As Climategate is exposing the IPCC conference in Copenhagen as an exercise in political flatulence based on fraud within the scientific community scientific and a bizarre conspiracy by Leftists to establish control and power over the world, President Obama is determined to commit the US to an International Treaty that will compromise our sovereignty and economic security. In a desperate effort to lend credibility to a movement that is being continuously exposed everyday as nothing more than a scam, Obama apparently believes that he can salvage the Hoax with his presence and charm. However, the people of the United States and the world are becoming aware of the conspiracy through the publication of hacked emails from the East Anglia University’s Climate Research Unit and the outing of its head Phil Jones.
President Obama has a greater interest in the survival of the Anthropogenic Global Warming Hoax, for once the Hoax is fully exposed, the basis for the Cap and Trade Bill is destroyed. Thus there is no need to further kill jobs, weaken the US Economy, dramatically increase the cost of living, and tax America into oblivion.
Obama’s plan is to tax the United States taxpayer and redistribute the wealth or money to Third World Leftist Dictators around the world. Apparently this same scheme has been revealed in the hacked emails from East Anglia’s Phil Jones who has been asked to step aside pending an investigation.
Even Al Gore, the divinity school dropout, has enough political survival instinct to pass up the Copenhagen meeting.
The United Nations, who will have their capabilities at corruption compromised by the ongoing exposure of the climate warming hoax offered this shallow attempt to revive the myth. Rajendra K. Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Control, offered up this insipid explanation as to the validity of his panel’s existence.
Statement on news reports regarding hacking of the East Anglia University email communications
It is unfortunate that an illegal act of accessing private email communications between scientists who have been involved as authors in I.P.C.C. assessments in the past has led to several questions and concerns. It is important for me to clarify that the I.P.C.C. as a body follows impartial, open and objective assessment of every aspect of climate change carried out with complete transparency. IPCC relies entirely on peer reviewed literature in carrying out its assessment and follows a process that renders it unlikely that any peer reviewed piece of literature, however contrary to the views of any individual author, would be left out. The entire report writing process of the I.P.C.C. is subjected to extensive and repeated review by experts as well as governments. Consequently, there is at every stage full opportunity for experts in the field to draw attention to any piece of literature and its basic findings that would ensure inclusion of a wide range of views. There is, therefore, no possibility of exclusion of any contrarian views, if they have been published in established journals or other publications which are peer reviewed.
I would also like to highlight the fact that the summary for policymakers of all the reports of the I.P.C.C. are accepted and approved by all the governments of the world. Even at the stage of approval of the summary for policymakers of any report, which is carried out word by word, omissions if any would be highlighted by government representatives in the course of the approval.
In summary, no individual or small group of scientists is in a position to exclude a peer-reviewed paper from an I.P.C.C. assessment. Likewise, individuals and small groups have no ability to emphasize a result that is not consistent with a range of studies, investigations, and approaches. Every layer in the process (including large author teams, extensive review, independent monitoring of review compliance, and plenary approval by governments) plays a major role in keeping I.P.C.C. assessments comprehensive, unbiased, open to the identification of new literature, and policy relevant but not policy prescriptive.
The unfortunate incident that has taken place through illegal hacking of the private communications of individual scientists only highlights the importance of I.P.C.C. procedures and practices and the thoroughness by which the Panel carries out its assessment. This thoroughness and the duration of the process followed in every assessment ensure the elimination of any possibility of omissions or distortions, intentional or accidental.
Despite efforts to diminish the obvious fact that a science built on fraud is not science, it is a scam and nothing more, politicians like Senator Barbara Boxer, are instead on the attack stating that hacking is illegal and the US will prosecute the hackers for a crime that was committed in England meanwhile President Obama sails into the storm as if the Hoax hasn’t been exposed.
This raises the question of Obama’s loyalty. Is his first priority to the United Nations or is it to the United States. It is logical to assume that a leader who is willing to compromise his country’s security, sovereignty, and economic vitality for an International Agency that has a less than dubious record of corruptness, the question of loyalty has to arise. For the first time in the history of the United States the question of a President’s loyalty is about to be seriously considered and the evidence is damning. It is now time to ask President Obama just with whom he has his loyalty, with the United States or with some foreign power. He has stated that he is a citizen of the world and many Americans saw that as a poetic statement, however there seems to be a covert message within that quote that is only now beginning to be revealed.
Being a citizen of the world in action when you are the President of the United States is treason, my friends... treason and definitely reason for impeachment. Just how much are we going to take before it is too late?!?
Source: Flopping Aces - Posted by Skookum
No comments:
Post a Comment