Difference Between Propaganda and Reality

Politicians Haven’t Listened … Merkel Climate Advisor Blasts Global Inaction … Politicians need to get their act together on climate change, says Chancellor Angela Merkel‘s leading climate advisor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber just days before the global warming conference in Qatar. The World Bank agrees, releasing a report on Monday highlighting the serious consequences that await should global temperatures continue rising unchecked. – Der Spiegel

Dominant Social Theme: Climate change is a terrible thing.

Free-Market Analysis: First it was called “global warming” and now “climate change.” But no matter what it is called, it is still a power elite dominant social theme. The idea is that humans are responsible for a great upswelling of heat and humidity around the world.
The world may be getting warmer, or maybe not. But the meme rolls on. A subdominant theme is simply that humans are a curse upon the world and that their destructive tendencies must be controlled.

The people doing the controlling, of course, will be the self-appointed elites that apparently run the banking system and seek to create a formal world government. They use fear-based dominant social themes – promotions – to frighten people into adopting globalist solutions to phony scarcity problems.

Global warming – climate change – is a foundational meme. It allows the controlling elites to recreate society based on scarcity rather than plenty. It provides a rationale for the total reorganization of society in a manner that is ever more conducive to societal control.

People will have to monitor their very exhalations and ensure that they do not eat too much lest they leave an overly large “footprint” on the Earth. In order to ensure that people are adequately modest in their lifestyle and habits, more and more laws will have to be enacted.

The beauty of global warming from a power elite standpoint is that it is truly a global problem demanding global solutions. Thus, the UN can be brought to bear and its globalist mandate extended. Here’s some more from the article:

As representatives from almost 200 countries prepare to meet next week in Doha, Qatar to reach agreement on measures to slow global warming, climate scientists are sounding the alarm for more aggressive action. Climate change must become a priority they say.
Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, a leading German climate scientist and the government’s chief advisor on climate-related issues, warns that the goal of keeping global warming below two degrees Celsius by 2100 will only be possible with a massive rethinking of priorities. 

“We’re currently on a course to see a 3.5 to 4 degree (6.3 to 7.2 degree Fahrenheit) change by the end of the century,” Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), told SPIEGEL. “We’ve stressed time and again, that we need nothing less than a new industrial revolution, but many politicians haven’t listened. They’ve just sat back.”

Schellnhuber says that the European Union could easily achieve a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent by 2020 relative to 1990, instead of the 20 percent it has committed to. Schellnhuber asked Chancellor Angela Merkel to form a “coalition of the willing.” But unfortunately, he said, climate change is “not the highest priority” for Germany’s leader.

Schellnhuber’s comments in SPIEGEL came as a report he compiled with the World Bank, entitled “Turn Down the Heat: Why a 4°C Warmer World Must be Avoided,” was released on Monday. Timed to coincide with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) meeting in Qatar, the study focuses on the consequences of a global four-degree temperature increase by the end of the century. The report notes that food shortages, massive water scarcity, rising sea levels, cyclones, drought and an irreversible decrease in biodiversity would result.

We can see from all this that the European political machinery (the world’s political machinery, in fact) continues to provide extensive support for global warming … climate change. The reality of global warming is far from affirmed but the sociopolitical consensus grinds on.

Of course, there is this, posted back in July by Newsbusters.org:

“New Study Thoroughly Debunks Global Warming, Will Media Notice?”

A new study published in the journal Nature Sunday completely debunks all previous claims that temperatures in recent decades are in any way historic demonstrating instead that things were much hotter on this planet during Roman times:

The website of Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz published a … reader-friendly explanation of the study Monday:

Professor Dr. Jan Esper’s group at the Institute of Geography at JGU used tree-ring density measurements from sub-fossil pine trees originating from Finnish Lapland to produce a reconstruction reaching back to 138 BC. In so doing, the researchers have been able for the first time to precisely demonstrate that the long-term trend over the past two millennia has been towards climatic cooling. 

“We found that previous estimates of historical temperatures during the Roman era and the Middle Ages were too low,” says Esper. “Such findings are also significant with regard to climate policy, as they will influence the way today’s climate changes are seen in context of historical warm periods.” [...]

There are many other reports like this but they are not taken into consideration. The ongoing pursuit of solutions to a likely nonexistent problem is symptomatic of a power elite theme.

These themes and sub-themes are launched on the world as promotions and thus “reality” is not to be recognized. It is a signature of propaganda – and what we call directed history, as well.

Conclusion: When we see a “problem” acted upon at the highest levels, even when there is significant question as to its veracity, the chances are we’re witnessing political support of a promotion, not government action designed to address a legitimate problem.
Help Us Transmit This Story

2012-11-21 06:43:15

Source: http://weeklyintercept.blogspot.com/2012/11/difference-between-propaganda-and.html