Thank You for visiting....
Rink A Dink Productions is a non profit web site.
Dedicated to presenting,,,
free music sources, out side artist, and most
important, posting news stories and article
exposing the New World Order, and its agenda.
There are no paying advertisers
please make a donation of any amount to help
cover the cost of presenting this web site.

Please
Disclaimer: We believe that all uncredited images
on these pages are in the public domain. If we
have unwittingly infringed any copyright,
please let us know
Video:
Global Warming...
Megafreeze
Global Warming – or – Global
cooling? This January 2007 History
Channel ‘Megafreeze’
documentary depicts a possible
'mini' ice age scenario  just around
the corner – hardly ‘global
warming’. A growing number of
free thinking climate scientists
engaged in studying the sun's
‘global warming’ activities (the sun
is 99.98% of the mass of the solar
system) are growing increasingly
sceptical about the ‘Global
Warming’ rhetoric of politicians.
The 'global warming' phrase it
seems has been used to directly
mislead the public into an
intellectual acceptance of 'carbon
taxation'. However as the ‘global
warming’ scenario like the one
portrayed here shows - ‘lying’ is
really the only ethical option open
to Governments - whose
pronouncements govern the
forward flow of time and history.
‘Global Warming’ sounds a lot
better than ‘Global Cooling’ –
which publicly pronounced would
collapse northern hemisphere
based stock markets in a matter of
days. What this overly dramatic
‘Global Warming’ documentary
does is tell it like it is likely to be.
Ten years is one time frame
mentioned in the film but some
scientists are talking about 3-5
years. The phrase 'global warming'
will, in under 2-3 years be patently
obsolete in the northern latitudes
at least. Is it helpful to over
dramatise potentially real ‘global
warming’ scenarios as this work
does? Does this approach reduce
the likely-hood of rational and
informed scientific debate about
the subject? Will the ‘tipping point’
about ‘global warming’ come in
time for our species to re-organise
it’s activities – or will it just be that
we lose the ability to feed more
than half of the planet’s population
in under ten years. Doom and
Gloom? A wake up call? Business
as usual? You decide – good luck!  
Watch Movie Now!
Mars Melt Hints at
Solar, Not Human,
Cause for Warming,
Scientist Says

Click here to find out more!
Kate Ravilious
for National Geographic News
February 28, 2007

Simultaneous warming on Earth
and Mars suggests that our
planet's recent climate changes
have a natural—and not a human-
induced—cause, according to one
scientist's controversial theory.

Earth is currently experiencing
rapid warming, which the vast
majority of climate scientists says
is due to humans pumping huge
amounts of greenhouse gases into
the atmosphere. Read More!

(Get an overview: "Global Warming
Fast Facts".)
Global warming
on Mars?
Guest contribution by Steinn
Sigurdsson.

Recently, there have been some
suggestions that "global warming"
has been observed on Mars (e.g.
here). These are based on
observations of regional change
around the South Polar Cap, but
seem to have been extended into
a "global" change, and used by
some to infer an external common
mechanism for global warming on
Earth and Mars (e.g. here and
here). But this is incorrect
reasoning and based on faulty
understanding of the data.  Read
More!
The planet Mars is
undergoing significant
global warming, new data
from the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA) show,
lending support to many
climatologists' claims that the
Earth's modest warming during the
past century is due primarily to a
recent upsurge in solar energy.
Martian Ice Shrinking Dramatically

According to a September 20 NASA
news release, "for three Mars
summers in a row, deposits of
frozen carbon dioxide near Mars'
south pole have shrunk from the
previous year's size, suggesting a
climate change in progress."
Because a Martian year is
approximately twice as long as an
Earth year, the shrinking of the
Martian polar ice cap has been
ongoing for at least six Earth years.

The shrinking is substantial.
According to Michael Malin,
principal investigator for the Mars
Orbiter Camera, the polar ice cap
is shrinking at "a prodigious rate."

"The images, documenting
changes from 1999 to 2005,
suggest the climate on Mars is
presently warmer, and perhaps
getting warmer still, than it was
several decades or centuries
ago," reported Yahoo News on
September 20.  Read More!
Look to Mars for the
truth on global warming

The Deniers -- Part IX

Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post  
Published: Friday, February 02,
2007
January 26, 2007

Climate change is a much, much
bigger issue than the public,
politicians, and even the most
alarmed environmentalists realize.
Global warming extends to Mars,
where the polar ice cap is
shrinking, where deep gullies in
the landscape are now laid bare,
and where the climate is the
warmest it has been in decades or
centuries.

"One explanation could be that
Mars is just coming out of an ice
age," NASA scientist William
Feldman speculated after the
agency's Mars Odyssey completed
its first Martian year of data
collection. "In some low-latitude
areas, the ice has already
dissipated." With each passing
year more and more evidence
arises of the dramatic changes
occurring on the only planet on
the solar system, apart from Earth,
to give up its climate secrets.
Read More!
Mars Emerging from Ice
Age, Data Suggest
By SPACE.com

posted: 03:00 pm ET
08 December 2003

Scientists have suspected in
recent years that Mars might be
undergoing some sort of global
warming. New data points to the
possibility it is emerging from an
ice age.

NASA's Mars Odyssey orbiter has
been surveying the planet for
nearly a full Martian year now, and
it has spotted seasonal changes
like the advance and retreat of
polar ice. It's also gathering data of
a possible longer trend.

There appears to be too much
frozen water at low-latitude
regions -- away from the frigid
poles -- given the current climate
of Mars. The situation is not in
equilibrium, said William Feldman
of the Los Alamos National
Laboratory.

"One explanation could be that
Mars is just coming out of an ice
age," Feldman said. "In some
low-latitude areas, the ice has
already dissipated. In others, that
process is slower and hasn't
reached an equilibrium yet. Those
areas are like the patches of snow
you sometimes see persisting in
protected spots long after the last
snowfall of the winter."

Frozen water makes up as much as
10 percent of the top 3 feet (1
meter) of surface material in some
regions close to the equator. Dust
deposits may be covering and
insulating the lingering ice,
Feldman said.

Feldman is the lead scientist for an
Odyssey instrument that assesses
water content indirectly through
measurements of neutron
emissions. He and other Odyssey
scientists described their recent
findings today at the fall meeting of
the American Geophysical Union in
San Francisco.
Read More!
Top Global Warming
Advocate: Jupiter &
Saturn Closer To Sun
Than Earth
Live Earth kingpin dismantles his
own credibility on national radio as
propaganda bandwagon is
massive flop

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Monday, July 9, 2007


Live Earth's half empty stadiums
and lackluster TV viewing figures
were preceded by another
embarrassment after one of the
propaganda bandwagon's kingpins
and a top global warming advocate
responded to a question about
solar-system wide climate change
by claiming that Jupiter, Mars and
Saturn were closer to the sun than
Earth. Read More!
Global Warming?
Sun's Output Increasing
in Possible Trend
Fueling Global Warming
By Robert Roy Britt
In what could be the simplest
explanation for one component of
global warming, a new study shows
the Sun's radiation has increased
by .05 percent per decade since
the late 1970s.

The increase would only be
significant to Earth's climate if it
has been going on for a century or
more, said study leader Richard
Willson, a Columbia University
researcher also affiliated with
NASA's Goddard Institute for Space
Studies.

The Sun's increasing output has
only been monitored with
precision since satellite
technology allowed necessary
observations. Willson is not sure if
the trend extends further back in
time, but other studies suggest it
does.

"This trend is important because, if
sustained over many decades, it
could cause significant climate
change," Willson said.

In a NASA-funded study recently
published in Geophysical
Research Letters, Willson and his
colleagues speculate on the
possible history of the trend based
on data collected in the
pre-satellite era.

"Solar activity has apparently been
going upward for a century or
more," Willson told SPACE.com
today.

Significant component

Further satellite observations may
eventually show the trend to be
short-term. But if the change has
indeed persisted at the present
rate through the 20th Century, "it
would have provided a significant
component of the global warming
the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change reports to have
occurred over the past 100 years,"
Read More!
Science:
The truth about global
warming - it's the Sun
that's to blame

By Michael Leidig and Roya Nikkhah
Last Updated: 11:15pm BST
17/07/2004

Global warming has finally been
explained: the Earth is getting
hotter because the Sun is burning
more brightly than at any time
during the past 1,000 years,
according to new research.

A study by Swiss and German
scientists suggests that increasing
radiation from the sun is
responsible for recent global
climate changes.

Dr Sami Solanki, the director of the
renowned Max Planck Institute for
Solar System Research in
Gottingen, Germany, who led the
research, said: "The Sun has been
at its strongest over the past 60
years and may now be affecting
global temperatures.
"The Sun is in a changed state. It is
brighter than it was a few hundred
years ago and this brightening
started relatively recently - in the
last 100 to 150 years."

Dr Solanki said that the brighter
Sun and higher levels of
"greenhouse gases", such as
carbon dioxide, both contributed
to the change in the Earth's
temperature but it was impossible
to say which had the greater
impact.

Average global temperatures have
increased by about 0.2 deg Celsius
over the past 20 years and are
widely believed to be responsible
for new extremes in weather
patterns. After pressure from
environmentalists, politicians
agreed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997,
promising to limit greenhouse gas
emissions between 2008 and 2012.
Britain ratified the protocol in 2002
and said it would cut emissions by
12.5 per cent from 1990 levels.

Globally, 1997, 1998 and 2002 were
the hottest years since worldwide
weather records were first collated
in 1860.

Most scientists agree that
greenhouse gases from fossil
fuels have contributed to the
warming of the planet in the past
few decades but have questioned
whether a brighter Sun is also
responsible for rising
temperatures.

To determine the Sun's role in
global warming, Dr Solanki's
research team measured magnetic
zones on the Sun's surface known
as sunspots, which are believed to
intensify the Sun's energy output.

The team studied sunspot data
going back several hundred years.
They found that a dearth of
sunspots signalled a cold period -
which could last up to 50 years -
but that over the past century their
numbers had increased as the
Earth's climate grew steadily
warmer. The scientists also
compared data from ice samples
collected during an expedition to
Greenland in 1991. The most
recent samples contained the
lowest recorded levels of
beryllium 10 for more than 1,000
years. Beryllium 10 is a particle
created by cosmic rays that
decreases in the Earth's
atmosphere as the magnetic
energy from the Sun increases.
Scientists can currently trace
beryllium 10 levels back 1,150
years.

Dr Solanki does not know what is
causing the Sun to burn brighter
now or how long this cycle would
last.

He says that the increased solar
brightness over the past 20 years
has not been enough to cause the
observed climate changes but
believes that the impact of more
intense sunshine on the ozone
layer and on cloud cover could be
affecting the climate more than the
sunlight itself.

Dr Bill Burrows, a climatologist and
a member of the Royal
Meteorological Society, welcomed
Dr Solanki's research. "While the
established view remains that the
sun cannot be responsible for all
the climate changes we have seen
in the past 50 years or so, this
study is certainly significant," he
said.

"It shows that there is enough
happening on the solar front to
merit further research. Perhaps we
are devoting too many resources
to correcting human effects on the
climate without being sure that we
are the major contributor."

Dr David Viner, the senior
research scientist at the University
of East Anglia's climatic research
unit, said the research showed
that the sun did have an effect on
global warming.

He added, however, that the study
also showed that over the past 20
years the number of sunspots had
remained roughly constant, while
the Earth's temperature had
continued to increase.

This suggested that over the past
20 years, human activities such as
the burning of fossil fuels and
deforestation had begun to
dominate "the natural factors
involved in climate change", he
said.

Dr Gareth Jones, a climate
researcher at the Met Office, said
that Dr Solanki's findings were
inconclusive because the study
had not incorporated other
potential climate change factors.

"The Sun's radiance may well have
an impact on climate change but it
needs to be looked at in
conjunction with other factors
such as greenhouse gases,
sulphate aerosols and volcano
activity," he said. The research
adds weight to the views of David
Bellamy, the conservationist.
"Global warming - at least the
modern nightmare version - is a
myth," he said. "I am sure of it and
so are a growing number of
scientists. But what is really
worrying is that the world's
politicians and policy-makers are
not.

"Instead, they have an
unshakeable faith in what has,
unfortunately, become one of the
central credos of the
environmental movement: humans
burn fossil fuels, which release
increased levels of carbon dioxide
- the principal so-called
greenhouse gas - into the
atmosphere, causing the
atmosphere to heat up. They say
this is global warming: I say this is
poppycock."
Sun Blamed for
Warming of Earth and
Other Worlds

By Ker Than, LiveScience Staff
Writer

Earth is heating up lately, but so
are Mars, Pluto and other worlds in
our solar system, leading some
scientists to speculate that a
change in the sun’s activity is the
common thread linking all these
baking events.

Others argue that such claims are
misleading and create the false
impression that rapid global
warming, as Earth is experiencing,
is a natural phenomenon.

While evidence suggests
fluctuations in solar activity can
affect climate on Earth, and that it
has done so in the past, the
majority of climate scientists and
astrophysicists agree that the sun
is not to blame for the current and
historically sudden uptick in global
temperatures on Earth, which
seems to be mostly a mess created
by our own species.

Wobbly Mars

Habibullo Abdussamatov, the head
of space research at St.
Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical
Observatory in Russia, recently
linked the attenuation of ice caps
on Mars to fluctuations in the
sun's output. Abdussamatov also
blamed solar fluctuations for Earth’
s current global warming trend. His
initial comments were published
online by National Geographic
News.

“Man-made greenhouse warming
has [made a] small contribution
[to] the warming on Earth in recent
years, but [it] cannot compete with
the increase in solar irradiance,”
Abdussamatov told LiveScience in
an email interview last week. “The
considerable heating and cooling
on the Earth and on Mars always
will be practically parallel."

But Abdussamatov’s critics say the
Red Planet’s recent thawing is
more likely due to natural
variations in the planet’s orbit and
tilt. On Earth, these wobbles,
known as Milankovitch cycles, are
thought to contribute to the onset
and disappearance ice ages.

“It’s believed that what drives
climate change on Mars are orbital
variations,” said Jeffrey Plaut, a
project scientist for NASA’s Mars
Odyssey mission. “The Earth also
goes through orbital variations
similar to that of Mars.”

As for Abdussamatov’s claim that
solar fluctuations are causing
Earth’s current global warming,
Charles Long, a climate physicist at
Pacific Northwest National
Laboratories in Washington, says
the idea is nonsense.

“That’s nuts,” Long said in a
telephone interview. “It doesn’t
make physical sense that that’s the
case.”

In 2005, Long’s team published a
study in the journal Science
showing that Earth experienced a
period of “solar global dimming”
from 1960 to 1990, during which
time solar radiation hitting our
planet’s surface decreased. Then
from the mid-1990’s onward, the
trend reversed and Earth
experienced a “solar brightening.”

These changes were not likely
driven by fluctuations in the
output of the Sun, Long explained,
but rather increases in
atmospheric clouds or aerosols
that reflected solar radiation back
into space.

Other warming worlds

Others have pointed out
anomalous warming on other
worlds in our solar system.

Benny Peiser, a social
anthropologist at Liverpool John
Moores University who monitors
studies and news reports of
asteroids, global warming and
other potentially apocalyptic
topics, recently quoted in his daily
electronic newsletter the following
from a blog called Strata-Sphere:

“Global warming on Neptune's
moon Triton as well as Jupiter and
Pluto, and now Mars has some
[scientists] scratching their heads
over what could possibly be in
common with the warming of all
these planets ... Could there be
something in common with all the
planets in our solar system that
might cause them all to warm at
the same time?”  Read More!
The solar constant isn't
constant.  The sun is a
variable star.

The vast majority of climate
scientists in the world seriously
and objectively studies what it is
that influences global climate
changes.  We don't hear as much
from them in the media as we do
from the far smaller but also far
more vocal minority of climate
scientists who make a living by
publicizing alarmist and often
outrageous claims about man's
detrimental influence on the global
climate.

Armed with the very real evidence
of the global cooling trend during
the first half of the 20th century,
climate alarmists claimed in the
1970s that another ice age was
imminent.   Today they (including
even some former proponents of a
coming ice age, e. g.: Stephen
Schneider), ride a wave of alarm
about man-made catastrophic
global warming, a wave of alarm
they created and keep fueling .

Objective scientists find that the
evidence supporting a man-made
global warming trend is at best
skimpy.  However, it cannot and
should not be denied that climate
changes take place and that they
have done so since long before
man even made an appearance on
Earth.

Based on many different indicators
from widely varying sources, it has
been found that our sun, a
variable star, is a major and
controlling influence on the extent
and rate of long- and short-term
climate changes affecting Earth.  In
a January 17, 2003 article,
Science@NASA describes the
extent of the fluctuations in solar
radiation over time, how they are
being measured, the instruments
that are being used to measure
them, how those instruments are
being calibrated and what has
been found by using them.
Recipe For A Storm:
Ingredients for More Powerful
Atlantic Hurricanes
the interaction between the
Atlantic Ocean and atmosphere
may be the recipe for stronger,
more frequent hurricanes.
University of Wisconsin-Madison
scientists have found that the
Atlantic organizes the ingredients
for a powerful hurricane season to
create a situation where either
everything is conducive to
hurricane activity or nothing
is-potentially making the Atlantic
more vulnerable to climate change
than the world's other hurricane
hot spots. Read More!
Russian scientist
issues global cooling
warning

Global cooling could develop on
Earth in 50 years and have serious
consequences before it is
replaced by a period of warming in
the early 22nd century, a Russian
scientist said Friday.
Environmentalists and scientists
today focus on the dangers of
global warming provoked by man's
detrimental effect on the planet's
climate, but global cooling -
though never widely supported - is
a theory postulating an
overwhelming cooling of the Earth
which could involve glaciation.
"On the basis of our [solar
emission] research, we developed
a scenario of a global cooling of
the Earth's climate by the middle of
this century and the beginning of a
regular 200-year-long cycle of the
climate's global warming at the
start of the 22nd century," said the
head of the space research sector
of the Russian Academy of
Sciences' astronomical
observatory.
Khabibullo Abdusamatov said he
and his colleagues had concluded
that a period of global cooling
similar to one seen in the late 17th
century - when canals froze in the
Netherlands and people had to
leave their dwellings in Greenland
- could start in 2012-2015 and
reach its peak in 2055-2060.
Read more!
Video;
Global Warming Climate
Catastrophe - Cancelled!
Real scientists demolish the
CO2='global warming' myth.
Man-made 'climate change' is a
politically motivated, media driven
Marxist tool to  make the hated
Western masses more amenable to
the globalist nationwreaking NWO
one world government agenda,
and an excuse to impose
repressive taxation to pay for their
social engineering experiments.

Video;
The Denial Machine

This documentary shows how
fossil fuel corporations have kept
the global warming debate alive
long after most scientists believed
that global warming was real and
had potentially catastrophic
consequences. It shows that
companies such as Exxon Mobil
are working with top public
relations firms and using many of
the same tactics and personnel as
those employed by Phillip Morris
and RJ Reynolds to dispute the
cigarette-cancer link in the 1990s.
Exxon Mobil sought out those
willing to question the science
behind climate change, providing
funding for some of them, their
organizations and their studies.In
the past few years, a hurricane has
engulfed the debate about global
warming. This scientific issue has
become a rhetorical firestorm with
science pitted against spin and
inflammatory words on both sides.
Forget global warming:
Welcome to the new Ice
Age
Lorne Gunter, National Post  Published:
Monday, February 25, 2008I
Again I read an article that would
seem to make people be less
hysterical about the end of the
world and to stop the forced
environmental tax that seems to
be the ultimate goal of the global
warming alarmists...

What amazes me is that if people
were REALLY trying to figure out
what is happening to our planet
they would look at things
comprehensively and not with
tunnel vision trying to chase a
predetermined conclusion based
on pick and choose data.

"Snow cover over North America
and much of Siberia, Mongolia and
China is greater than at any time
since 1966.

The U.S. National Climatic Data
Center (NCDC) reported that many
American cities and towns
suffered record cold temperatures
in January and early February.
According to the NCDC, the
average temperature in January
"was -0.3 F cooler than the
1901-2000 (20th century) average."

China is surviving its most brutal
winter in a century. Temperatures
in the normally balmy south were
so low for so long that some
middle-sized cities went days and
even weeks without electricity
because once power lines had
toppled it was too cold or too icy to
repair them.

There have been so many snow
and ice storms in Ontario and
Quebec in the past two months
that the real estate market has felt
the pinch as home buyers have
stayed home rather than venturing
out looking for new houses.

In just the first two weeks of
February, Toronto received 70 cm
of snow, smashing the record of
66.6 cm for the entire month set
back in the pre-SUV, pre-Kyoto,
pre-carbon footprint days of 1950.

And remember the Arctic Sea ice?
The ice we were told so
hysterically last fall had melted to
its "lowest levels on record?
Never mind that those records
only date back as far as 1972 and
that there is anthropological and
geological evidence of much
greater melts in the past.

The ice is back.

Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster
with the Canadian Ice Service in
Ottawa, says the Arctic winter has
been so severe the ice has not
only recovered, it is actually 10 to
20 cm thicker in many places than
at this time last year.

OK, so one winter does not a
climate make. It would be
premature to claim an Ice Age is
looming just because we have had
one of our most brutal winters in
decades.

But if environmentalists and
environment reporters can run
around shrieking about the
manmade destruction of the
natural order every time a robin
shows up on Georgian Bay two
weeks early, then it is at least fair
game to use this winter's weather
stories to wonder whether the
alarmist are being a tad premature.

And it's not just anecdotal
evidence that is piling up against
the climate-change dogma.

According to Robert Toggweiler of
the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics
Laboratory at Princeton University
and Joellen Russell, assistant
professor of biogeochemical
dynamics at the University of
Arizona -- two prominent climate
modellers -- the computer models
that show polar ice-melt cooling
the oceans, stopping the
circulation of warm equatorial
water to northern latitudes and
triggering another Ice Age (a la the
movie The Day After Tomorrow) are
all wrong.

"We missed what was right in front
of our eyes," says Prof. Russell. It's
not ice melt but rather wind
circulation that drives ocean
currents northward from the
tropics. Climate models until now
have not properly accounted for
the wind's effects on ocean
circulation, so researchers have
compensated by over-emphasizing
the role of manmade warming on
polar ice melt.

But when Profs. Toggweiler and
Russell rejigged their model to
include the 40-year cycle of winds
away from the equator (then back
towards it again), the role of ocean
currents bringing warm southern
waters to the north was obvious in
the current Arctic warming.

Last month, Oleg Sorokhtin, a
fellow of the Russian Academy of
Natural Sciences, shrugged off
manmade climate change as "a
drop in the bucket." Showing that
solar activity has entered an
inactive phase, Prof. Sorokhtin
advised people to "stock up on fur
coats."

He is not alone. Kenneth Tapping
of our own National Research
Council, who oversees a giant
radio telescope focused on the
sun, is convinced we are in for a
long period of severely cold
weather if sunspot activity does
not pick up soon.

The last time the sun was this
inactive, Earth suffered the Little
Ice Age that lasted about five
centuries and ended in 1850.
Crops failed through killer frosts
and drought. Famine, plague and
war were widespread. Harbours
froze, so did rivers, and trade
ceased.

It's way too early to claim the same
is about to happen again, but then
it's way too early for the hysteria of
the global warmers, too."
Video;
A Convenient Lie;..............
A discussion about
'An Inconvenient Truth'...CLICK HERE!
A Look at All Sides Exposing the Truth about the Climate Change Controversy.
Al Gore: "I Invented
Global Warming"
by Noah Bradley
Today, in a routine press
conference, former vice president
Al Gore said that "I invented global
warming." The crowd of reporters
had no time to be shocked since
they were all racing to publish a
clip of it to youtube to boost their
popularity tenfold. After a winner
in this faux-race was decided, Al
Gore continued in his usual
intellectual drawl, "The internet
was the first step -- you have to
give them porn before you give
them the end of the world, you
know. Without me, there would be
neither of those -- porn or the
imminent destruction of
everything we know and love. This
is why so many people love me."

Some of the reporters, hearing
such profound wisdom, formed a
new religion and began
worshiping Al Gore. Little did they
know, though, that there are
already millions of members in the
official Church of Gore.

One particularly unpleasant
reporter asked the Great and
Gooey Gore "how the hell, exactly,
did you invent global warming?"
Like only Al Gore could, he looked
at the young whipper snapper, and
said with his firmest, manliest
voice possible, "With my noggin,
you conservative nutball." The
young reporter was then escorted
from the building and supposedly
sent to the prisons of Guantanamo.

Another reporter, slightly more
forward-thinking than the former
Asker of Questions, inquired as to
"what are you going to invent next,
oh great one?"

Mr. Gore thought for a moment,
scratched his scruffy chin, and
then smirked. He had it: "Well, as a
matter of fact, I was considering --
now, I'm not exaggerating this fact
-- inventing a device where, if you
touched it just right, it would
giggle. You know, you tickle the
thing. I think I'm going to call it the
Tickle-Me-Gore. Catchy, isn't it?"

At that, the rest of the room
immediately joined the Church of
Gore.
Video;
Owning the weather

Documentary that looks at the
history of weather modification
and its use by the military. Among
the topics covered are: cloud
seeding, HAARP and declassified
experiments
Watch Movies Here FREE!
See full length movies for free any
time on  demand no fees no
membership required.
" click here!
Article;
Weather warfare
Michel Chossudovsky 22/05/2008

Beware the US military’s
experiments with climatic warfare,
says Michel Chossudovsky

Rarely acknowledged in the
debate on global climate change,
the world’s weather can now be
modified as part of a new
generation of sophisticated
electromagnetic weapons. Both
the US and Russia have
developed capabilities to
manipulate the climate for military
use.

Environmental modification
techniques have been applied by
the US military for more than half a
century. US mathematician John
von Neumann, in liaison with the
US Department of Defense,
started his research on weather
modification in the late 1940s at
the height of the Cold War and
foresaw ‘forms of climatic warfare
as yet unimagined’.

During the Vietnam war, cloud-
seeding techniques were used,
starting in 1967 under Project
Popeye, the objective of which
was to prolong the monsoon
season and block enemy supply
routes along the Ho Chi Minh Trail.

The US military has developed
advanced capabilities that enable
it selectively to alter weather
patterns. The technology, which is
being perfected under the High-
frequency Active Auroral
Research Program (HAARP), is an
appendage of the Strategic
Defense Initiative – ‘Star Wars’.
From a military standpoint, HAARP
is a weapon of mass destruction,
operating from the outer
atmosphere and capable of
destabilising agricultural and
ecological systems around the
world.

Weather-modification, according
to the US Air Force document AF
2025 Final Report, ‘offers the war
fighter a wide range of possible
options to defeat or coerce an
adversary’, capabilities, it says,
extend to the triggering of floods,
hurricanes, droughts and
earthquakes: ‘Weather
modification will become a part of
domestic and international
security and could be done
unilaterally… It could have
offensive and defensive
applications and even be used for
deterrence purposes. The ability
to generate precipitation, fog and
storms on earth or to modify
space weather… and the
production of artificial weather all
are a part of an integrated set of
[military] technologies.’

In 1977, an international
Convention was ratified by the UN
General Assembly which banned
‘military or other hostile use of
environmental modification
techniques having widespread,
long-lasting or severe effects.’ It
defined ‘environmental
modification techniques’ as ‘any
technique for changing – through
the deliberate manipulation of
natural processes – the dynamics,
composition or structure of the
earth, including its biota,
lithosphere, hydrosphere and
atmosphere, or of outer space.’

While the substance of the 1977
Convention was reasserted in the
UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC) signed
at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio,
debate on weather modification
for military use has become a
scientific taboo. Military analysts
are mute on the subject.
Meteorologists are not
investigating the matter and
environmentalists are focused on
greenhouse gas emissions under
the Kyoto Protocol. Neither is the
possibility of climatic or
environmental manipulations as
part of a military and intelligence
agenda, while tacitly
acknowledged, part of the broader
debate on climate change under
UN auspices.

The HAARP Programme

Established in 1992, HAARP, based
in Gokona, Alaska, is an array of
high-powered antennas that
transmit, through high-frequency
radio waves, massive amounts of
energy into the ionosphere (the
upper layer of the atmosphere).
Their construction was funded by
the US Air Force, the US Navy and
the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA).

Operated jointly by the Air Force
Research Laboratory and the
Office of Naval Research, HAARP
constitutes a system of powerful
antennas capable of creating
‘controlled local modifications of
the ionosphere’. According to its
official website, www.haarp.alaska.
edu, HAARP will be used ‘to
induce a small, localized change in
ionospheric temperature so
physical reactions can be studied
by other instruments located
either at or close to the HAARP
site’.

But Rosalie Bertell, president of
the International Institute of
Concern for Public Health, says
HAARP operates as ‘a gigantic
heater that can cause major
disruptions in the ionosphere,
creating not just holes, but long
incisions in the protective layer
that keeps deadly radiation from
bombarding the planet’. Physicist
Dr Bernard Eastlund called it ‘the
largest ionospheric heater ever
built’.

HAARP is presented by the US Air
Force as a research programme,
but military documents confirm its
main objective is to ‘induce
ionospheric modifications’ with a
view to altering weather patterns
and disrupting communications
and radar. According to a report
by the Russian State Duma: ‘The
US plans to carry out large-scale
experiments under the HAARP
programme [and] create weapons
capable of breaking radio
communication lines and
equipment installed on
spaceships and rockets, provoke
serious accidents in electricity
networks and in oil and gas
pipelines, and have a negative
impact on the mental health of
entire regions.’

An analysis of statements
emanating from the US Air Force
points to the unthinkable: the
covert manipulation of weather
patterns, communications and
electric power systems as a
weapon of global warfare,
enabling the US to disrupt and
dominate entire regions.

Weather manipulation is the pre-
emptive weapon par excellence. It
can be directed against enemy
countries or ‘friendly nations’
without their knowledge, used to
destabilise economies,
ecosystems and agriculture. It can
also trigger havoc in financial and
commodity markets. The
disruption in agriculture creates a
greater dependency on food aid
and imported grain staples from
the US and other Western
countries.

HAARP was developed as part of
an Anglo-American partnership
between Raytheon Corporation,
which owns the HAARP patents,
and British Aerospace Systems
(BAES). The HAARP project is one
among several collaborative
ventures in advanced weapons
systems between the two defence
giants.

The HAARP project was initiated in
1992 by Advanced Power
Technologies, Inc. (APTI), a
subsidiary of Atlantic Richfield
Corporation (ARCO). APTI
(including the HAARP patents) was
sold by ARCO to E-Systems Inc, in
1994.

E-Systems, on contract to the CIA
and US Department of Defense,
outfitted the ‘Doomsday Plan’,
which ‘allows the President to
manage a nuclear war’.
Subsequently acquired by
Raytheon Corporation, it is among
the largest intelligence
contractors in the World.

BAES was involved in the
development of the advanced
stage of the HAARP antenna array
under a 2004 contract with the
Office of Naval Research. The
installation of 132 highfrequency
transmitters was entrusted by
BAES to its US subsidiary, BAE
Systems Inc. The project,
according to a July report in
Defense News, was undertaken by
BAES’s Electronic Warfare
division. In September it received
DARPA’s top award for technical
achievement for the design,
construction and activation of the
HAARP array of antennas.

The HAARP system is fully
operational and in many regards
dwarfs existing conventional and
strategic weapons systems. While
there is no firm evidence of its
use for military purposes, Air
Force documents suggest HAARP
is an integral part of the
militarisation of space. One would
expect the antennas already to
have been subjected to routine
testing.

Under the UNFCCC, the
Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) has a
mandate ‘to assess scientific,
technical and socioeconomic
information relevant for the
understanding of climate change’.
This mandate includes
environmental warfare. ‘Geo-
engineering’ is acknowledged, but
the underlying military
applications are neither the object
of policy analysis or scientific
research in the thousands of
pages of IPCC reports and
supporting documents, based on
the expertise and input of some
2,500 scientists, policymakers and
environmentalists.

‘Climatic warfare’ potentially
threatens the future of humanity,
but has casually been excluded
from the reports for which the
IPCC received the 2007 Nobel
Peace Prize. Michel
Chossudovsky is a Professor of
Economics at the University of
Ottawa and an editor at the Centre
for Research on Globalization,
www.globalresearch.ca
Video;
Owning the weather /
PLAY NOW
Documentary that looks at the
history of weather modification
and its use by the military. Among
the topics covered are: cloud
seeding, HAARP and declassified
experiments
Article;
Weather Control?

In the technological millennium
that scientists have promised
civilization after the war, Professor
Albert Eide Parr, director of the
American Museum of Natural
History, believes that at last
something can be done about the
weather. He thinks that cities can
be planned with built-in climate
control.

Addressing the graduating class at
University of Chicago's Institute of
Meteorology, Professor Parr
observed indignantly that
scientists have done practically
nothing about the weather. "Our
relations to the forces of weather
and climate," said he, "are still in
the most primitive cultural stage."

Oceanographer Parr's own ideas
on climate control are still in a
sketchy stage, but he offered
meteorologists a few provocative
suggestions: they might "create a
city of calm in a windy location" by
means of windbreaks and
shelterbelt planting, cool or warm
a city by the use of
"heat-generating or
light-reflecting facades in city
building," control the effects of
the sun by intelligent planning of
light and shadow.

Unknown Elements. But the most
eminent U.S. meteorologist,
Carl-Gustaf Arvid Rossby, head of
Chicago's Institute, smiled
skeptically at these notions. Said
he: "There's too much of the
popular science approach to the
geophysical sciences in the U.S.
We are far behind Scandinavia,
where these sciences are most
advanced, because we think in
terms of controlling chemicals in a
laboratory. We should try instead
to establish a delicate balance
between man and his
environment."

Rossby agrees with Professor Parr
that no one knows much about
weather; meteorologists still have
no precise idea, for example, why
some clouds drop rain and others
do not. But Carl Rossby, a moon
faced, jolly Swede, has turned up
many another useful fact about
weather since he arrived in the
U.S. and went to work for the
Weather Bureau in 1926.

Rossby changed U.S. weather
forecasting by using upper-air
soundings instead of relying only
on surface readings of
temperature, pressure and
humidity. At M.I.T., where in 1928
he launched the first U.S.
meteorology school and trained
weather experts for aviation, he
started the first regular weather
observation nights in the U.S. He
found that an air mass retains the
same specific humidity and
potential temperature throughout
its journey from the polar to the
temperate zone. Result was more
accurate forecasting over longer
ranges; the U.S. Weather Bureau
began to issue five-day forecasts,
is steadily extending the span.*

Back to Nature. Meteorologist
Rossby believes that war
stimulates progress in
meteorology, but he expects no
miracles after World War II. He
urges that city planners study
meteorology and meteorologists
study city planning, but at best he
thinks cities of the future may be
made only a few degrees cooler in
summer, a few degrees warmer in
winter. The most practical step
cities can now take toward
weather control, says he, is to get
rid of their smoke (perhaps by
underground smoke tunnels). So
doing, they would get more
ultraviolet radiation, better
visibility, fewer fogs, probably less
rain.

*Chairman George Aiken of a
Senate Agricultural Subcommittee.
Article;
Contrails And The Dark
Side
By Rusty Rockets
By now we're all familiar with
global warming and its predicted
consequences, even to the extent
where people are finally listening
to longtime environmentalist Al
Gore! But in order to curb global
warming it's likely that there'll be a
number of lifestyle sacrifices we'll
need to make. Arguably, one of
the most inconvenient of these
would be air travel. Jets certainly
pump out their fair share of
greenhouse emissions, which
would be reason enough to
consider cutting back air travel,
but jets add to global warming in
yet another way. In case you
haven't heard, the long trails of
condensation known as
"contrails" emitted by jet airliners
are now considered to be a
significant factor in global
warming. Furthermore, a group of
UK meteorologists recently found
that night flights make contrail
troubles considerably worse. With
airlines expected to continue
expanding their routes and
increasing frequencies of flights;
what can be done to make airline
travel greener?

While floating peacefully high
above the Earth's surface, shuttle
astronaut Dr. Fred W. Leslie says
that he "remembers seeing
contrails stretched across the
planet." Australian astronaut Andy
Thomas also considered contrails
one of the planet's most striking
features. "One of the most readily
visible signs of human presence
is the occurrence of contrails from
aircraft in the upper atmosphere.
They are very long lasting, and
can be seen over virtually all parts
of the world... radiating out from
cities, like spokes in a wheel,"
recalls Thomas.

A study conducted by Dr. Andrew
M. Carleton, a professor of
geography, and climatologist Dr.
David Travis, observed anomalous
changes in temperature during
the unprecedented grounding of
all aircraft after the 9/11 attacks.
The researcher's analysis of
temperature anomalies during the
period September 11-14, 2001,
clearly suggest serious
implications in regard to global
warming. "We show that there was
an anomalous increase in the
average diurnal temperature
range for the period September
11-14, 2001, explained the paper,
published in Nature. "Because
persisting contrails can reduce
the transfer of both incoming
solar and outgoing infrared
radiation and so reduce the daily
temperature range, we attribute at
least a portion of this anomaly to
the absence of contrail," they
added.

Like clouds, the ice crystals in
contrails shield the Earth's
surface from the sun's radiation
during the day, and keep the heat
in at night. In this way, contrails
have reduced daytime
temperatures and increased
nighttime temperatures. Some
researchers have argued that
contrails (and also pollutants in
clouds) have masked the full
effects of global warming thanks
to a phenomenon known as global
dimming. On the face of it, global
dimming sounds helpful, but it
only makes the situation more
complex. Last year, another study
claimed that global dimming had
actually ceased, and that we are
now in an era of global
brightening; perhaps, the authors
suggest, because of changes in
the number and composition of
aerosols. It seems we can't win, as
cleaning up the environment
means that we may be subjected
to the full effects of global
warming, while not doing anything
will continue to make our dismal
predicament progressively worse.
If you're stumped by this vexing
conundrum, don't be.
Meteorologists at the University
of Reading, in southern England,
have made some observations
about contrails that show why
getting rid of them is the better
option.

Their paper in Nature claims that
contrails will play a significant role
in global warming as airlines
continue to expand their
businesses. The Reading team,
led by Nicola Stuber, found that
night flights contribute to climate
change far more than day flights.
It's a surprising result, according
to the researchers, as night flights
only account for 22 percent of
Britain's annual air travel, but
contribute to approximately 60-80
percent of the greenhouse effect
attributed to contrails. "Flights
during the nighttime are
responsible for at least 60 percent
of the climate warming associated
with contrails, that's condensation
trails, over the UK," said Stuber.
But if contrails are merely
amplifying the effects of clouds in
regard to temperature regulation,
intuitively you'd imagine that there
would still be a balance
maintained. But according to
Stuber, it doesn't work that way.
"The problem is that contrails
during the day reflect some solar
radiation back into space, and that
leaves us with a cooling effect on
Earth. Then, during the daytime
and during the night time, they
enhance the natural greenhouse
effect of the atmosphere. So the
problem is, at night time, you no
longer have sunshine, so they no
can longer reflect solar radiation,
so the greenhouse effect of the
contrails is no longer balanced.
That's why a small proportion of
flights have a large impact on the
daily average climate warming
effect," explains Stuber. So, what
can be done?

"Rescheduling flights would
certainly be one measure to think
about if policy makers decided to
reduce aviation, reduce climate
change," suggests Stuber. Less
night flights? Those cheap,
red-eye specials considered an
airline's bread-and-butter? Not
likely! Add to this the fact that a
2005 European-wide investigation
into contrails, conducted by the
Imperial College London,
discovered that contrails were not
even factored into government
assessments of the environment.

One way of reducing the
occurrence of contrails suggested
by the Imperial College
investigation was to have planes
fly at altitudes where contrails
won't form. Pilots could drop
slightly to these contrail-free
altitudes when software detects
that the plane is forming contrails.
But the investigation also noted
that lower altitudes mean slower
speeds, which represents yet
another unpalatable solution for
commercial airlines.

The Imperial College team suggest
that much of the responsibility for
finding ways to reduce contrail
formation rests with aircraft
manufacturers. "There is little
more that aircraft designers can
do to increase engine fuel
efficiency at high altitude, but
designing new aircraft that can be
as fuel efficient flying at 20,000
feet, as today's aircraft are at
35,000 feet, would help eliminate
contrails."

Others believe that there are
more clandestine measures
available to fix the problem of
contrail formation, but claim that
the technology is a military secret.
The B-2 bomber is a stealth
aircraft, so it needs to leave as
little trace of its presence as
possible, which is why it allegedly
leaves no contrails. How is this
possible? In 2000, Air International
magazine published an article
about the B-2, and explained how
it was that the B-2 didn't produce
contrails. "As for elimination of
contrails (normally a giveaway,
even for a stealth aircraft), the
USAF said chlorofluorosulphonic
acid was injected into the jets to
eliminate contrails." But the USAF
later told reporters that it was
done by "regulating exhaust
temperatures." Air International
considered this "nonsense,"
because: "contrails are ice
crystals from water vapor left
when hydrocarbon fuel is burned,
and can never be eliminated by
'regulating exhaust
temperatures.'"

Guesswork and denials aside, one
commentator believes he can
explain contrail-less military
aircraft. David Hambling, author of
Weapons Grade, says that the
technology for reducing contrails
has been available for some time.
He refers to a technology called
"plasma aerodynamics," that was
first developed and researched by
the Russians. The interest shown
in plasma aerodynamics by military
agencies worldwide lies in its
alleged stealth capability. "The
USAF appears to have been using
plasma aerodynamics for decades.
The Russians certainly know all
about it, as does anyone who has
bought the technology off them,"
says Hambling. "According to the
patents, it has additional benefits
too - it can muffle the noise
produced by engines as well as
preventing contrails from forming.
The only people not enjoying its
benefits are the civilian taxpayers
who funded it in the first place."

I guess we'll just have to wait and
see whether military agencies and
governments consider global
warming a big enough - or real
enough - threat to our planet's
future for them to disclose their
coveted technology. Aircraft
manufacturers are certainly key
players in all this, but they are only
effective as long as they can make
new environmentally sound
planes financially attractive to
airlines (government subsidy,
perhaps?). There are the allegedly
contrail free High-Speed Civil
Transport (HSCT) planes designed
by NASA to look forward to, but
who knows when that will become
viable, and what new
environmental problems they'll
bring as baggage. Failing all that,
we'll have to wait for commercial
airlines to take the initiative and
reduce or stop night flights; I'm
not holding my breath though.
Tropical  Atmosphere  
Ocean  project:
The
Global Consequences
of El Niño
The twists and turns in the
ongoing dialogue between ocean
and atmosphere in the Pacific can
have a ripple effect on climatic
conditions in far flung regions of
the globe. This worldwide
message is conveyed by shifts in
tropical rainfall, which affect wind
patterns over much of the globe.
Imagine a rushing stream flowing
over and around a series of large
boulders. The boulders create a
train of waves that extend
downstream, with crests and
troughs that show up in fixed
positions. If one of the boulders
were to shift, the shape of the
wave train would also change and
the crests and troughs might
occur in different places.
HOLES IN HEAVEN -
HAARP












51:05
A great documentary talking about
HAARP, it explanes what HAARP is
and what they are doing with it.
HAARP is used as a DIRECT ENERGY
WEAPON.