritually one”?”

    It isn’t but it’s preconditioning for the arrival of their “Coming One”.

    >’Who is “the Coming One”? The clue is the “light”. He’s Lucifer, the morning star, the son of dawn, the serpent – as Blavatsky wrote. He is why a six and a half tonne block of iron ore is bathed in light from an unseen source above, immediately beneath the UN debating chamber, an altar, as the UN Secretary-General called it “to the God of all”.”

    5 ft high, 2 ft wide. More an obelisk than an alter to my mind. Those similar around the world, Vatican (x2), Washington, City of London, New York Central Park, were the topic of a previous off-topic rant in another thread starting here:

    https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2015/06/epas-mccarthy-every-voice-needs-to-be-in-this-discussion/comment-page-1/#comment-1346142

    I’ve disqualified Francis as a player in Rev 13 because the 666 criteria isn’t met but I’ve just watched SDA guys Steve Wohlberg and Tim Saxton on Firstlight TV discussing the pope’s encyclical and they think he’s in the running i.e. they think the prophesy is playing out right now and say so (I don’t agree but I’ll watch). They point out that Francis will address the UN General Assembly on Sept 25 after having met with Obama on Sept 23:

    ‘Pope Francis to visit White House on September 23, 2015’
    http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/03/27/pope_francis_to_visit_white_house_on_september_23,_2015/1132562

    White House statement said President Obama “looks forward to continuing this conversation with the Holy Father during his first visit to the United States as pope.”

    Wohlberg points out that using the term “Holy Father” is placing the man in the position of God so that’s a start. They go on that the pope draws bigger crowds than anyone, examples Obama or Jagger. The UN address is the UN 70th anniversary (I think it is) so the pope will probably be addressing the largest group of world leaders ever assembled.

    Wohlberg’s Rev 13 theory, which he quotes someone else for, is that the first beast is the RC church (that’s a strong possibility) and the second, the “lamb” (False Prophet), is the USA (not credible I don’t think so but these guys are American – American’s want to fit USA into Revelation somewhere). I’ve never heard of this angle before (plenty of American’s think Obama is THE Anti-Christ though but that is subtly different) but it doesn’t fit unless there’s some radical inter-power brokering, massive instant synthesizing as above, and displays of supernatural power. I don’t think so, it would have to play out like this:

    11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. [USA/Obama according to Wohlberg/ Saxton and their source]

    12 And he [Obama] exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him [RC church/Francis], and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein [all synthesised ideologies and religions] to worship the first beast [RC church/Francis], whose deadly wound was healed. [RC papal line]

    13 And he [Obama] doeth great wonders [supernatural power], so that he [Obama] maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men [miraculous power on the face of it],

    There’s more but obviously this is highly problematic. I’ll watch with interest though. I think we might be witnessing a model for the not to distant future but with different players if this is to play out.

    It’s the “exerciseth all the power” part that certainly is an initial possibility (the rest seems highly improbable to me). Obama has already backed the pope’s encyclical. Wohlberg says note the use of “His Holiness” and “full moral authority of his position”, which is basically pro-pope anti-God:

    The White House
    Office of the Press Secretary

    Statement by the President on Pope Francis’s Encyclical

    I welcome His Holiness Pope Francis’s encyclical, and deeply admire the Pope’s decision to make the case – clearly, powerfully, and with the full moral authority of his position – for action on global climate change.

    As Pope Francis so eloquently stated this morning, we have a profound responsibility to protect our children, and our children’s children, from the damaging impacts of climate change. I believe the United States must be a leader in this effort, which is why I am committed to taking bold actions at home and abroad to cut carbon pollution, to increase clean energy and energy efficiency, to build resilience in vulnerable communities, and to encourage responsible stewardship of our natural resources. We must also protect the world’s poor, who have done the least to contribute to this looming crisis and stand to lose the most if we fail to avert it.

    I look forward to discussing these issues with Pope Francis when he visits the White House in September. And as we prepare for global climate negotiations in Paris this December, it is my hope that all world leaders–and all God’s children–will reflect on Pope Francis’s call to come together to care for our common home.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/06/18/statement-president-pope-francis%E2%80%99s-encyclical

    This last sentence,

    “it is my hope that all world leaders–and all God’s children–will reflect on Pope Francis’s call to come together to care for our common home.”

    Could perhaps be a precursor to fulfillment of Rev 13: 12,

    “and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein [all synthesised ideologies and religions] to worship the first beast [RC church/Francis]”

    But it doesn’t fit in the rest of the context – yet. It all has to fit to be valid fulfillment.

  81. Richard C (NZ) on July 18, 2015 at 11:26 pm said:

    >”I’ve disqualified Francis as a player in Rev 13 because the 666 criteria isn’t met”

    Well, the count criteria is met but Francis himself doesn’t fit. Ralph Myers:

    “Yes, it appears that all that remains for this prophecy is the removal of Benedict XVI as an antipope and then Francis’ name completes the count to 666. It is what I have predicted, according to this interpretation.”

    But,

    “It is he who is the final Antichrist [Satanic/Satan/Lucifer] that will have the whole world following after him. Francis is a human being. He is not Satan.”

    http://www.666beast.net/Update.htm

  82. Richard C (NZ) on July 19, 2015 at 10:03 am said:

    >”Here’s an hypothesis if you care to engage in this forum. “Religion poisons everything”. Falsify that if you dare.”

    If the hypothesis is couched “Religion [of man] poisons everything” then I think you’re on to something Mike.

    If you take the example of the Christian religion and the visions of John the Revelator, there is nothing poisonous in the presence of God. Everything is pure, pure gold, pure crystal, pure everything. This in either the realm of God or in the New Jerusalem of the prophesied millennium (1000 years peace on earth). Everything impure or poisonous of any form is excluded. In the New Jerusalem there are trees for healing, the antithesis of poison. I don’t think they are cherry trees but they might be. Point is, God is pure not poisonous.

    Man not so much. The Roman Catholic church (religion of man) in particular has poisoned the Christian religion. They did their best to poison the science of the Enlightenment (even the pope’s encyclical poisons man-made climate change theory – it’s dead wrong in Para 23), they poisoned bible translation from the original manuscripts (over 24,000 of those), they poisoned sacred days (hunted down early SDA’s in Italy and killed them), they introduced pagan poison, their inquisitions were the imposition of their poison.

    The Roman Catholic church was a fraud from inception, merely a transition from the Roman Empire. There is no evidence that Peter was the first bishop of Rome, the first pope came on the scene many decades later and from then on it was murderous, the ultimate poison, until Napoleon. Benedict XVI stood down because he shuffled priests around the world that were involved in sexual abuse cases. This is what will get him declared anti-pope, not his Nazi lineage, but it was allowed while he was pope. The RC church did its best to cover up its sexual abuse. This is the religion of man, poisonous, and certainly not Godly.

    Then of course there’s ISIS. Much the same as the RC church over centuries. Hypothesis confirmed.

    [Yay, I got the its right two in a row]

  83. In my mothers village in the UK, the local church does good work in the community and is a hub for the elderly.

    I don’t see much poison there.
    I’m not sure that the RichRd Dawkins cultists are not a religion either.

  84. Richard C (NZ) on July 19, 2015 at 11:33 am said:

    >”In my mothers village in the UK, the local church does good work in the community and is a hub for the elderly. I don’t see much poison there.”

    Yes I think we have to be careful to distinguish between the good and the poison within any denomination or religion. The poison is invariably in the leadership (the manipulators). In Revelation 18:4 there’s a passage “Come out of her, my people” which many interpret as telling good people in the RC church, specifically, to get out. This even though the RC church runs (one of?) the largest charities in the world.

  85. Richard C (NZ) on July 19, 2015 at 11:36 am said:

    ‘Collapse of the AGW theory of the IPCC; ‘Most influential climate paper of all time’ contains multiple false assumptions’

    Introduction

    Kyoji Kimoto, a Japanese chemist, scientist, and fuel-cell computer modeler & inventor, has submitted his latest work as a guest post to The Hockey Schtick, and which refutes multiple false physical assumptions which underlie the alleged “first physically sound climate model” described in “the most influential climate change paper of all time.” These same erroneous physical assumptions also continue to serve as the fundamental basis of James Hansen’s NASA/GISS climate model, many other models including the ‘state-of-the-art’ IPCC climate models, and form the basis of the wide range of modeled CO2 climate sensitivity estimates.

    In Kimoto’s new work below (and in his prior published paper also below), he addresses the multiple unphysical assumptions made by Manabe & Wetherald, Hansen/GISS, and IPCC modelers et al, a few of which include:

    1. An artificially fixed tropospheric lapse rate of 6.5K/km, which does not adjust to perturbations in the atmosphere. This false assumption artificially limits negative lapse rate feedback convection. Using physically correct assumptions, Kimoto finds the climate sensitivity to doubled CO2 to be a negligible 0.1-0.2C.

    2. Mathematical error in the calculation of the Planck response parameter, due to a false assumption of fixed emissivity, an error which continues to be promulgated by the IPCC

    3. Positive feedback from water vapor (whereas millions of radiosonde & satellite observations demonstrate water vapor has a net negative-feedback cooling effect)

    4. Fixed relative humidity (contradicted by observations showing a decline of mid-troposphere relative and specific humidity) (A new paper also finds specific humidity is the most non-linear and non-Gaussian variable in weather models, also implying relative humidity is non-linear, and borne out by observations)

    5. Neglect of the [less than] 15 micron ocean penetration depth of GHG IR radiation, which greatly limits potential greenhouse gas warming of the top ocean layer.

    [An upcoming HS post will discuss additional other unphysical assumptions of Manabe et al. including improper application of blackbody assumptions & the Stefan-Boltmann Law, gross failure to calculate maximum emitting temperatures of greenhouse gases, and absolutely false assumption that CO2 can absorb/emit at an equivalent blackbody temperature of 300K (but is limited to 193K maximum by basic physical chemistry & quantum theory). Also note, the 1976 US Standard Atmosphere was published 9 years after Manabe et al, did not reference Manabe et al, and did not use one single radiative transfer equation or calculation to determine the entire atmospheric temperature profile 0-100km, including the stratosphere which is grossly inaccurate in Manabe et al]

    More>>>>
    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.nz/2015/07/collapse-of-agw-theory-of-ipcc-most.html

  86. Richard C (NZ) on July 19, 2015 at 11:58 am said:

    >”they poisoned sacred days”

    They moved the Jewish Sabbath from Saturday to the RC Sunday.

    One of the requirements of the euro zone Greece bailout is to introduce Sunday trading.

    One of the undercurrents of the man-made climate change “spirituality” (think pope’s encyclical) is that everyone is moving too fast, we have no time to rest. Sunday should be a day of rest (and they will make it so).

    This is in direct conflict with the euro zone’s Greece bailout conditions.

  87. Richard C (NZ) on July 19, 2015 at 12:16 pm said:

    >”they poisoned sacred days”

    Easter is another one. That’s a pagan celebration, the days (starting Friday) don’t fit the biblical account of the crucifixion. Nothing to indicate Christmas was in the middle of NH winter either. The RC church instituted pagan days into the Christian calendar.

  88. I find it curious how the mere mention of Christianity can put people into fits of rage, yet they tiptoe around Islam in case they might offend someone.

    Presumably, we might actually regret this when the world is predominantly Islam, as Mark Steyn proposes in his book “America Alone”

  89. Richard C (NZ) on July 19, 2015 at 1:31 pm said:

    >”they poisoned……..”

    With priests. The second covenant did away with the need for priests but the RC church instituted them nevertheless. Confession to priests is poison, but this is/was how the church knows/knew everyone’s secrets.

    Even in the old covenant (as still Orthodox Jewery today) priests could only come from the tribe of Levi. If your priest isn’t Levite he’s no priest.

    >”they poisoned bible translation from the original manuscripts”

    Matthew 23:9 KJV
    [Jesus] – “And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.”

    OK, now look for that in the RC Douay-Rheims version:

    https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=call+no+man+father&version=DRA&resultspp=25

    Doesn’t occur, been expunged. Hence the RC predilection for calling all their illegitimate priests “Father” and their chief priest the pope, not Jesus or Father God note, “Holy Father”. This is man usurping God in this denomination.

  90. Richard C (NZ) on July 19, 2015 at 1:44 pm said:

    >”we might actually regret this when the world is predominantly Islam”

    In Europe the demands of Islam are described as “the tail wagging the dog”.

    There’s no place in the Islamic Caliphate for the Infidel (which is everyone else – us). We’ve been over this before. It’s an evil empire. From Climate Depot:

    GOP Prez. Candidate Carly Fiorina Vs. Katie Couric on Climate Change

    Carly Fiorina: ‘I think it’s ridiculous for the Obama Administration to call ISIS a “strategic distraction,” and then go on to climate change is the single most pressing National Security issue of our time.’

    Read more: http://www.climatedepot.com/#ixzz3gIrcFqxB

    Carly Fiorina OWNS Katie Couric on Climate Change
    http://louderwithcrowder.com/carly-fiorina-pwns-katie-couric-on-climate-change/

  91. Mike Jowsey on July 23, 2015 at 10:59 pm said:

    OMG! Harbingers of Paris 2015 fail?

    Pope Francis’ approval ratings slump sharply in US, led by conservative dismay

    Among conservatives the dropoff has been especially sharp: just 45 percent view Francis favorably today as opposed to 72 percent a year ago.

    “This decline may be attributable to the pope’s denouncing of ‘the idolatry of money’ and attributing climate change partially to human activity, along with his passionate focus on income inequality — all issues that are at odds with many conservatives’ beliefs,” Gallup analyst Art Swift wrote Wednesday (July 22) when the survey was published.

    But liberal fervor for the Argentine pope, who was elected to great acclaim in March 2013, has also cooled, dropping an average of 14 points.

    https://richarddawkins.net/2015/07/pope-francis-approval-ratings-slump-sharply-in-us-led-by-conservative-dismay/

  92. Mike Jowsey on July 23, 2015 at 11:18 pm said:

    Andy: “In my mothers village in the UK, the local church does good work in the community and is a hub for the elderly. I don’t see much poison there.”

    Is the motivation religion or is it simply the empathy and honest concern for a struggling individual. The Good Samaritan was not ascribed to any religion in the fable Jesus was purported to have told. So in your anecdote religion per se is not at point. Can you name any act of kindness or welfare performed in the name of a religion that could not be performed by a non-believer?

    As to “I’m not sure that the Richard Dawkins cultists are not a religion either”, this borders on ad-hom rhetoric. You will see what you want to see, but if you want to discuss specifics of argument, happy to engage.

  93. Andy on July 24, 2015 at 9:34 am said:

    Is the motivation religion or is it simply the empathy and honest concern for a struggling individual.

    The latter is kind of what Christianity is about, so both is true. Anyway, the Church is a focal point where people meet up, have a singsong and a cup of tea afterwards.

    As to “I’m not sure that the Richard Dawkins cultists are not a religion either”, this borders on ad-hom rhetoric.

    Not sure how this is ad-hom. An atheist friend of mine went to a Richard Dawkins lecture and he described is as being like a revival meeting.

    I’m of the view that we can accommodate different views in our society as long as people don’t feel the need to force their views on others, or to do harm to others. When LBGT activists start to harass Christians and use the government as a stick to punish them for not baking a cake, I don’t see forces of good at work.

    I see the same forces that gave us Fascism and Communism that led to the deaths of 100 million people during the 20th Century.

  94. Mike Jowsey on July 24, 2015 at 12:22 pm said:

    “Not sure how this is ad-hom.” Use of the word cultists.

  95. Use of the word cultists.

    I have no problem with Richard Dawkins who is an eminent scientist. I have no problem with people that read his books.

    However, he has a following which does sometimes resemble a religious cult, much like the global warming cultists.

    The Spectator on the Richard Dawkins Cult:
    http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9286682/the-bizarre-and-costly-cult-of-richard-dawkins/

  96. For those with a bit of humour, this page on Dawkins is good for a laugh
    http://en.illogicopedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins_(cult_leader)

  97. Mike Jowsey on July 24, 2015 at 6:08 pm said:

    Playing the man rather than the ball. As I wrote upthread Andy, “You will see what you want to see, but if you want to discuss specifics of argument, happy to engage.” Cheers.

  98. Andy on July 24, 2015 at 6:21 pm said:

    Playing the man rather than the ball

    I’m not really sure what you mean here Mike. I have no beef with you or Richard Dawkins. Please let’s not be enemies where no malice is intended.

    To give you a little perspective, John, the vicar who buried my father in the local Devon churchyard, is an all round good guy. He is about 70, he wore Bart Simpson socks when he came to discuss funeral arrangements with myself and my Mum. He rides a red 700cc Honda motorbike, and works his butt off caring for and looking after the elderly and vulnerable people in the district.

    I went to one of his services at church with my Mum. When he entered the congregation starting singing the introductory hymn, rather poorly. He stopped the organist and turned to the congregation, and said “that is rubbish, you lot sound like you just got out of bed”. Which was met with much laughter, and a much better encore.

    I’m not a religious person and neither is my Mum much, but she gets comfort from this community and I really don’t see anything sinister in it.

    Since my mother was brought up during a fascist dictatorship in Germany, I find this “soft Anglican” church thing pretty unthreatening, really, to put things in perspective

  99. Mike Jowsey on July 24, 2015 at 7:49 pm said:

    Andy, ‘I find this “soft Anglican” church thing pretty unthreatening, really, to put things in perspective”

    Yes, my Mum likes her church too. My beef is not with local churches, in fact I think they provide good social intercourse, discussion, music, and compassion in the main. But as RC said “The poison is invariably in the leadership”. What I object to regards religion (religious leadership if you like) is pushing their beliefs on me (for example in our national anthem), pushing them on my children as part of a school curriculum, putting a stop to stemcell research, decrying the use of condoms in aids-torn Africa, proclaiming from the pulpit that CAGW is real and we have a Godly duty to fix it, et cetera et cetera. Then there are the wars, the persecution of Jews by RCs, God’s command to the Israelites to commit genocide on the Malachites, et cetera et cetera et cetera. Religion in that sense poisons everything.

    When I asked earlier if you could name any act of kindness or welfare performed in the name of a religion that could not be performed by a non-believer, I could have gone a step further and asked you to name any act of terror or atrocity that has been done only because of religion. Like genital mutilation for example.

    Sorry if I come across a wee bit stridently, but the subject was raised and I seldom shirk a debate. I was a born-again raving happy clappy for a couple of decades. In leadership, no less. So, please excuse me for my sometime jerking knee. I have really enjoyed discussing this topic with you and RC – seldom get to do so in politically correct land.

  100. Andy on July 24, 2015 at 8:04 pm said:

    Mlke, thanks for your response.
    I was a born-again raving happy clappy for a couple of decades

    which puts it into perspective thanks

    No problem, at the end of the day, I am a rational person, like you, that has science and logic as our tools.

    I hope this puts the matter at rest. I am not your enemy. I hope we can catch up for a beer sometime

  101. Mike Jowsey on July 24, 2015 at 8:13 pm said:

    ” I hope we can catch up for a beer sometime”. Darn tootin! And may I say, overdue. I’ll let you know when I’m coming to the Big Smoke and maybe we can intersect at your local.

  102. Mike Jowsey on July 24, 2015 at 8:22 pm said:

    Correction to a muddled memory – not Malachites, Amalekites,

    Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
    1 Sam 15:3

  103. Andy on July 24, 2015 at 8:41 pm said:

    I’ll let you know when I’m coming to the Big Smoke and maybe we can intersect at your local.

    Sure sounds good, do you contact details? RT can provide with my permission

  104. Richard Treadgold on July 24, 2015 at 10:06 pm said:

    “RT can provide with my permission”

    Done. Good luck.

  105. Richard C (NZ) on July 24, 2015 at 10:17 pm said:

    It wasn’t just the Amalekites Mike, it was ALL the Canaanites inhabiting the promised land:

    Numbers 33:55 Canaanites to Be Destroyed
    …54’You shall inherit the land by lot according to your families; to the larger you shall give more inheritance, and to the smaller you shall give less inheritance. Wherever the lot falls to anyone, that shall be his. You shall inherit according to the tribes of your fathers. 55But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then it shall come about that those whom you let remain of them will become as pricks in your eyes and as thorns in your sides, and they will trouble you in the land in which you live. 56’And as I plan to do to them, so I will do to you.'”

    http://biblehub.com/numbers/33-55.htm

    Canaan was the area of modern Israel roughly. The OT Israelites failed to “drive out the inhabitants of the land” totally and paid the price. And since modern Israel was formed the Palestinians continue to “trouble [them] in the land in which [they] live.

    The origin of the name “Palestine”:

    In 14 BC, Israel became a nation.
    In circa 12 BC the Philistines invaded and occupied a strip of land by the Mediterranean Sea along the southwest coast of Israel (Gaza).
    In 61 BC, Israel was conquered by the Roman Empire.
    For many years (including New Testament days) the Roman Empire allowed the Israelis to remain in Israel, as a subservient people.
    In 70 AD the Roman Empire destroyed the temple in Jerusalem and dispersed all the Israeli people out of Israel.
    Rome then renamed Israel as “Palestine” — a name derived from the ancient name, “Philistines.”

    I always feel sorry for the old Palestinians and Bedouin whose olive groves get bulldozed by the Israelis and they end up dispossessed. That, and the command to annihilate, is a bit hard to reconcile with God is love. But think of what happened to the Jews because they disobeyed:

    EXILE and CAPTIVITY
    http://www.biblereferenceguide.com/keywords/exile.html

    God plays tough. Not to mention Nazi and Stalinist extermination of Jews.

    I find events relating to the survival of Israel, or otherwise, quite riveting. The surrounding countries, particularly Muslim, want Israel annihilated. The Revelation prophecy is for Russia to attempt invasion. They’ve just annexed the Crimea (formally USSR) so they have reestablished their military presence in the Black Sea. It doesn’t go so well for the Russians according to prophecy. Remember, that in terms of the NT, Israel is a nation in unbelief and yet it survives in the modern era (six day war etc).

    Thing is, you can decry the religious aspects of this all you like from distaste, scepticism, rationalism or whatever (I’m a sceptic as defined by the Enlightenment BTW) but when prophesied events play out before your own eyes (if you are familiar enough to recognize them of course) then surely you have to reconsider?

    The 70 AD events, and the siege leading up to it, was an Olivet prophesy of Jesus:

    ‘The Wars of The Jews’ by Flavius Josephus
    Flavius Josephus describes the destruction of Jerusalem. Written in 75 AD
    Proof that Matthew 24 was fully fulfilled in 70 AD
    http://www.bible.ca/pre-flavius-josephus-70AD-Mt24-fulfilled.htm

    That was nasty (e.g. mothers boiling their babies to eat). OK, not before your eyes but before Flavius Josephus. But now in 2015 you can observe, you can test prophesy, you can relate Revelation to our day and age directly. You can accept or reject on the evidence but you can’t dismiss out of hand just because you find the evidence distasteful and the source of the prophesy distasteful.

    I’m not saying that I see an exact fulfillment of say Rev 6 (six seals) or Rev 13 (two beasts) but there’s too much ringing true to ignore.

    Now go to ‘Reminder: your stubborn sceptical mind will be dissected this week’:

    ‘Could Pope’s Edict On Global Warming Lead To Sunday Law?’

    https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2015/07/reminder-your-stubborn-sceptical-mind-will-be-dissected-this-week/comment-page-1/#comment-1351525

    And ‘The Mark of the Beast’ following.

    If you can’t join those dots then I don’t think you have been paying attention to the pope’s entry into the politics of climate change. This is basically the end game of a whole line of already fulfilled prophesy, the end game is the final fulfillment of Rev 13 (mystery 666). The first beast is the RC church but I don’t think the second beast is Pope Francis (still a possibility). He’s certainly doing the groundwork for the last pope though who will be #666 (not the 666th pope note) according to interpretation of Revelation and Daniel. I think Francis will be deposed eventually (he’s sitting on #666 now – not the 666th pope note) because he doesn’t fit the picture IMO.

  106. Richard C (NZ) on July 24, 2015 at 11:29 pm said:

    That timeline last comment was woolly and wrong sorry.

    Delete this “In 14 BC, Israel became a nation.” That is wrong, it was more ending than beginning but wrong anyway.

    >”In 61 BC, Israel was conquered by the Roman Empire.”

    Should be referring to Hasmonean conquest by the Romans in 61 – 63 BC and the end of the Hasmonean dynasty in 37 BC. From Wiki:

    “Josephus’ account is the only primary source covering the history of the Hasmonean dynasty during the period of its expansion and independence between 110 to 63 BC”

    “The installation of Herod the Great (an Idumean) as king in 37 BC made Israel a Roman client state and marked the end of the Hasmonean dynasty. In AD 6, Rome joined Judea proper, Samaria and Idumea (biblical Edom) into the Roman province of Iudaea”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasmonean_dynasty

    I think I might be confusing accounts of the 63 BC Jerusalem siege with the 70 AD destruction too. There were several siege’s of Jerusalem so I would have to look up Josephus’ ‘Wars of the Jews’ to get it right. Not important to what I was getting at though.

  107. Richard C (NZ) on July 25, 2015 at 12:01 am said:

    Siege of Jerusalem (63 BC)

    After three months, Pompey’s troops finally managed to overthrow one of the Baris’ towers and were able to enter the Temple precinct, both from the citadel and from the west. First over the wall was Faustus Cornelius Sulla, son of the former dictator and a senior officer in Pompey’s army. He was followed by two centurions, Furius and Fabius, each leading a cohort, and the Romans soon overcame the defending Jews. 12,000 were slaughtered, while only a few Romans troops were killed.[5][12]

    Pompey himself entered the Temple’s Holy of Holies which only the High Priest was allowed to enter, thereby desecrating it. He did not remove anything, neither its treasures nor any funds, and the next day ordered the Temple cleansed and its rituals resumed.[13][14][15][16] Pompey then headed back to Rome, taking Aristobulus with him for his triumphal procession.[5]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_%2863_BC%29

    Siege of Jerusalem (AD 70)

    Josephus had acted as a mediator for the Romans and, when negotiations failed, witnessed the siege and aftermath. He wrote:

    “Now as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder, because there remained none to be the objects of their fury (for they would not have spared any, had there remained any other work to be done), [Titus] Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and Temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as they were of the greatest eminence; that is, Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison [in the Upper City], as were the towers [the three forts] also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall [surrounding Jerusalem], it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it [Jerusalem] had ever been inhabited.”

    Josephus claims that 1.1 million people were killed during the siege, of which a majority were Jewish, and that 97,000 were captured and enslaved, including Simon bar Giora and John of Giscala.[4]

    “The slaughter within was even more dreadful than the spectacle from without. Men and women, old and young, insurgents and priests, those who fought and those who entreated mercy, were hewn down in indiscriminate carnage. The number of the slain exceeded that of the slayers. The legionaries had to clamber over heaps of dead to carry on the work of extermination.”[5]

    Many fled to areas around the Mediterranean. Titus reportedly refused to accept a wreath of victory, saying that the victory did not come through his own efforts but that he had merely served as an instrument of God’s wrath.[6]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_%28AD_70%29

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation