Friday 23 January 2015


Hi This is a special greeting on a special subject.
I know you must be fed up with the subject however, I urge you to watch this 61 min documentary, and I know it is with translation and can be irksome.
Absolutely Brilliant and really worth looking at. 

Global warming stopped 16 years ago, Met Office report reveals: MoS got it right about warming... so who are the 'deniers' now?

Last year The Mail on Sunday reported a stunning fact: that global warming had ‘paused’ for 16 years. The Met Office’s own monthly figures showed there had been no statistically significant increase in the world’s temperature since 1997.
We were vilified. One Green website in the US said our report was ‘utter bilge’ that had to be ‘exposed and attacked’.
The Met Office issued a press release claiming it was misleading, before quietly admitting a few days later that it was true that the world had not got significantly warmer since 1997 after all. A Guardian columnist wondered how we could be ‘punished’( Quote from article)

49 Former NASA Scientists Send A Letter Disputing Climate Change

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden
Is NASA playing fast and loose with climate change science? That's the contention of a group of 49 former NASA scientists and astronauts. 
On March 28 the group sent a letter to NASA administrator Charles Bolden, Jr., blasting the agency for making unwarranted claims about the role of carbon dioxide in global warming, Business Insider reported.
"We believe the claims by NASA and GISS [NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies], that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data," the group wrote. "With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled."
The group features some marquee names, including Michael F. Collins, Walter Cunningham and five other Apollo astronauts, as well as two former directors of NASA's Johnson Space Centre in Houston.
The letter included a request for NASA to refrain from mentioning CO2 as a cause of global warming in future press releases and websites. The agency's "Global Climate Change" web page says that "Humans have increased atmospheric CO2 concentration by a third since the Industrial Revolution began. This is the most important long-lived "forcing" of climate change."
HOUSTON, TX – April 10, 2012.
49 former NASA scientists and astronauts sent a letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden last week admonishing the agency for it’s role in advocating a high degree of certainty that man-made CO2 is a major cause of climate change while neglecting empirical evidence that calls the theory into question.
The group, which includes seven Apollo astronauts and two former directors of NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston, are dismayed over the failure of NASA, and specifically the Goddard Institute For Space Studies (GISS), to make an objective assessment of all available scientific data on climate change. They charge that NASA is relying too heavily on complex climate models that have proven scientifically inadequate in predicting climate only one or two decades in advance.
H. Leighton Steward, chairman of the non-profit Plants Need CO2, noted that many of the former NASA scientists harbored doubts about the significance of the C02-climate change theory and have concerns over NASA’s advocacy on the issue. While making presentations in late 2011 to many of the signatories of the letter, Steward realized that the NASA scientists should make their concerns known to NASA and the GISS.
“These American heroes – the astronauts that took to space and the scientists and engineers that put them there – are simply stating their concern over NASA’s extreme advocacy for an unproven theory,” said Leighton Steward. “There’s a concern that if it turns out that CO2 is not a major cause of climate change, NASA will have put the reputation of NASA, NASA’s current and former employees, and even the very reputation of science itself at risk of public ridicule and distrust.”
Select excerpts from the letter: 
  • “The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.”
  • “We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated.”
  • “We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject.”
The full text of the letter:
March 28, 2012
The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
NASA Administrator
NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001
Dear Charlie,
We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.
The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.
As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.
For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.
Thank you for considering this request.
(Attached signatures)
CC: Mr. John Grunsfeld, Associate Administrator for Science
CC: Ass Mr. Chris Scolese, Director, Goddard Space Flight Center
Ref: Letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, dated 3-26-12, regarding a request for NASA to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that human produced CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on climate change.
/s/ Jack Barneburg, Jack – JSC, Space Shuttle Structures, Engineering Directorate, 34 years
/s/ Larry Bell – JSC, Mgr. Crew Systems Div., Engineering Directorate, 32 years
/s/ Dr. Donald Bogard – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 41 years
/s/ Jerry C. Bostick – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 23 years
/s/ Dr. Phillip K. Chapman – JSC, Scientist – astronaut, 5 years
/s/ Michael F. Collins, JSC, Chief, Flight Design and Dynamics Division, MOD, 41 years
/s/ Dr. Kenneth Cox – JSC, Chief Flight Dynamics Div., Engr. Directorate, 40 years
/s/ Walter Cunningham – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 7, 8 years
/s/ Dr. Donald M. Curry – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Leading Edge, Thermal Protection Sys., Engr. Dir., 44 years
/s/ Leroy Day – Hdq. Deputy Director, Space Shuttle Program, 19 years
/s/ Dr. Henry P. Decell, Jr. – JSC, Chief, Theory & Analysis Office, 5 years
/s/Charles F. Deiterich – JSC, Mgr., Flight Operations Integration, MOD, 30 years
/s/ Dr. Harold Doiron – JSC, Chairman, Shuttle Pogo Prevention Panel, 16 years
/s/ Charles Duke – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 16, 10 years
/s/ Anita Gale
/s/ Grace Germany – JSC, Program Analyst, 35 years
/s/ Ed Gibson – JSC, Astronaut Skylab 4, 14 years
/s/ Richard Gordon – JSC, Astronaut, Gemini Xi, Apollo 12, 9 years
/s/ Gerald C. Griffin – JSC, Apollo Flight Director, and Director of Johnson Space Center, 22 years
/s/ Thomas M. Grubbs – JSC, Chief, Aircraft Maintenance and Engineering Branch, 31 years
/s/ Thomas J. Harmon
/s/ David W. Heath – JSC, Reentry Specialist, MOD, 30 years
/s/ Miguel A. Hernandez, Jr. – JSC, Flight crew training and operations, 3 years
/s/ James R. Roundtree – JSC Branch Chief, 26 years
/s/ Enoch Jones – JSC, Mgr. SE&I, Shuttle Program Office, 26 years
/s/ Dr. Joseph Kerwin – JSC, Astronaut, Skylab 2, Director of Space and Life Sciences, 22 years
/s/ Jack Knight – JSC, Chief, Advanced Operations and Development Division, MOD, 40 years
/s/ Dr. Christopher C. Kraft – JSC, Apollo Flight Director and Director of Johnson Space Center, 24 years
/s/ Paul C. Kramer – JSC, Ass.t for Planning Aeroscience and Flight Mechanics Div., Egr. Dir., 34 years
/s/ Alex (Skip) Larsen
/s/ Dr. Lubert Leger – JSC, Ass’t. Chief Materials Division, Engr. Directorate, 30 years
/s/ Dr. Humbolt C. Mandell – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Program Control and Advance Programs, 40 years
/s/ Donald K. McCutchen – JSC, Project Engineer – Space Shuttle and ISS Program Offices, 33 years
/s/ Thomas L. (Tom) Moser – Hdq. Dep. Assoc. Admin. & Director, Space Station Program, 28 years
/s/ Dr. George Mueller – Hdq., Assoc. Adm., Office of Space Flight, 6 years
/s/ Tom Ohesorge
/s/ James Peacock – JSC, Apollo and Shuttle Program Office, 21 years
/s/ Richard McFarland – JSC, Mgr. Motion Simulators, 28 years
/s/ Joseph E. Rogers – JSC, Chief, Structures and Dynamics Branch, Engr. Directorate,40 years
/s/ Bernard J. Rosenbaum – JSC, Chief Engineer, Propulsion and Power Division, Engr. Dir., 48 years
/s/ Dr. Harrison (Jack) Schmitt – JSC, Astronaut Apollo 17, 10 years
/s/ Gerard C. Shows – JSC, Asst. Manager, Quality Assurance, 30 years
/s/ Kenneth Suit – JSC, Ass’t Mgr., Systems Integration, Space Shuttle, 37 years
/s/ Robert F. Thompson – JSC, Program Manager, Space Shuttle, 44 years/s/ Frank Van Renesselaer – Hdq., Mgr. Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, 15 years
/s/ Dr. James Visentine – JSC Materials Branch, Engineering Directorate, 30 years
/s/ Manfred (Dutch) von Ehrenfried – JSC, Flight Controller; Mercury, Gemini & Apollo, MOD, 10 years
/s/ George Weisskopf – JSC, Avionics Systems Division, Engineering Dir., 40 years
/s/ Al Worden – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 15, 9 years
/s/ Thomas (Tom) Wysmuller – JSC, Meteorologist, 5 years

Secret of China's people who live to old age. 15 mins

Abby Martin on Afghanistan.  The drugs are the real cause. 4 mins.
Access Express | 01/16/15
Please Google and read. 
Illuminati Cameron wants a huge downer on the Internet.  Read in above Access before it is too late.  He is a Fracker, a Fluoride lover and in love with GMO foods.  
This evening's clip is a corollary 
to the one broadcast this morning, 
captured by the TV channel, 
France 24, in which we see that 
the Charlie Hebdo "terrorist" either 
shot a blank at the cop, who was on 
the ground, allegedly wounded and 
defenseless on his back, to receive 
the bullet that was aimed at his head, 
at point blank range, to be coldly 
"finished off." 
There's what looks to me an outside 
possibility that a real bullet was shot; 
but that it missed and bounced off the 
sidewalk. However, due to the lack of 
any damage to the sidewalk, to say 
nothing of the lack of any damage to 
the cop's head, which would have 
exploded like a watermelon, from a 
7.32x09mm round shot at point blank 
range and the lack of any sign of blood
produced by the shot, at the time 
of the attack, per the footage, after 
which the "terrorist" went running back 
to the escape vehicle, it appears to me 
more likely that the "terrorist's" AK-47 
was loaded with blanks. 
(A magazine or more of blanks used in 
the Charlie Hebdo incident could raise 
questions about the status of the rest of 
this shooter's victims. But we'll leave 
that aside, for now).
In this Sky News broadcast, the presenter 
makes a Freudian Slip, when he says: "You 
can see the blood on the ground, which 
has been put there..." The reporter then 
corrects his story, "Because of the blood that 
was shed there yesterday."
I'd go with A) "Put there" because we didn't 
see any B) "Blood...shed there," during the 
shooting, wjhich we saw in this morning's video. 
Not a drop.
The intrepid reporter continues, "The spot 
where he fell, has already been marked by 
candles, by some flowers, which have been 
laid here. This area was largely cordoned of
f last night."
What? So, after a murder, the cops allow 
everyone to pass through the area where  
a fellow cop was murdered, in cold blood
allowing contamination of the crime scene?
My two cents say that when the cameras 
were gone, blood was ladled out upon the 
Parisian sidewalk, in order for the mainstream 
story to coagulate...
Video (2 mins): 
I appreciate the above may anger many of the readers of this Post however, I merely report what I have to report. After all I did with 9 / 11, 7 /9, MH 370 and many others, I have copied this from Forbiddenknowledge and as usual it is up to you to make up your own mind.
This is footage of the Charlie Hebdo 
shootings which has been restricted 
or taken down from a number of 
websites. As you will see, it contains 
no blood, gore or graphic violence.

It does, however punch a major hole 
in the official story. 3 mins
  • Arguments are provided against typical vaccine justifications that diseases like smallpox and polio were eradicated by vaccination
  • Historical data reveals that smallpox was eradicated through efforts like isolation, improved nutrition, hygiene, and sanitation
  • Incidence of polio was dramatically “reduced” because the disease was redefined, and serological testing was introduced—not because of success of the vaccine
Ellen Wood Montage.  5 mins. This remarkable lady keeps on keening on.  Good on yer Ellen.
A REAL EXPERTS OPINION. 2 mins  Best one of all.
The general public will rebel against this and cry conspiracy.  However whilst I deeply and sincerely sympathise and send condolences to the bereaving family's they have a right to know who really murdered their beloved ones.
In Post 165A I mentioned this story briefly 
The headline in the UK today…
A lack of exercise could be killing over 600,000 people in Europe every year, a 12-year study suggests. University of Cambridge researchers said about 676,000 deaths each year were down to inactivity, compared with 337,000 from carrying too much weight.
Extend the same results to North America where the infrastructure is mainly designed for cars and up to 2 million deaths throughout Europe and North America every year could be the direct result of not walking my recommended ‘fast 3-5 miles per day (4-8km)’. This puts it on a par with deaths from medical treatment.
To be Really Clear
The really interesting outcome was that walking was beneficial for people of any weight although obesity and inactivity often go hand in hand. Even more strange is that thin people have a higher risk of health problems if they are inactive. And obese people who exercise are in better health than those that do not.
The study, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, attempted to clarify the relative dangers of inactivity and obesity.
The Moral of the Story?
Nancy Sinatra sang, ‘These Boots are made for walking’, but it should have been ‘these legs are made for walking’. Failing to walk every day risks your health, your independence, your sanity and as this study shows, your very life. Strolling around shopping is not walking. Walking is long strides and steady breathing.
See the walking extract taken from my book here: (COURTESY Robert Redfern---'Good Health Naturally).

Positive outlook reduces bone loss and risk of osteoporosis

Post-menopausal women who are satisfied with their lives have higher bone density and are less likely to suffer from osteoporosis, a new study has found.

Women with this positive outlook suffered 52 per cent less bone density loss than others who were dissatisfied with their lives. Changes in attitude over the 10 years of the study also affected bone density levels. Women who became more depressed over the decade saw their bone density weaken by 85 per cent compared to those who maintained a positive outlook, researchers from the Kuopio Osteoporosis Risk Factor and Prevention Study discovered.

Earlier studies had found that depression has a negative impact on bone density and the likelihood of osteoporosis, and the researchers wanted to find out if the reverse was also true: that a positive outlook helps maintain bone density levels.
They tracked the mental well-being of 1,147 women, whose bone density levels had been measured in 1999, and asked them about their interest in life, their happiness and whether they were lonely, before carrying out fresh measurements in 2009.

(Source: Psychosomatic Medicine, 2014; 76 (9): 709) (Courtesy WDDTY)
Gray State.  Trailer. 3 mins.  Profound
OK on that sombre video above, let's hope decency and sanity prevail.
Until next. Be Well.  Geoff

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.