SUV's On Jupiter?
Are humans responsible for climate change on the outer reaches of the solar system, or is it the sun?

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Thursday, November 16, 2006

Kofi Annan today slammed global warming skeptics as being "out of step" and "out of time," but how will altering human activity halt climate change when the evidence clearly indicates that the sun itself and not SUV's is heating up the entire solar system?

"The U.N. chief lamented "a frightening lack of leadership" in fashioning next steps to reduce global emissions. "Let us start being more politically courageous," he urged the hundreds of delegates from some 180 member nations of the 1992 U.N. climate treaty," reports Forbes.

But how do we square the fact that almost every planet in our solar system is simultaneously undergoing temperature change and volatile weather patterns. Does this not suggest that global warming is a natural cycle as a result of the evolving nature of the sun? Can Al Gore fill me in on this one?

- Space.com: Global Warming on Pluto Puzzles Scientists
In what is largely a reversal of an August announcement, astronomers today said Pluto is undergoing global warming in its thin atmosphere even as it moves farther from the Sun on its long, odd-shaped orbit.

- Space.com: New Storm on Jupiter Hints at Climate Change
The latest images could provide evidence that Jupiter is in the midst of a global change that can modify temperatures by as much as 10 degrees Fahrenheit on different parts of the globe.

- Current Science & Technology Center: Global Warming on Mars?
A study of the ice caps on Mars may show that the red planet is experiencing a warming trend. If both Mars and Earth are experiencing global warming, then perhaps there is a larger phenomenon going on in the Solar System that is causing their global climates to change.

- United Press International: NASA looks at a monster storm on Saturn
NASA says its Cassini spacecraft has found a hurricane-like storm at Saturn's South Pole, nearly 5,000 miles across -- or two-thirds Earth's diameter.

- Science Agogo: Global Warming Detected on Triton
There may not be much industrial pollution on Neptune's largest moon, but things are hotting up nonetheless. "At least since 1989, Triton has been undergoing a period of global warming," confirms astronomer James Elliot, professor of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "Percentage-wise, it's a very large increase."

- Associated Press: Study says sun getting hotter
Solar radiation reaching the Earth is 0.036 percent warmer than it was in 1986, when the current solar cycle was beginning, a researcher reports in a study to be published Friday in the journal Science. The finding is based on an analysis of satellites that measure the temperature of sunlight.

- London Telegraph: The truth about global warming - it's the Sun that's to blame
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.

The simple fact is that throughout the ages the earth has swung wildly between a warm, wet, stable climate, to a cold, dry and windy one - long before the first fossil fuel was burned. The changes we are now witnessing are a walk in the park compared to the battering that our planet has taken in the past.

This is not a defense of the oil cartels or the Neo-Con wreckers, who would have every motivation to ignore global warming whether it is man-made or not.

Nor is it a blanket denial of the fact that the earth is getting very gradually hotter, but how do we reconcile global warming taking place at the farthest reaches of the solar system with the contention that it is caused by human activity? Have our exhaust fumes left earth's atmosphere and slipped through a black hole to Triton?

The assertion that global warming is man made is so oppressively enforced upon popular opinion, especially in Europe, that expressing a scintilla of doubt is akin to holocaust denial in some cases. Such is the insipid brainwashing that has taken place via television, newspapers and exalted talking heads - global warming skeptics are forced to wear the metaphoric yellow star and only discuss their doubts in hushed tones and conciliatory frameworks, or be cat-called, harangued and jeered by an army of do-gooders who righteously believe they are rescuing mother earth by recycling a wine bottle or putting their paper in a separate trash can.

Fearmongering about an imminent climate doomsday also hogs news coverage and important environmental issues like GM food, mad scientist chimera cloning and the usurpation and abuse of corporations like Monsanto flies under the radar.

Global warming is cited as an excuse to meter out further control and surveillance over our daily lives, RFID chips on our trash cans, GPS satellite tacking and taxation by the mile, as well as a global tax at the gas pump.

The extremist wing of the environmentalist movement, characterized by people like Dr. Erik Pianka, advocate the mass culling of humanity via plagues and state sanctioned bio-terrorism, in order to "save" the earth from the disease of humanity. Nazi-like genocial population control measures and the environmental establishment have always held a close alliance.

The orthodox organized religion of global warming and its disastrous consequences for our freedom of speech, freedom of mobility and our right to remain outside of the system, needs to be attacked on the foundational basis that the phenomenon is solar-system wide and it is clearly caused by the natural evolution of the sun and not human activity.

Hmmm, I think global warming is very human related. The author of this article writes that "oil cartels or the Neo-Con wreckers, who would have every motivation to ignore global warming whether it is man-made or not", TPTB also had every motivation to ignore conspiracy theories, until they realised that they could deftly manage the conspiracists. TPTB have every motivation to get involved with the idea of global warming. These energy monopolies own the majority of renewable and alternative energy patents, and fear mongering is their forte and it's extremely profitable for them.

When any energy is emitted from Point A, the energy disperses evenly in 3 dimensions the further it travels from the Point A. I have forgotten the exact equation, but energy dissipates inversely square, so for every distance doubled the energy is a quarter of what is was. So if you imagine the distance between the sun and the earth, you can imagine the amount of energy that would have been needed at the source. So for the earth to gain an average of half a degree would require a phenomenal temperature increase of the sun's corona, which hasn't happened. To conclude, it's not the sun's fault. It has been doing what it does for an eternity, why all of a sudden is it warming up? It is our way of life that we need to look at

It's time we start to point the finger of blame at ourselves. (end rant)

This is part of a natural cycle, where the earth gets hotter and colder in turn. It has happened for millenia. Scientists have been measuring the temperature of sunlight, and finding it to be becomming hotter recently. It is also possible that this in turn stimulates a release of energy from a planet's core - I know of no-one who has categorically stated that the entirety of the energy for global warming had to come from the sun.

However, the current cycle of sunspot flares, which started in 1987, if I recall correctly, could well have more bearing on the issue than I currently give them credit for. Also, bearing in mind that stars do become hotter towards the end of their lifetime, it is certainly not an unnatural phenomena for a star's temperature to change. They don't simply remain at the same temperature throughout their lifetimes - otherwise why should the earth have had ice age (as well as far hotter) temperatures in its past - when human technology clearly was not the issue?

In the words of ardent globalist Mikhail Gorbachev, The threat of environmental crisis will be the "international disaster key" that unlocks the New World Order.

Bearing in mind that the oil companies are owned by the global elite, who fix oil prices and profits, that free / green energy inventions have been patented and buried by the US government (and frequently the inventors themselves in days gone by), I think the source of the problem is pretty self-explanatory.

Humans are not creating greenhouse gasses on the other solar system planets, yet they also have global warming. However, this is a massive opportunity for governments to slap increasing amounts of "environmental taxes" on us, chip our dustbins, then us, justifying that "we need to do this to save the planet!" - which they really just want as their own playground. They have to justify eradicating 80% of the world's population, if these plans are to come to fruition, and making people believe that they are simply a nasty scourge on the planet will, no doubt, induce many of the lemmings to throw themselves off the cliff, figuratively speaking.

At the same time, please note that the governments themselves have no intention of quitting their jet-set lifestyle, HAARP weather modification technology, or nuclear explosions testing which together contribute the greatest extent of human input.

I vividly remember part of the school curriculum, back in 1978 (before the term global warming had ever been coined, let alone worried about) being "environmentalism".

So, which came first - the chicken or the egg?

What sort of evidence do we have to prove this? Do we have meticulous records of our climate changes over countless millenia? Did our ancestors have the technology to measure the temperature of sunlight? Because we dont Things are getting hotter, but this is what greenhouses do, dont they??

In regards to TPTB, I dont dispute that they are on the bandwagon for "environmentalism", as this serves their interests for them to be able implement absolute control. They certainly didn't start the idea of environmentalism though. There's no proof of this.

It is my belief that most reasonable people would accept the fact that so much of the UK landscape was shaped by glaciation stands as irrefutable evidence that our climate was significantly colder in the past - do you disagree? The very fact that they had glaciers then, and do not now, is as much proof of climate change over several millenia as is necessary.

Demanding precise measurements of sunlight temperatures from before the time that such instruments and satellites were available is not a valid or useful argument when clear evidence exists from other means. Please re-read the original article, as you will find that it does give evidence that temperature of sunlight HAS increased over the past couple of decades. I am happy to debate on facts, but spurious claims and specious arguments are a waste of both our time.

Your assertion that "it's not the sun's fault" flies in the face of the new research published in the London Telegraph (link in original article) which states that "the Earth is getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1,000 years". Since you disagree with these new findings, are you willing to provide proof and links to peer-reviewed research that backs up your statement, or else was this simply an expression of belief, rather than fact?

If this is indeed the case, it would be useful to discriminate between your belief / opinion and solid evidence by beginning the sentence with "I believe", or "it is my opinion" for the sake of clarity Also, do you have any evidence for your claim that "They (TPTB) certainly didn't start the idea of environmentalism though. There's no proof of this"?

Lack of knowledge of any evidence does not, in itself, stand as evidence to the contrary, however certain you may feel otherwise.

If you can back up your claims with proof of:
1) Who did begin the environmental crusade - AND
2) Who funded them,
3) Plus background information on which groups they belonged to, circles they moved in, and general motivations etc (if such data exists)

I would then be happy to check this evidence for myself & accept it if correct.

Heh, that should keep you out of mischief for a while

Sorry to be pedantic, but one can never measure the temperature of sunlight (Btw, the author is not a scientist of any kind). You can measure the heat difference of a substance that a light wave heats up, but that is all.

Quotes such as "Solar radiation reaching the Earth is 0.036 percent warmer than it was in 1986" from Associated Press: Study says sun getting hotter and ""The Sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures... Average global temperatures have increased by about 0.2 deg Celsius over the past 20 years ..." from London Telegraph: The truth about global warming - it's the Sun that's to blame implies they had technology to measure the temperature of a light wave, not the after effects! The statistics are not in dispute here. How can they come to their conclusions with their non existant "Star Trek" Light thermometer?! The only proof they have is the earth is getting warmer... The conclusions are at best the personal beliefs and opinions of whoever is funding these studies

As we have extremes at both poles and on the equator, what's to say tectonic shift is a key player in this debate? Britain, for all we know, might have been situated in the same place as the artic thousands of years ago. There is also evidence that the antartic once experienced tropical weather. Does this mean that the south pole was once free of ice? As we know of the cycle of procession and tectonic shift, the antartic could have been situated in the region of the south american continent. So when you say we have clear evidence of glaciers, doesnt necessarily mean that the earth once experienced an ice age. Glaciers exist today, without no ice age... So clear evidence of glacial erosion, but not of an ice age.

So once again, the burden of proof lies with the author of these articles on how one actually measure the temperature (and the rise) of electromagnetic radiation, and how our ancestors did 1000 thousand years ago (as they claim here in the first paragraph...). Evidence of the earth warming up does not conclude that the sun is heating up. there is no other evidence in those articles to reach such conclusions. Think about it, why would main media outlets report such studies? By saying global warming is a specious argument, you are agreeing with the energy cartels propaganda.

I'll explain why... TPTB control everything. What gives them the majority of the power? Predominantly it's banking and energy markets. You think that they're going to completely balls up their plans for geo-political stability with energy markets because of their so called drive for environmentalism? I think not.

Ok, since I never claimed a conspiracy on the conception of environmentalism, i dont think the burden of proof lies with me. If you cry foul on environmentalism then the burden of proof lies with you. I prefer the concept of being innocent before being proved guilty of a crime, not the other way around I havent seen any evidence to say the environmentalists were financed and started by the NWO, although I believe that have infiltrated the environmental movement

You can't give a straight answer, you lose

So movements are considered guilty before being proved innocent then???

If there was so much truth in it, you would have easily been able to answer the questions and properly account for that, surely?

If you cannot, then this must be an admission that your sympathies are evidently based on sentimentalism and not upon fact; there has been good evidence presented here, which you choosing not to refute by supplying solid counter-evidence and research.

Everyone has opinions; they should not stand in the way of investigating facts (please read my signature below).

Mairi x

Then we shall agree to disagree

Science suggests that the whole earth was covered with ice:

Earth Was Completely Covered by Ice, Geologists Say

Was the Earth Once Covered with Ice?

Paleoclimatology: The Ice Core Record

A slightly different opinion:
Earth's surface may not have been covered in ice
Please note that this is STILL evidence for an Ice Age and colder temperatures globally.

Since you won't research this properly, I claim this as one point to me

The problem with these types of debates is that they're based on a false assumption, and are therefore pointless. Why do so many people insist that we are separate to nature? We ARE nature! If the environment is going downhill, it's because WE are. If there is global warming, WE cause it. If there is an ice age, we will be the cause of that too. Anything that happens or doesn't happen is in direct correlation to how we are.

Contrary to what the environmentalist movement suggests, there is nothing we can physically do about it. It's all in the consciousness. If we really want a nice and peaceful planet to live on, the only way we're going to get that is if WE become nice and peaceful. Look around you - are we? No, we're the exact opposite, and hey, there you go.

This is all based on the false presumption that the world has been created, that it is an artifact. We consider ourselves separate from nature instead of realizing that we are part of it. Separation in any way, shape or form is a man-made concept, it simply does not exist. Until we realize this, these things will continue on unhampered. Continue struggling and fighting, continue to see issues in isolation and perpetuate your worst fears - guaranteed for life, and it's free!

Although I largely agree with what you're saying Osgy, I have to note that your statement of fact that "the false presumption that the world has been created" is in itself an assumption - it has neither been proven nor disproven, although the largest body of evidence these days goes very much against evolution.

I'm also curious as to how humans cause global warming on other planets, and how far out into the universe do you imagine this would theoretically extend?