Does the Gov’t Seek to keep the public Blind, Deaf, and Dumb?

COMMENT: I watched the Forecaster after ordering the DVD from Amazon. Aside from the fact that it brought tears to my and my wife’s eyes, your forecasts on this year being exceptionally cold, your forecast of Brexit, Trump, the Dow and countless other things, it is not hard to see why the government wanted your model. My heating bills have almost doubled this year. How can your computer forecast such a trend years in advance when they can’t do more than 10 days?

Quite frankly, they do not want a system that can do all these things public. That’s why the New York Times or Bloomberg will never even mention what you have accomplished. It is all about keeping the public blind, deaf, and dumb.

God be with you and your family


ANSWER: I do have to admit many people have expressed that view. It has been unbelievably cold. Even airports in Houston and Atlanta have been impacted by snow they do not have equipment for. If people really did listen, it would change politics. You can’t keep up the same nonsense of simply voting for someone and they will change everything. It just cannot be done. They always blame the rich and seek to raise taxes, but it miraculously never manages to lower anyone else’s taxes. It always just lines the pockets of the politicians.

Is Climate Change a Tool to Eliminate Democracy?

COMMENT: Your view on denying climate change is supporting the capitalist model. This shows you have no credibility.


REPLY: Climate is changing and it is part of the normal cycle. You are actually correct that I support capitalism and freedom and am against authoritarianism and totalitarian systems. What you fail to understand is that climate change is an agenda to eliminate your freedom. The entire argument is to support a move toward an authoritarian state. You better wake up. This not truly about the climate, it is all about controlling society, eliminating democracy, and changing the entire economic model that changes society.

It’s a well-kept secret, but 95 per cent of the climate models we are told prove the link between human CO2 emissions and catastrophic global warming have been found, after nearly two decades of temperature stasis, to be in error. It’s not surprising.

We have been subjected to extravagance from climate catastrophists for close to 50 years.

In January 1970, Life magazine, based on “solid scientific evidence”, claimed that by 1985 air pollution would reduce the sunlight reaching the Earth by half. In fact, across that period sunlight fell by between 3 per cent and 5 per cent. In a 1971 speech, Paul Ehrlich said: “If I were a gambler I would take even money that ­England will not exist in the year 2000.”

Fast forward to March 2000 and David Viner, senior research scientist at the Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia, told The Independent, “Snowfalls are now a thing of the past.” In December 2010, the Mail Online reported, “Coldest December since records began as temperatures plummet to minus 10C bringing travel chaos across Britain”.

We’ve had our own busted predictions. Perhaps the most preposterous was climate alarmist Tim Flannery’s 2005 observation: “If the computer records are right, these drought conditions will become permanent in eastern Australia.” Subsequent rainfall and severe flooding have shown the records or his analysis are wrong. We’ve swallowed dud prediction after dud prediction. What’s more, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which we were instructed was the gold standard on global warming, has been exposed repeatedly for ­mis­rep­resentation and shoddy methods.

Weather bureaus appear to have “homogenised” data to suit narratives. NASA’s claim that 2014 was the warmest year on record was revised, after challenge, to only 38 per cent probability. Extreme weather events, once blamed on global warming, no longer are, as their frequency and intensity decline.

Why then, with such little evidence, does the UN insist the world spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year on futile climate change policies? Perhaps Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UN’s Framework on Climate Change has the answer?

In Brussels last February she said, “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years since the Industrial Revolution.”

In other words, the real agenda is concentrated political authority. Global warming is the hook.

Figueres is on record saying democracy is a poor political system for fighting global warming. Communist China, she says, is the best model. This is not about facts or logic. It’s about a new world order under the control of the UN. It is opposed to capitalism and freedom and has made environmental catastrophism a household topic to achieve its objective.

Figueres says that, unlike the Industrial Revolution, “This is a centralised transformation that is taking place.” She sees the US partisan divide on global warming as “very detrimental”. Of course. In her authoritarian world there will be no room for debate or ­disagreement.

Make no mistake, climate change is a must-win battlefield for authoritarians and fellow travellers. As Timothy Wirth, president of the UN Foundation, says: “Even if the ­(climate change) theory is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”

Having gained so much ground, eco-catastrophists won’t let up. After all, they have captured the UN and are extremely well funded. They have a hugely powerful ally in the White House. They have successfully enlisted compliant academics and an obedient and gullible mainstream media (the ABC and Fairfax in Australia) to push the scriptures regardless of evidence.

They will continue to present the climate change movement as an independent, spontaneous consensus of concerned scientists, politicians and citizens who believe human activity is “extremely likely” to be the dominant cause of global warming. (“Extremely likely” is a scientific term?)

And they will keep mobilising public opinion using fear and appeals to morality. UN support will be assured through promised wealth redistribution from the West, even though its anti-growth policy prescriptions will needlessly prolong poverty, hunger, sickness and illiteracy for the world’s poorest.

Figueres said at a climate ­summit in Melbourne recently that she was “truly counting on Australia’s leadership” to ensure most coal stayed in the ground.

Hopefully, like India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Tony Abbott isn’t listening. India knows the importance of cheap energy and is set to overtake China as the world’s leading importer of coal. Even Germany is about to commission the most coal-fired power stations in 20 years.

There is a real chance Figueres and those who share her centralised power ambitions will succeed. As the UN’s December climate change conference in Paris approaches, Australia will be pressed to sign even more futile job-destroying climate change treaties.

Resisting will be politically difficult. But resist we should. We are already paying an unnecessary social and economic price for empty gestures. Enough is enough

The Blizzard of 1899

A lot of people are claiming that the extreme cold is part of Global Warming and human-induced climate change. Well, all we need do is look to the Blizzard of 1899. That is the record cold where it snowed also all the way into the capital of Florida, Tallahassee. It was snowing also in Tallahassee this season.

February 1899 was the coldest winter on record all the way up to 2017. All of these claims are just nonsense that this extreme cold is created by Global Warming or climat6e change caused by humans. We have been there and done that before prior to the invention of automobiles and massive expansion of the Industrial Revolution. Let’s see if we break the record come February. It is even 72 degrees in Abu Dhabi.

Greenhouses Gases Are a Product of Civilization for Thousands of Years

QUESTION: Do you believe we are going into an ice age?

ANSWER: No. At best we return to a mini-ice age. There are those who argue that a decline in solar activity, which they cannot deny, will not be enough to offset the human created Global Warming. There are so many things wrong with the Global Warming theories it is even hard to figure out where to begin. Long before the Industrial Revolution, the assumption was that our planet’s atmosphere was still untainted by human-made pollutants for it was somehow pristine. That assumption is dead wrong, but nobody wants to challenge it because if there were periods of human air pollution before, then perhaps their theory that this will destroy the planet and we will all burn to a crisp, as Christine Legard said, is nonsense.

All one has to do is read the contemporary accounts from ancient Rome. The residents of ancient Rome suffered from pollution that was primarily caused by burning wood to cook and stay warm rather than fossil fuels. There was a great smoke cloud they wrote about called gravioris caeli (“heavy heaven”). Others referred to it as infamis aer (“infamous air”). Complaints about this infamis aer and its effects can be found in classical writings. “No sooner had I left behind the oppressive atmosphere of the city [Rome] and that reek of smoking cookers which pour out, along with clouds of ashes, all the poisonous fumes they’ve accumulated in their interiors whenever they’re started up, than I noticed the change in my condition,” wrote in 61AD Seneca the Younger (c. 4 BC – 65AD) the philosopher, statesman, and adviser to Emperor Nero who ordered him to commit suicide.

Moreover, there were lawsuits over air pollution in ancient Rome. The Roman courts heard civil claims over smoke pollution. The Roman jurist Titus Aristo, who was also a member of the council of Emperor Trajan. He was an author of annotations to the works of some jurists of the Augustan period, declared that a cheese shop could not discharge smoke into the buildings above it. Pollution had become so bad that the East Empire in Constantinople even enacted the first known Clean Air Act. In 535AD, then Emperor Justinian proclaimed the importance of clean air as a birthright. “By the law of nature these things are common to mankind—the air, running water, the sea.”

Further evidence that refutes the Global Warming crowd is the discovery of bubbles trapped in Greenland’s ice which revealed that humans began emitting greenhouse gases at least 2,000 years ago. Célia Sapart of Utrecht University in the Netherlands led a team of scientists from Europe and the United States in a study that charted the chemi­cal signature of methane gas in ice samples spanning 2,100 years. The methane gas naturally occurs in the atmosphere but it is considered a greenhouse gas emitted landfills, large-scale cattle ranching, natural gas pipeline leaks and land-clearing fires.

Célia Sapart employed a 1,600-foot-long ice core sample extracted from Greenland’s 1.5-mile-thick ice sheet representing 115,000 years of history. The team chemically analyzed the methane in microscopic air bubbles trapped in each ice layer. They sought to prove global warming is a modern consequence of human activity. They assumed that they would be able to prove that the warmer climate since the 1700s was caused by an increase in methane gas levels.

The found that indeed methane concentrations went up. What they proved was the fact that the rise in methane gas did not correlate with warm periods. What they ended up proving was the simple fact that the theory of greenhouse methane gas was NOT the cause and that the rise in temperature must have been caused by something else. The focused then change and the “something else” was still attributed to human activity, of course, but it was then said to have been due to metallurgy and large-scale agriculture starting around 100 BC.

Indeed, the ancient Romans did keep domesticated livestock and their passing of gas in methane gas, a byproduct of digestion and in China the rice fields include a methane-producing bacteria. So methane gas is a natural part of the planet and the assumption that we should all commit suicide to save the planet is really just nuts. So the team turned to blacksmiths who produced methane gas when they burned wood to produce metal tools or weapons. They noted in the ice core samples that as civilizations collapsed following the fall of the Roman Empire, then there was a moderate decline in methane gas emissions.They concluded that between 100 BC and AD 1600, methane emissions rose by nearly 31 million tons per year. They argue that the United States alone generates some 36 million tons of methane per year.

Célia Sapart had to admit that such emissions of methane gas were by no means enough to alter the climate. The conclusion was still that humans were altering the atmosphere on a global scale in ancient times as well. The study has proved that the assumption that it has only been only of a modern invention that human activity has produced methane gas and the world was pristine before 1800 is just a fantasy. Ice Ages and warming periods have existed well before human civilization where they began to burn wood to stay warm. All they were able to accomplish was prove that greenhouse gases have been produced for thousands of years. If anything, this study shows that the end is not necessarily near based upon greenhouse gas.

Just How Fast Can Things Freeze?

When the weather goes against Global Warming, they flip it into volatility and claim cold is now the byproduct of Global Warming. Al Gore’s environmental group, Penn State University climate scientist Michael Mann wrote, “the unusual weather we’re seeing this winter is in no way evidence against climate change,” it’s “an example of precisely the sort of extreme winter weather we expect because of climate change.”

They offer no evidence that human have caused climate change, just constant opinion. Only they can possibly be right and dismiss any evidence that points to such rapid declines pre-1850. The frozen woolly mammoths discovered in Russia completely frozen and intact with plants still in their stomachs have long made many ponder just how fast the planet can freeze.

When woolly mammoths began to be discovered intact and frozen in Siberia back in 1772, this changed science forever. The sudden bitter cold took place long before humans were around driving cars. As always, such evidence is always ignored. This is the real inconvenient truth they cannot explain so it is best just to pretend it does not exist.

Some people have written in asking will Toronto or Chicago suddenly emerge under a sheet of ice without notice? The evidence from Siberia suggests that yes it can happen in the blink of an eye. However, there is no recorded history which we could put into the computer to answer that question in a precise manner.

This is the known record so far. This is very approximate and it is plotted in terms of millions of years. We really cannot make an accurate forecast that Chicago or Toronto would suddenly find itself under a sheet of ice in days, weeks, months, or years. What is certain overall is the trend. We are headed toward a bitterly cold period ahead. Does that mean we will see glaciers down into Spain or Texas? That may very well be the case, but we are also looking at a time frame measured in millions of years, which is not relevant to our immediate lifespan.

Taking this data and assuming 450 million years ago was a good date target, there is a 72-million-year cycle the computer has determined from this data set. Therefore, it would appear that we are headed toward the biggest glacial period in the history of the planet. However, we are probably looking at that in about 30 million years. Nevertheless, it will get colder in our lifespan and this initial bout with getting colder should be moving into 2028. You will still need heating pads and warm clothes if the power grids hold up.

The biggest problem with this cold is the fact that the environmentalists have stopped coal-generated power and they are not so fond of nuclear. Solar panels work if not covered in snow and wind turbine will freeze in place. That leaves wood and coal burning stoves. This winter in New England, found power companies struggling to provide power to meet the demands. Ironically, people like Al Gore and Michael Mann may end up responsible for killing more people than any war. Yes you can die from too much heat, but you can also die from too much cold

Underwater Volcanoes Contribute to Warming Deep Water


QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; I read you Maya Report and found it fascinating how volcanic eruptions in the ocean are polarized to where the North Pole is at that time. Now we have people trying to claim that the heat from global warming is being hidden stored deep in the oceans. It seems once more these people ignore the fact that there are underwater volcanoes erupting more so now than before. Is that a true statement?


ANSWER: Oh yes, that is correct. There have been attempts to measure the heat generated from underwater volcanic eruptions. They attempted that off the East Pacific Rise, which is a point in the ocean floor where continents move apart. This is where magma contained in the Earth’s core to rise to the surface and spew from underwater volcanoes. This data was part of what was supplied to me to run through our model to determine the cyclical nature of how the poles flip. The volcanic activity underwater is rising and no doubt has an impact on the temperature. There have been attempts to linked volcanism to tiny shifts in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, as well, that occur every 100,000 years. These shifts may trigger ice ages and warm periods, both of which affect global sea levels. That, in turn, would increase or suppress volcanic activity it is believed.

Nevertheless, the Global Warming crowd claims the oceans are getting warmer down deep and that must be from mankind. Once more, they take the results and fit it to a predetermined conclusion.

Dormant/Extinct Volcano Erupts for First Time in Recorded History

Another dormant volcano has suddenly awakened erupting in a rather spectacular fashion, spewing lava for the first time in known history, It sent an ash cloud 2.1 kilometers into the sky. This ancient volcano on Kadovar Island, which is northeast of Papua New Guinea, has been dormant throughout hu8man history until January 5th, 2018.  It began to erupt at around noon, local time. The volcanic island is about 24 kilometers from the northern coast of mainland Papua New Guinea. Our model is also showing that there will be a rise in volcanic activity as we move into 2024. We previously warned: “If we see a series of volcanic eruptions in the VEI 6 category or greater within 2018, expect to see a very sharp turn down in temperature and Global Cooling will take on rapid change going into 2024.” It is truly fascinating how this correlates to the change in the energy output of the sun

Snow in the Sahara Desert – 3rd Time in 37 years

Last year, the snow appeared in Spain wiping out the crops and causing rationing of vegetables. This year the snow went down even further and crossed into Algeria covering the desert. So while the Global Warming people are desperate to explain weather as caused by humans, we are ignoring the cycle of the sun which has caused ice ages and warming periods long before 1850. As the Dail Mail has reported, that up to 16 inches of snow has fallen on the Sahara desert. This is the third time in 37 years (8.6 x 4.3) that Algeria has even seen snow cover the desert. This is perfectly aligned with the 8.6-year cycle for the region.

It appears to be right on schedule since Socrates is pointing to a rise in food prices by the time we move into the peak of the next Economic Confidence Model 8.6-year wave – 2024.35. The satellite images from NASA show what took place. This is not just a small storm. Europe has been hit with the cold stretching down to the extremes where they have relied upon food during the winter season.

As we move into these last two wave formations, we will also have climate change on top of sovereign debt and pension crisis. It is reaching the point that whatever can go wrong, seems to be lining up.

Extreme Volatility in Weather – Part of Climate Change?

QUESTION: It is crazy hot here in Sydney the exact opposite of the extreme cold in the north. Is there an explanation at all for this?

ANSWER:  Most people do not realize that the climate is actually “polar opposites.” Both the Arctic (North Pole) and the Antarctic (South Pole) are cold because they don’t get any direct sunlight.  However, though the North Pole and the South Pole are “polar opposites,” they both get the same amount of sunlight but there is a major difference. The South Pole is a much colder than the North Pole and this also contributes to the difference in climate experience around the globe.

The Arctic is ocean surrounded by land whereas the Antarctic in the South is in fact land surrounded by ocean. Consequently, the ocean under the Arctic ice is cold, yet the water is still warmer than the ice! So the ocean warms the air which it cannot do in the South. Antarctica is dry despite the ice. Under the ice and snow, you find land with mountain ranges, not ocean. As with any mountain range, the higher you go, the colder it gets. The actual average elevation of Antarctica is about 7,500 feet (2.3 km).

The extreme heat in Australian, reached 47c (116f), is more akin to the Middle East in summer. I went trekking through the valley of the Kings in Egypt when it was 50c (122f) and I was the only one out and about while everyone stayed in the hotel. As the energy output of the sun collapses, we will witness growing extremes in different regions. The last time it was this hot in Sydney goes back to the 1930s during the Dust Bowl people in the USA. The cycle in extremes appears to be 86 years so this is on target. Australia is dry and ripe for wildfires the same as we see in California. This will contribute to the decline in food supply globally.

Climate Change – As if it was Supposed to Change

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; Your computer has proven it can forecast markets, economies, the rise and fall of governments, war, and now even weather well in advance of anyone else. Is this bitter cold just a taste of what is to come? If so, I definitely think it is time to follow you south before you can’t sell a house up here when interest rates also start to rise. Working in a bank, I know all too well as soon as there is any trouble, the lending stops. I suppose that is what you are warning about with your real estate forecasts as well.


ANSWER: Unfortunately, this is the beginning of the decline. It will get worse. We are looking at a progressive period of colder weather for the first 13 years following 2015. There should be some oscillation and if there are any warm winters compared to this one, this will be an extension of the decline at least into 2032 with the more likely target off into 2045-2047. By the time this is finished, you will be willing to taxes to get global warming. The sad part of this whole mess is that the Global Warming crowd, while they are rolling around in their bed of cash rejoicing how much they made on this scam, they have led many people to their death by distracting people from the real fury of nature.

Extreme cold has reached from New England to the Midwest and down to the Carolinas, with temperatures dropping below zero. It has been in the 40s here at night in the Tampa region and it snowed a little in Tallahassee. The fatalities associated with the harsh conditions will continue to rise from drivers sliding off an icy road to the rise in disease. This will be a very dangerous rise in economic declines as well as temperature plummet during the winters ahead. It is so cold, any kind of exposed skin can freeze in a couple of minutes.” It was so cold, the attendance for New York City’s Times Square on New Year’s Eve was sharply lower.

I have written about this in the Mayan Report which I have called the clash between catastrophe and uniformity. There are simply people who want to believe that everything is uniform and tomorrow will be the same as today. Then there is the group of scientists who believe in cycles and understand that there is a natural rhythm to everything. In 1832, Professor Albrecht Reinhard Bernhardi (1797–1849) argued that the North Polar ice cap had extended into the plains of Germany. To support this theory, he pointed to the existence of huge boulders that have become known as “erratics” he suggested were pushed by the advancing ice. This was a shocking theory for it was certainly a nonlinear view of natural history. Bernhardi was thinking out of the box. The theory of climate change began to take shape. It had all began with the discovery of in 1772 near Vilui, Siberia of an intact frozen woolly rhinoceros followed by the more famous discovery of a frozen mammoth in 1787. You may be shocked, but these discoveries of frozen animals with grass still in their stomach, set in motion these two schools of thought of catastrophe and uniformity since the evidence implied you could be eating lunch and suddenly find yourself frozen to be discovered by posterity. It was this discovery that sparked the investigation into cycles which led to Haley’s Comet, the realization it was the same comet on a cycle, to Charles Darwin’s (1809-1882) Theory of Evolution, which was also inspired by climate change that led to the survival of the fittest proposition. (see Mayan Report).