Environmental Medicine
(Global Warming & Chemical Genocide)
by: Mark Sircus Ac., OMD
Medical News Commentaries
More than 60 influential
scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates, issued a statement this week
asserting that the Bush administration had systematically distorted
scientific fact in the service of policy goals on the environment,
health, and on biomedical research. The United States government
stands accused of repeatedly censoring and suppressing reports by its
own scientists and disbanding government panels that provide unwanted
advice according to the New York Times. Their
statement was accompanied by a report published by the Union of
Concerned Scientists, listing cases where the administration has
manipulated science on environmental and other issues.
Bush and his associates
stand accused of lying about basic scientific issues that have a
bearing on the health and well being of the entire human race because
they have to do with global warming and dramatic climate changes. It
does not take much effort to find motives and patterns for suppressing
inconvenient facts that might force Mr. Bush's friends in the oil, gas
and coal industries to spend more on pollution control or for consumers
to spend and consume less on fossil fuels, thus cutting deeply into
profits of many major corporations. When it comes to this particular
subject Bush stands almost alone in public rejection, but he is a
powerful world leader. Thus certain major institutions like the World
Bank and the Pentagon have gone behind his back and commissioned
studies that are warning us that our world is in serious peril, and the
biggest threat to our future is not terrorism, but our own dependence
on fossil fuels. A growing number of scientists, policy makers, and technical specialists
both inside and outside the government allege that the Bush
administration has suppressed or distorted the scientific analyses of
federal agencies trying to sidetrack serious efforts to reduce the
overuse of fossil fuels.
Dr. Kurt Gottfried, an
emeritus professor of physics at Cornell University said to the Times
that the administration has "engaged in practices that are in conflict
with spirit of science and the scientific method." The most serious
charge in the report has to do with global warming. The scientific
consensus says the world is warming rapidly with the United Nations
reporting that 150,000 people are already dying each year from
increasing temperatures, yet audaciously President Bush stands up in
public and says the weather is just fine. The intentional distortion of
science around this particular area of international concern could be
tantamount to murder for thousands, and eventually millions could
die because of inaction by the world community whose leadership stands
in Washington. These charges are substantiated by the Pentagon, which
has just released (leaked) a report contradicting everything the chief
executive of the United States has ever said about global warming.
Global
warming may be bad news for future generations,
but let's face it, most of us spend
as little time
worrying about it as we did about al Qaeda before 9/11.
Like the terrorists, though, the
seemingly remote climate
risk may hit home sooner and harder
than we ever imagined.
David Stipp- Fortune Magazine
The Times and these eminent
scientists indicate that Bush is placing a heavy risk on the nation's
long-term prosperity, health and military prowess yet we have to admit
that he is not the only one in denial. According
to a massive United Nations environmental study released in May 2002,
the planet is poised on a precipice, and time is running out for making
tough political and economic choices that can pull it back from
disaster. Bush is leading a massive attempt to downplay the obvious and
has single-handedly held off rational discussion and decisions that,
hypothetically, could save millions if eventually not billions of
lives. In this regard, do not be surprised that in a decade or two Bush
might ultimately stand accused of being the greatest mass murderer of
all time bypassing the collective works of Hitler, Mao, Stalin and Pol
Pot.
On February 9th
Fortune Magazine, then The London Observer, Common Dreams, Mother Jones
and Greenpeace all published the essence of a secret report from the
Pentagon saying that global warming, "should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to
a US national security concern." It declares, "Future wars will be
fought over the issue of survival rather than religion, ideology or
national honor." The report warned that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising
seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear
conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt
across the world. The devastating Pentagon report predicts that abrupt
climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as
countries go to war to secure dwindling food, water and energy
supplies. “Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,”
concludes the Pentagon and “Once again, warfare would define human
life.”
Ultimately,
the report forecasts a decrease in the planet's
human carrying capacity, leading to
sharp reductions in the
world's population due to starvation, disease, and war.
Greenpeace
The very next fifty years of
human history is absolutely crucial. In 1993 we already were put on
alert by, "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity," signed by some 1700
leading scientists, including over half of all living Nobel Laureates
in science, stated, "A great change in our stewardship of the earth and
the life on it is required if vast human misery is to be avoided
and our global home on this planet is not to be irretrievably
mutilated.” Most people have not listened to this warning, never having
even heard of it because the press had not reported on these kinds of
things in a way that the public can listen to; and in these ten years
since more people have bought bigger cars then ever before.
The
Bush administration -- infamously, ludicrously -- remains a holdout on
climate change. Blithely ignoring the near-universal scientific
consensus that global
warming is real, dangerous, and largely the product of human activity,
the White House proceeds as if it didn't even exist.
Mother
Jones Magazine
Though it is not pleasant to
look at what is happening in the world, we must ask, is our resistance
to looking deeply at events and their primordial causes increasing the
force and the need for nature to crash down on us? The melting of the
polar icecaps is perhaps the single most devastating event impacting on
world health and climate conditions, diminishing now at a faster rate
than any scientist has expected, at almost 1 percent per year. “The
rate of 9% per decade rate of melt is happening three times faster than
originally thought, and could continue even faster than that,” says
Josefino Comiso, senior scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Center.
Implications for global climate patterns are catastrophic as arctic
snow and ice are integral in controlling Earth's temperatures by
insulating the atmosphere from land and ocean heat. Tom Agnew, a
research meteorologist at the Meteorology Service of Canada, says the
warming trend is due to greenhouse-gas emissions from burning fossil
fuels. It is unclear whether reversing the trend is possible. "The
whole system is very slow to start," he says, "and also very slow to
stop." Norwegian researchers close to the problem are confirming
scientist’s worst fears indicating that this process is accelerating
and others are speculating that we are experiencing solar cycles that
are increasing temperatures slightly, but not enough to account for the
intensity of the changes.
The Pentagon Report creates
what they see as very possible near turn scenarios saying, “By 2005 the
climatic impact of the shift is felt more intensely in certain regions
around the world. More severe storms and typhoons bring about higher
storm surges and floods in low-lying islands such as Tarawa and Tuvalu
(near New Zealand). In 2007, a particularly severe storm causes the
ocean to break through levees in the Netherlands making a few key
coastal cities such as The Hague unlivable. Failures of the delta
island levees in the Sacramento River region in the Central Valley of
California creates an inland sea and disrupts the aqueduct system
transporting water from northern to southern California because salt
water can no longer be kept out of the area during the dry season... As
glacial ice melts, sea levels rise and as wintertime sea extent
decreases, ocean waves increase in intensity, damaging coastal cities.
Additionally millions of people are put at risk of flooding around the
globe (roughly 4 times 2003 levels), and fisheries are disrupted as
water temperature changes cause fish to migrate to new locations and
habitats, increasing tensions over fishing rights."
The
Bush administration is hardly the first administration to shamelessly
distort scientific findings for political reasons but the stakes are
higher now then ever. Richard Nixon was brought down by the single act
of Watergate. The watershed for
George W. Bush could conceivably come from the single act of censoring
reports on climate change. The question could be asked; can the
world survive such a leader? One
might also ask how we can blame governments for global
warming while more and more people are buying gasoline
gusling cars?
It is far too
easy, even for those with the most honourable goals, to
address only superficial symptoms and not the root causes that lie much
deeper? It seems evident
that what needs to be changed is the whole system. But
we need to be aware that there are those who will want to take
advantage of the current climate of crisis, working for profit, while
making it even worse for the world's population.
This commentary is offered so the public can become aware of the alarm
bells our foremost scientists are ringing. What is evident is that the
whole human race appears to be on a collision course with a dark
destiny, one that might have been avoided with some common sense. We
are facing many mega qustions simultaneously and they all seem to
becoming to a flash point simultaneously in the near future. In a
pioneering study released last week for example, according to The New
York Times, “the Union of Concerned Scientists asked two independent
labs to examine samples of traditional corn, soybean and canola seeds.
The labs found contamination in half the corn, half the soybean and
more than 80 percent of the canola varieties. The study draws no
conclusions about when the mingling took place. It could have happened
during field tests, after modified crops were widely planted or during
shipping and storage. But the genetic purity of at least some
traditional seed varieties has been compromised.” This is a huge and
serious problem for the children of the future.
Have we let our governments
and corporations gang up on us innocents? Are we really innocent or are
we just ignorant, lazy, docile, and gullable? I do not think it
matters, names, accusations, whatever. The question is what are we
going to do about it? In many areas of medicine and science we have let
incredibly dark forces take control and we are already seeing our
children pay in terms of their general health. Freud’s death wish seems
to have become the passion of humanity. The question today might just
be, can we transcend our humanity? Can we evolve into something
slightly better, slightly more intelligent, and slightly more coherent?
One thing is clear, when it comes to medicine and science we have
trusted the wrong people.
Government agencies,
corporations, scientists and medical people have come together to gang
rape humanity. We could easily call it chemical genocide or chemical
rape. The richest people on the planet have not made all their money
through love this is for certain. Just remember this tomorrow when you
brush your teeth, know that our favourite people have put poison in
your toothpaste. Ask a chemist about fluoride not your dentist and you
will see not the tip of the iceberg but the mainframe of a crime
against humanity that shames and humiliates all sense of human
intelligence.
References:
http://www.fortune.com/fortune/technology/articles/0,15114,582584,00.html
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=415878
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-13.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0222-01.htm
http://www.motherjones.com/news/dailymojo/2004/02/02_806.html
Editors Note:
Environmentalism is a verifiable UN/NWO/Faction1 program deployed in the ongoing battle for world domination and control.
In his introduction to a 1997 Special Report titled Time to Say `No' to World Government Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. writes,
"Among those trends which must be ended, is a series of frauds, beginning with Rachel Carson's {Silent Spring} hoax against the safest insecticide since the invention of birds, DDT. Since then, the virtual banning of DDT has killed countless human beings through the pests whose menace to humanity had been virtually ended with DDT. Since then, the rate of human sickness and even death through tainted food, has been escalating as a result of another hoax, the anti-scientific charge, that chloroflourocarbons are the cause for man-made depletion of the so-called ozone layer. Now, the same hoaxsters are deployed by Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair and his European allies from behind Alice's Looking-Glass, in demanding an accelerated increase in misery, sickness, and death-rates, through a ``Global Warming'' hoax." bold emphasis added
In an earlier essay, SCIENCE IS NOT "STATISTICS" Mr. LaRouche explains precisely why the science used in these arguments is fatally flawed.
In determining the nature of the lawful interactions among ostensibly non-living, living, and cognitive processes, we must proceed by recognizing that these processes are distinguished from one another in terms of differing characteristic physical-space-time curvatures, notably in their infinitesimally small intervals of action. If one, then, proposes to define an interaction among processes of such characteristically, mutually distinct curvatures, by use of "models" which arbitrarily presume mechanistically linear interactions in the very small, the resulting calculation can be guaranteed to be absurd, totally false to reality.
Notably, if one projects "environmental" calculations which leave out the role of human cognition in the technological development of economy, the resulting judgment on the relations between man and nature will be totally false to reality. The spread of disease, as a result of the banning of DDT, the increase of morbidity rates in populations around the world, as a result of impact of the "Ozone Hole" hoax on refrigeration of the food-delivery again, and the threatened accelerated increase of death-rates, globally, from the "Global Warning" fraud, are warnings of the dangers involved in linearizing thinking about the living processes.
It is more than fair to sum up that point, respecting the fallacy of linearization, thus: If one assesses the impact of economy upon ecology, by reference to any of the generally accepted varieties of classroom economics doctrine today, the resulting conclusion is necessarily a fraudulent one.
He goes on to show that coincident with the beginning of the alleged environmental problems predominately in the 1960's, there was a significant change in the generally accepted standards of scientific practice.
In the matter of what might be termed carelessly "environmental science," there are two broad classifications.
One, is the standard of scientific proof generally accepted by specialists in the relevant fields prior to 1962-1972. Proofs from this quarter may have their problematic features, but the standard of practice from that period was "within the ball-park" of truthfulness and competence. This standard worked, not because the mathematics employed was particularly good; it worked, usually, despite bad mathematical models, because the standard applied for purposes of policy shaping, was that of crucial-experimental demonstration of principle, rather than reliance on mathematical models as such.
The second standard, is the ideological one associated with the influential "1001 Club" which was established under Britain's consort Prince Philip and the Netherlands drone Prince Bernhard, as adjuncts to the 1961 founding of the World Wildlife Fund. The prescriptions of this second standard, are usually not merely incompetent, but outright hoaxes. Three prominent examples of such frauds are those just cited above: Rachel Carson's fraudulent allegations against DDT --for which no scientific proof was ever supplied, F. Sherwood Rowland's "Ozone Hole" hoax, and the "Global Warming" hoax.
In an article published in the Wall Street Journal, "A Major Deception on Global Warming", Mr. Frederick Seitz, questioning the integrity of the IPCC in following their own guidelines, suggests that there is something more than just bad science going on here. Alluding to a deeper political motive, he writes;
"If the IPCC is incapable of following its most basic procedures, it would be best to abandon the entire IPCC process, or at least that part that is concerned with the scientific evidence on climate change, and look for more reliable sources of advice to governments on this important question."
