Posted originally on Mar 27, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
Did we get enough of them to save the planet?
I am not kidding. There are now Climate Zealots who are eager to bring about World War III as the means to save the planet by eliminating 50%+ of the world population. This is why all our world leaders are promoting war, and the NEOCONS love it.
In 2020, messages including “The Earth has a deadline” began to appear on the display. Then, numbers 7:103:15:40:07 showed up, representing the years, days, hours, minutes, and seconds until that deadline. On September 17, the clock began counting down from seven years, 103 days, 15 hours, 40 minutes, and seven seconds, displayed in red.
Ironically, they may be correct in proposing that in 2027, the world will end geopolitically, but not for climate reasons. They realize there is NO WAY we can abandon fossil fuels and replace them with wind and solar. That is just impossible. To make the power grid and electric cars feasible, you must reduce the world population by 50% while maintainer the power grid as it is today. Our computer has forecast that the peak of World War III is most likely in the 2026/2027 time period.
This is NOT my opinion. I stood up at our World Economic Conference in 2011 and showed that the War Cycle would turn up in 2014, and our computer even projected Ukraine would be the place. I even posted that Ukraine would be the place to watch for the start of World War III back in 2013, BEFORE the 2014 revolution. It was Victoria Nuland who selected the UNELECTED new government and instructed them to start the civil war by attacking the Donbas. Everyone knew that would force Putin to defend the Russian people there.
Our computer is not partisan or biased and is not influenced by human intervention. It is the ONLY Artificial Intelligence Computer with a 40-year track record. The ONLY mainstream press to ever slightly review the forecasts was the New Yorker Magazine back in 2009 with the title The Secret Cycle. In 2011, this model forecasted the markets would make all-time new highs above 2007. Most laughed. Barrons wrote: Circular Reasoning: A Market for Pi in the Sky? The man who called the ’87 crash is now calling for a long-term market rise. By ROBIN GOLDWYN BLUMENTHAL. Barrons never reported how the forecasts were the only ones to be correct. They reported them in 2011 because they thought they were absurd.
Even the German magazine Smart Investor pointed out that we were the only ones projecting inflation and an economic boom into 2024, while the majority kept calling for a recession over the last three years. They wanted to know, “Could you please briefly explain your forecasting approach?”
Even with the AI craze, mainstream media is NOT interested in reporting our forecasts because they contradict the instructed narrative.
Forecasting war is NOT what I want to see. Many people have written in and said I should get the Nobel Peace Prize. Obama wanted to invade Syria, so he got the Nobel Peace Prize for promoting war. Most assumed he got it for simply being the first black president. I speak out against a war our computer is forecasting, so I am not qualified for that Nobel Peace Prize since I actually advocate peace. Nobody wants this forecast to be wrong more than me.
Julius Caesar wrote in his commentaries that people “believe what they wish,” and that statement has defined the human race for thousands of years. This is why you CANNOT have an intelligent conversation with ANY of these climate change people. It has become their religion. The stupid ones have confused climate change with pollution. They are dancing the world into a nuclear holocaust and assume that they will survive, but the other half of the world will not. They have taken over the White House alongside the NEOCONS and are on the same agenda – reducing the population, albeit for different reasons.
Milutin Milanković was a Serbian geophysicist and astronomer who, in the 1920s, calculated what has become known as the Milankovitch Cycle, describing the collective effects of changes in the Earth’s movements on its climate millions of years. He hypothesized that variations in eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession combined, creating cyclical variations in the intra-annual and latitudinal distribution of solar radiation on the Earth’s surface. This cycle has greatly influenced climate, resulting in major climatic patterns.
The Axil Precession goes back to the ancients’ observations. The Maya discovered this movement because when they built a temple, they aligned with the stars only to discover that the stars had moved. The Earth’s axis of rotation, known as the Precession of the Equinox, was calculated to have a period of about 25,700 years. I believe the accuracy of the Economic Confidence Model frequency 8.6 is a source derived from this movement of the Earth itself. The calculations I ran further refined that approximation of 25,700 years to 25,800 years of 3 x 8.6.
I believe that the 100,000-cycle may actually be 95,852 years in length. Milankovitch believed that the angle of the Earth’s axial tilt had the greatest effect on climate and that it did so by varying the summer insolation in northern high latitudes. Therefore, he concluded that there was a 41,000-year period of ice ages. However, in Science back in 1976, Hays, Imbrie, and Shackleton published “Variations in the Earth’s Orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages. For 500,000 years, major climatic changes have followed variations in obliquity and precession. Their work asserted that 23,000, 42,000, and approximately 100,000 years were involved, which have impacted the ice age cycles of the Quaternary glaciation over the last million years. This most likely might be refined at 43,000 (8.6 /2). Their work confirmed the hypothesis proposed decades earlier by astronomer Milutin Milankovitch.
Some have been arguing that since this Milankovitch Cycle predicts that we should be getting colder, while it has been getting warmer since 1970 when the scientists were predicting an ice age was coming, this is all because of CO2 and Methane gas. They blame farming that cuts down trees, adding CO2 to the atmosphere, and in Asia, rice farming produces methane. Throw in cars, and we are doomed thanks to the Industrial Revolution, where we should somehow return to the Stone Age. This is why there are some cheering nuclear war in hopes of reducing the population by 50%.
They REFUSE to look at the sun’s beating between solar maximum and minimum. They only want to take the data that supports their predetermined conclusion—kill 50% of the population to save the planet. The peak in the solar cycle tends to correlate with the major turning points in the war cycle. Extending the 11-year solar cycle back in time even brings us to the fall of Rome.
There is a correlation between solar activity and volcanoes. VEI is a logaritmic scale, so to create the same impact of one VEI 7, you need 10 VEI 6, 100 VEI 5, 10,000 VEI 4 or 100,000 VEI3. Volcanoes not only throw up dust that deflects the sun’s energy, which Bill Gates wanted to shoot up particles to permanently block the sun, but the higher the explosion also shoots ash much higher into the atmosphere, and a VEI 5+ may reach the stratosphere. Consequently, the impact of a VEI 5 would occur every 12 years and a VEI 9 only once every 27,000 years. This is what causes the big mass extinctions that appear to be cycles of multiples of 31.4 million years following Pi.
Evidence suggests that volcanic winters occur during the Solar Minimum and have caused events like the massive 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora in the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia), which was a VEI7. This eruption was probably the largest since the 6th century AD, producing devastation between 535 and 536 AD. It is believed that the year without a summer was probably enhanced due to the 1814 eruption of Mayon in the Philippines, which was VEI4. Even just taking the 1814 and 536 events, dividing that by 8.6 and dividing that results again by 8.6 brings us to 17.2, which is twice the 8.6 frequency.
Even looking at historical records, we find that major volcanic eruptions have brought down empires. It is assumed that Thera (Santorini) erupted between 1600 and 1700 BC, which destroyed the Minoan Empire. Then, the Vesuvius eruption in 79 AD was probably the most famous of all eruptions.
Emperor Titus rushed to open the Coliseum after Pompeii’s destruction. We can date his coin to 80AD since he was granted the Vonsulship VIII for that year. This was one way of trying to change the mood, much like rushing to open the Empire State Building during the Great Depression, to demonstrate that things would be getting better.
Additionally, Titus devoted much of his silver coinage of Atonement to the gods for the disaster of Pompeii. There were four main Atonement issues commemorating the services of prayer and propitiation through which the emperor attempted to address the public alarm over the disaster. People often attributed such events to the gods being angry. The coinage showed emblems seeking the approval of Jupiter, Neptune, Apollo, and the deceased former Emperors to watch over the Roman people.
The Huns began a migration Eastward because of droughts, but by 430-450AD, Asia had a severe drought. especially under King Attila, made frequent and devastating raids into the Eastern Roman Empire. There appear to have been droughts in Asia, which inspired them to move East. Asia has been prone to megadroughts that have lasted more than 1000 years. Central Asia today is cyclically moving back toward a drought. The year 2021 was a major drought in the region, and this has historically caused migrations. In fact, it has been called the worst drought on record.
In 451, they invaded the Western Roman province of Gaul, where they fought a combined army of Romans and Visigoths at the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields in 452 AD. What the mass migration brought was Malaria, which devastated Europe in 450AD. Nobody formally knows where the Huns came from. It is believed that they may have been the cause of the building of the Great Wall of China. The Huns came into Europe’s history when, in 370AD, they crossed the Volga River and conquered the Alans. Two years later, they attacked the Ostrogoths, an eastern tribe of Germanic Goths.
By 376, the Huns had attacked the Visigoths, who then sought sanctuary within the Roman Empire. As the Huns conquered the Goths and Visigoths, they became barbarians uninterested in culture. By 395 AD, they began invading the Roman Empire and were at the gates of Rome by 410 AD. They did not appear to have issued coinage until they invaded Europe.
However, evidence has been uncovered worldwide that the early Dark Ages of the 6th century AD was most likely triggered by the eruption around 535/536 AD, which was probably a VEI7+ event. The Roman historian Procopius (c. 500 – 565AD) recorded in 536AD in his account of the wars with the Vandals, “During this year a most dread portent took place. For the sun gave forth its light without brightness… and it seemed exceedingly like the sun in eclipse, for the beams it shed were not clear.” Numerous accounts from Ireland to China describe this major event.
This cataclysmic phenomenon occurred at the peak of the Economic Confidence Model Wave #762 (532-540AD), which was 536.55 (July 19/20). It has long been believed that the eruption was from Ilopango in El Salvador. There was probably a second eruption, perhaps in Indonesia, and it may have been Krakatoa. This volcanic explosion altered the world and even changed religion. Justinian I’s (527 -565AD) nearly lost his throne during the January 13, 532AD Nika riots, and another conspiracy against the emperor’s life by dissatisfied entrepreneurs was discovered as late as 562AD. Justinian was struck by the plague in the early 540s thanks to the eruption of 536AD and the malnutrition spread of the plague. However, he recovered, but his wife Theodora died in 548AD. This event created such major political unrest, economic decline, and social changes that few people have ever bothered to connect the dots.
There was a major volcanic explosion that was equal to more than 2000 Hiroshima-sized bombs. Human civilization was altered from the Mayan to Mongolia in the north to Constantinople and Southeast Asia. What unfolded were plagues, famine, death, and great migration, which caused people to move south. Empires and city-states collapsed, including Teotihuacan in Mexico and the Anglo-Saxon victory over the Celts and invasions, contributing to Islam’s rise. Even in India, the Gupta Empire (319-550AD) of Northern India collapsed by 543AD as the Huns overran it during the mid-6th century.
The devastation to agriculture lowered the economic growth, and by 602AD, the army in Byzantium revolted, overthrowing the government and installing Phocas, who became a spokesman for dissatisfied soldiers. When the army revolted in 602AD, the revolt successfully captured Constantinople on November 23rd, 602. Phocas declared himself emperor on the same day. The Sasanian Empire (224–651 AD) in Persia peaked during the 6th century and ended by 651 AD. This was all set in motion by the volcanic winter. The political, economic, and religious changes that occurred because of this devastating 6th-century volcanic winter were profound. According to the traditional account, the Islamic prophet Muhammad began receiving what Muslims consider divine revelations in 610 AD.
The last solar wave, Solar Wave #24, reached Solar Maximum in April 2014. Viktor Fedorovych Yanukovych fled Ukraine on February 22nd, 2014, going into solar maximum. We are in Solar Wave #25 and are approaching solar maximum, ideally by January 2025. This will probably also enhance rising civil unrest globally. We will then turn it down into Solar Minimum, which should peak between 2030-2032. Therefore, this rise in magnetic storms and gamma rays may cause major volcanic eruptions. This could easily result in a cold period that could be increased in amplitude by volcanic eruptions.
These insane climate zealots are attacking farming when this is the time we should be stockpiling food, just as Joseph warned the Pharoah. But they do not believe in cycles, God, or nature – just their own arrogance. That story is a lesson about climate change.
Posted originally on the CTH on March 24, 2024 | Sundance
There’s some nuance in the story, but essentially the Biden administration is not approving or extending Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) export permits to nations who do not have free trade agreements (FTA’s) with the United States. This is causing expansion issues in the LNG industry as needed investment capital by the industry is negatively impacted.
The Biden administration says they are pausing the permitting while they study climate change. However, the Biden administration is also unilaterally sending LNG to Europe to support the NATO objective to hamper the Russian economy (not working).
As a consequence, the Biden administration (think Biden family) is controlling the outflow of LNG; essentially putting themselves in a position of financial influence over the LNG industry. Who is controlling whom, and why?
HOUSTON, Texas — The liquefied natural gas industry has criticized the Biden administration for pausing export permits on LNG as uncertainties arise for developers planning massive amounts of investment.
Major U.S. exporter Freeport LNG’s Chief Executive Officer Michael Smith said Wednesday in an interview on the sidelines of the CERAWeek energy conference in Houston that “you won’t get this resolved till after the presidential elections” in November.
The U.S. Department of Energy, which issues permits for LNG export projects to countries that are not part of free trade agreements, announced in January that the government will pause permits to review how the projects affect climate change, national security and the economy.
The world’s largest LNG exporter’s sudden policy announcement has rippled through Asia, the largest consumer of the gas.
On Monday, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm told the audience at CERAWeek that the review will be in the “rear-view mirrors” by March next year. However, the secretary’s comments have not satisfied LNG companies.
“I am encouraged by the secretary’s comments, but I think that there’s still some significant risk that the timing will slip from what she said,” Smith said, pointing to similar study done by the Obama administration more than a decade ago, which led to a lengthier permitting process.
The LNG industry has complained that the uncertainty will make it difficult for developers to invest in the projects. Furthermore, while the U.S. has increased LNG exports to allies in Europe and Asia following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Japan and Europe have raised concerns that the pause could potentially lead to supply shortages. (more)
Read between the lines, they never stopped….
Just make sure it’s 10% for the Big Guy, that’s me!
Posted originally on the CTH on March 20, 2024 | Sundance
The backstory is so transparently corrupt it requires an explanation, so we’ll go down the full rabbit hole and explain how China knew – to a demonstrable certainty – their multi-billion dollar investment in Mexican EV plants would be useful.
Always remember, there are trillions at stake.
First, who was installed in the Biden White House in charge of all personnel and staffing? Catherine Russell. {SEE HERE} Who is Catherine Russell? She’s the wife of Tom Donilon, a long-time aid and advisor to Joe Biden who served in the Obama White House.
After serving as Obama’s National Security Advisor (prior to Susan Rice), Tom Donilon then went on to become “Chairman of the BlackRock Investment Institute {SEE HERE}.” His job was literally to “leverage the firm’s expertise and generate proprietary research to provide insights on the global economy, markets, geopolitics and long-term asset allocation.”
In essence, the Donilon family represented the interests of Blackrock in the White House.
Second, Tom Donilon’s brother, Mike Donilon is a Senior Advisor to Joe Biden {link} providing guidance on what policies should be implemented within the administration. Mike Donilon guides the focus of spending, budgets, regulation and white house policy from his position of Senior Advisor to the President.
In June of 2022, Blackrock’s Tom Donilon was then appointed to be co-chair of U.S. Department of State’s Foreign Affairs Policy Board {SEE HERE}, in charge of U.S-China policy. Can you see where this is going?
Blackrock, a massive multinational investment firm with assets in the tens-of-trillions, was essentially guiding/constructing the policymaking of the White House, through Tom Donilon, Mike Donilon and Catherine Russell (Tom’s wife). Blackrock then took out massive investment stakes in China, including in the Chinese auto-making industry, with specific focus on EVs. Tom Donilon, now shifting to the State Dept and guiding US-China policy, was the Blackrock government embed, ensuring policy that would keep their investments lucrative.
Pictured above BlackRock Investment Institute Chairman Tom Donilon (former National Security Advisor to President Obama), celebrating an international collaboration with China’s Chairman Xi Jinping
Next up, in late 2023 the Chinese auto firms carrying the Blackrock investment money, then made big announcements. “BUSINESS INSIDER – Three major Chinese EV companies are planning to build new factories in Mexico, sparking concern among US officials, according to a new report. MG, BYD, and Chery are all looking at sites to build new factories in the country, according to unnamed sources cited by The Financial Times, and this investment is causing angst in Washington.”
The total investment in Mexican auto plants, specifically to build Electric Vehicles (EVs) for the USA market, exceeds $5 billion. A very big investment considering that EV sales in the U.S. were not going so well.
So, think about it, what did Blackrock know about the USA EV market: (a) that defied current market conditions; and (b) that would support such a move by the Chinese auto manufacturers they financially supported?
Today, we get the answer:
(Politico) – The Biden administration is unleashing a flurry of regulatory actions that aims to shift the nation toward electric vehicles — with the biggest rule coming Wednesday to set strict limits on climate pollution from passenger cars.
The regulation being announced by EPA Administrator Michael Regan, as POLITICO’s E&E News reported last week, would slash greenhouse gases from cars and light trucks in half, while pushing to have electric vehicles make up about two-thirds of new passenger vehicle sales by 2032. (read more)
The final version of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Cars rule is the strictest federal climate regulation ever issued for passenger cars and trucks — even though it offers manufacturers a slightly slower phase-in of pollution limits than the EPA had first proposed last spring.
The agency estimated a year ago that the rule could lead to two-thirds of new cars and passenger trucks being electric in 2032. Wednesday’s version says automakers could build a mix of vehicles to comply with the rule, including fully battery-powered vehicles, plug-in hybrids that run on electricity and gasoline, and more efficient conventional engines.
EPA Administrator Michael Regan’s official rolled out the rule on Wednesday at a Washington event attended by carmakers, environmentalists and other groups.
President Joe Biden said the rule fulfills his promise to cut the nation’s carbon pollution in half by the end of the decade while promoting American workers. “Together, we’ve made historic progress. Hundreds of new expanded factories across the country. Hundreds of billions in private investment and thousands of good-paying union jobs,” Biden said in a statement. (read more)
Biden is a blithering idiot, a pretense, a false target. Biden reads what people tell him to read; he’s not the origin of the feces he spouts. Silver Spoon, “lunch bucket” Biden has no clue, and his Blackrock handlers keep him that way. Biden can tell the U.S. auto manufacturers anything; he has [¹]no clue what the actual policy being constructed is all about. The Biden family will be paid handsomely, either by the Blackrock group or by the Chinese -as is the background record.
So, let’s encapsulate things so far. (1) The interests of Blackrock determined the White House key staff and policy makers. (2) The Donilon clan represented those Blackrock interests and worked inside both the White House and State Dept to create and maintain policy favorable to Blackrock’s Chinese EV position. (3) China/Blackrock invest massively in Mexican EV production. (4) White House/EPA generate policy to support the Blackrock investment.
That’s how the three Chinese auto firms could be so sure of their decision in 2023 to invest in the Mexican Blackrock EV plan. The one that President Donald Trump rightly says will create a “bloodbath” in the U.S auto industry.
It is not the politicians; they are functionaries.
What I am saying directly is that Blackrock is the origin of the policy, and Blackrock is the beneficiary of the policy.
This is what I mean when I keep saying, “there are trillions at stake,” and “it’s not the politicians we should be looking at.”
In 2008, it was the SEIU who were the foot soldiers for Barack Obama. In 2009, SEIU President Andy Stern was the #1 visitor to the White House. The SEIU needed to get rid of the healthcare liability inside their pension plan because the union was about to go broke. That’s the origin of Obamacare. In 2024 Biden is manipulating the UAW leadership into the same position, looking for election help.
But wait, it gets worse…
Blackrock is in control of policy. Now look at where Blackrock investment has been pre-deployed, and that’s where you see Biden policy coming into play. Blackrock and JPMorgan set up the Ukraine reconstruction bank {SEE HERE}. That’s the core of the Ukraine issue. It’s not ideological, it’s financial. Follow the money.
But wait, it gets even worse….
Have you followed my research on the Russian sanctions?
2022 – NEW YORK, March 24 (Reuters) – BlackRock Inc’s (BLK.N) chief executive, Larry Fink, said on Thursday that the Russia-Ukraine war could end up accelerating digital currencies as a tool to settle international transactions, as the conflict upends the globalization drive of the last three decades.
In a letter to the shareholders of the world’s largest asset manager, Fink said the war will push countries to reassess currency dependencies, and that BlackRock was studying digital currencies and stablecoins due to increased client interest.
“A global digital payment system, thoughtfully designed, can enhance the settlement of international transactions while reducing the risk of money laundering and corruption”, he said.
[…] In the letter on Thursday, the chairman and CEO of the $10 trillion asset manager said the Russia-Ukraine crisis had put an end to the globalization forces at work over the past 30 years.
[…] “While companies’ and consumers’ balance sheets are strong today, giving them more of a cushion to weather these difficulties, a large-scale reorientation of supply chains will inherently be inflationary,” said Fink.
He said central banks were dealing with a dilemma they had not faced in decades, having to choose between living with high inflation or slowing economic activity to contain price pressures. (read more)
Now do you see the source, origin and beneficiary of the global cleaving?
The U.S. government didn’t construct the Russian sanctions, Blackrock did!
Blackrock lays the foundation for the Dollar-Based U.S. Digital Currency (USCBDC) with the construction of Russian sanction policy. How is that US-CBDC process facilitated in real terms? With the five big US banks controlling the flow of the digital funding mechanism.
RELATIONSHIPS – Larry Fink (Blackrock) and Jamie Dimon (JPMorgan) created the Ukraine Reconstruction Bank. Now, there are only two real threats to the creation of a US-CBDC as it currently appears. Threat #1 is Donald Trump. Threat #2 is the way people would work around the dollar based CBDC, unregulated crypto currency.
Who opposes crypto currency?
“I’ve always been deeply opposed to crypto, bitcoin, etc.,” Dimon said in response to a question from Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. “The only true use case for it is criminals, drug traffickers … money laundering, tax avoidance because it is somewhat anonymous, not fully, and because you can move money instantaneously. “If I was the government, I would close it down.” (read more)
Can you see it now?
I’ll have much more on this issue soon, but its critical people start to understand what is going on.
We will win this battle and eventually this war, or I’ll die fighting it.
They are trying to move fast, because people are catching on now.
We are on the right side of every issue; we cherish liberty and individual freedom. Our opposition is built upon a foundation of fraud and lies. The politicians are corrupt, and their arguments collapse when put in the sunlight; but they are not the root of the problem. [²] They are vessels. That’s why the multinationals like Blackrock need the rules and referees (politicians) slanted in their favor. That’s why they need censorship, deplatforming, and beyond everything else…. they must control information.
…The key battle right now is an information war.
[¹] [²] Now do you see why they built him a stage..
Posted originally on Mar 19, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
The World Economic Forum has spoken and chosen its newest climate change darling – Xiye Bastida. Greta Thunberg has been replaced by a more diverse candidate from the Otomi-Toltec Indigenous community in Mexico who is based in New York City. The WEF said she is one of the top 10 women to watch in 2024, as she will become the new voice of the climate change movement.
The 21-year-old was selected to mobilize 600 college students from the University of Pennsylvania to strike against climate change initiative. She then was selected to head a 300,000 person climate strike in New York City. She is the co-founder of Re-Earth Initiative and an organizer with Fridays for the Future. President Joe Biden invited her to speak at the Climate Summit in 2021, and she was also invited to participate in the World Leaders Summit at COP26.
“Xiye is a leading speaker about climate justice activism, Indigenous and immigrant visibility, and the power of Generation Z,” her website claims. This girl is absolutely everywhere – CNN, Forbes, The Hill, The Guardian, BBC, Vox, La Repubblica, Elle, The New York Times, Teen Vogue, HuffPost, and others are suddenly launching articles featuring Xiye. They have been building her character line for years and are ready to launch her into the spotlight.
She is the perfect candidate for the WEF agenda since she can reach a bilingual audience but has footing in the USA. “Climate change is a generation injustice,” she told the crowd at COP26, stating that emissions simply must “stop.” She then asked the COP2 to deliver an astounding $100 BILLION to the “most vulnerable nations” but would like to see that figure rise anywhere from $140 to $300 BILLION by 2025. Good luck, kid.
Posted originally on Mar 14, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, you know law like no other analyst. My air conditioner bit the dust, and it was a 14-seer 2-ton split heat pump. The repair company told me that I had to put in a whole new system because Biden changed the specs, and you now must have a 14.5-seer, so everything has to be changed. This raises the cost from at most $1,500 to $12,000 to $25,000, depending on the model you get today.
I remember you did a post on John Kerry complaining about air conditioners contributing to global warming. How can they retroactively now require you to change your complete system instead of a normal repair?
SL
ANSWER: Legally, they cannot. That violates every principle of the rule of law. The Ex Post Facto clauses, in a legal context, are typically used to refer to a criminal statute that punishes actions retroactively. In other words, the government cannot declare something is now criminal that was legal when originally performed and then prosecute you for a crime that did not previously exist. I’m sure they would come up with something in New York City since they do not respect the Constitution ever.
Two clauses in the United States Constitution prohibit ex post facto laws:
Article 1, § 9
This prohibits Congress from passing any laws which apply ex post facto.
Article 1 § 10.
This prohibits the states from passing any laws which apply ex post facto.
What the Biden Administration is doing in the environmental arena violates every principle of a free society. There needs to be a class action suit, for I am sure you are not the only one. These regulations will impact every home in the United States. Those making these decisions in the Biden Administration are a threat to our very civilization. This maybe a morbid joke, but they do hate your guts. You mean absolutely NOTHING to the Biden Administration. Wake up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted originally on Mar 13, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
The coronavirus lockdowns gave the world a glimpse of what could happen if our economy was suddenly shutdown. NASA has a space program called Parker Solar Probe (PSP) that aims to fly “into the outermost part of the Sun’s atmosphere, the corona, for the first time.” Why? Scientists at NASA predict an “internet apocalypse” may occur within the next year due to the uptick in the sun’s solar activity.
I’ve long touched on sun spots and solar activity in relation to weather patterns and a predictable chain of events. A giant dark hold opened on the sun’s surface in December 2023, emitting streams of unusually fast radiation, known as solar wind, right at Earth. Since December 4, the solar void has been pointing directly at Earth. Experts initially predicted this most recent hole could spark a moderate geomagnetic storm that could trigger radio blackouts and strong auroral displays.
For most of its history, science believed the sun’s output was constant. They finally realized that a thermal dynamic cycle beats like your heart so the sun could not exist without a steady outflow of energy. One degree less, and it would blow itself out. Hence, it is cyclical, rising and falling in intensity.
The eleven-year cycle in sunspots itself builds in intensity like the Economic Confidence Model (ECM), reaching “grand maxima” and “grand minima” over the course of 300 years. The last grand maximum peaked in 1958, after which the sun has been steadily quieting down. We have seen sunspot activity decrease at its steepest in 9,300 years, but the climate change zealots refuse to acknowledge naturally occurring cyclical weather patterns.
You can read more about this phenomenon here, but we are in the midst of a solar minimum. The media has been promoting the idea that we are amid asolar maximum despite it being extremely rare for a coronal hole to form during a maximum period. There are no publicly published scientific papers showing data before 1850 as it would uproot their agenda.
Now, these scientists, funded by the government, are predicting that solar storms could cause an internet black or an “internet apocalypse.” “We’ve never experienced one of the extreme case events, and we don’t know how our infrastructure would respond to it,” Sangeetha Abdu Jyothi, a computer science professor at the University of California at Irvine, told The Washington Post. “Our failure testing doesn’t even include such scenarios.”
Did I mention Robert Kegan is an editor at the Washinton Post which Jeff Bezos owns? Well, we can come back to that one.
Now there is absolutely nothing scientists can do to alter solar activity. They can spend millions or billions studying solar activity to prepare, but that is not what is occurring. They believe that our satellites in space will be taken down due to solar storms, resulting in widespread internet outages. Simultaneously, these same governments that are funding these very studies are pushing for the elimination of hard cash in favor of digital currency.
They can immediately eliminate our access to currency with CBDC. If they needed an excuse, which they do not, blaming the weather is a favorite tactic. Are the people unruly? Is civil unrest is rising with a revolutionary wave approaching? Starve them out by eliminating their ability to access digital money as alternative sources will not be available. Eliminate their ability to communicate with one another. Eliminate everything at the click of a button.
Again, these are theories, but these agencies always tell us what they plan to do in advance. They told us about plans for the coronavirus before it occurred, they are telling us about Agenda 2030 and the Great Reset. No one wants to accept that there is a concrete plan that results in YOU WILL OWN NOTHING AND BE HAPPY. The computer indicates we will be in a solar minimum until the 2050s, and who knows what the world will look like by then. Rest assured that any blame on the sun is a lie. The computer also indicates that these sinister plans WILL FAIL but the road to 2032, when the situation turns, will come at a cost.
There are three types of scientific models, as shown in figure 1. In this series of seven posts on climate model bias we are only concerned with two of them. The first are mathematical models that utilize well established physical, and chemical processes and principles to model some part of our reality, especially the climate and the economy. The second are conceptual models that utilize scientific hypotheses and assumptions to propose an idea of how something, such as the climate, works. Conceptual models are generally tested, and hopefully validated, by creating a mathematical model. The output from the mathematical model is compared to observations and if the output matches the observations closely, the model is validated. It isn’t proven, but it is shown to be useful, and the conceptual model gains credibility.
Figure 1. The three types of scientific models.
Models are useful when used to decompose some complex natural system, such as Earth’s climate, or some portion of the system, into its underlying components and drivers. Models can be used to try and determine which of the system components and drivers are the most important under various model scenarios.
Besides being used to predict the future, or a possible future, good models should also tell us what should not happen in the future. If these events do not occur, it adds support to the hypothesis. These are the tasks that the climate models created by the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP)[1] are designed to do. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)[2] analyzes the CMIP model results, along with other peer-reviewed research, and attempts to explain modern global warming in their reports. The most recent IPCC report is called AR6.[3]
In the context of climate change, especially regarding the AR6 IPCC[4] report, the term “model,” is often used as an abbreviation for a general circulation climate model.[5] Modern computer general circulation models have been around since the 1960s, and now are huge computer programs that can run for days or longer on powerful computers. However, climate modeling has been around for more than a century, well before computers were invented. Later in this report I will briefly discuss a 19th century greenhouse gas climate model developed and published by Svante Arrhenius.
Besides modeling climate change, AR6 contains descriptions of socio-economic models that attempt to predict the impact of selected climate changes on society and the economy. In a sense, AR6, just like the previous assessment reports, is a presentation of the results of the latest iteration of their scientific models of future climate and their models of the impact of possible future climates on humanity.
Introduction
Modern atmospheric general circulation computerized climate models were first introduced in the 1960s by Syukuro Manabe and colleagues.[6] These models, and their descendants can be useful, even though they are clearly oversimplifications of nature, and they are wrong[7] in many respects like all models.[8] It is a shame, but climate model results are often conflated with observations by the media and the public, when they are anything but.
I began writing scientific models of rocks[9] and programming them for computers in the 1970s and like all modelers of that era I was heavily influenced by George Box, the famous University of Wisconsin statistician. Box teaches us that all models are developed iteratively.[10] First we make assumptions and build a conceptual model about how some natural, economic, or other system works and what influences it, then we model some part of it, or the whole system. The model results are then compared to observations. There will typically be a difference between the model results and the observations, these differences are assumed to be due to model error since we necessarily assume our observations have no error, at least initially. We examine the errors, adjust the model parameters or the model assumptions, or both, and run it again, and again examine the errors. This “learning” process is the main benefit of models. Box tells us that good scientists must have the flexibility and courage to seek out, recognize, and exploit such errors, especially any errors in the conceptual model assumptions. Modeling nature is how we learn how nature works.
Box next advises us that “we should not fall in love with our models,” and “since all models are wrong the scientists cannot obtain a ‘correct’ one by excessive elaboration.” I used to explain this principle to other modelers more crudely by pointing out that if you polish a turd, it is still a turd. One must recognize when a model has gone as far as it can go. At some point it is done, more data, more elaborate programming, more complicated assumptions cannot save it. The benefit of the model is what you learned building it, not the model itself. When the inevitable endpoint is reached, you must trash the model and start over by building a new conceptual model. A new model will have a new set of assumptions based on the “learnings” from the old model, and other new data and observations gathered in the meantime.
Each IPCC report, since the first one was published in 1990,[11] is a single iteration of the same overall conceptual model. In this case, the “conceptual model” is the idea or hypothesis that humans control the climate (or perhaps just the rate of global warming) with our greenhouse gas emissions.[12] Various and more detailed computerized models are built to attempt to measure the impact of human emissions on Earth’s climate.
Another key assumption in the IPCC model is that climate change is dangerous, and, as a result, we must mitigate (reduce) fossil fuel use to reduce or prevent damage to society from climate change. Finally, they assume a key metric of this global climate change or warming is the climate sensitivity to human-caused increases in CO2. This sensitivity can be computed with models or using measurements of changes in atmospheric CO2 and global average surface temperature. The IPCC equates changes in global average surface temperature to “climate change.”
This climate sensitivity metric is often called “ECS,” which stands for equilibrium climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO2, often abbreviated as “2xCO2.”[13] Modern climate models, ever since those used for the famous Charney report in 1979,[14] except for AR6, have generated a range of ECS values from 1.5 to 4.5°C per 2xCO2. AR6 uses a rather unique and complex subjective model that results in a range of 2.5 to 4°C/2xCO2. More about this later in the report.
George Box warns modelers that:
“Just as the ability to devise simple but evocative models is the signature of the great scientist so overelaboration and overparameterization is often the mark of mediocrity.”[15]
Box, 1976
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC has published six major reports and numerous minor reports since 1990.[16] Here we will argue that they have spent more than thirty years polishing the turd to little effect. They have come up with more and more elaborate processes to try and save their hypothesis that human-generated greenhouse gases have caused recent climate changes and that the Sun and internal variations within Earth’s climate system have had little to no effect. As we will show, new climate science discoveries, since 1990, are not explained by the IPCC models, do not show up in the model output, and newly discovered climate processes, especially important ocean oscillations, are not incorporated into them.
Just one example. Eade, et al. report that the modern general circulation climate models used for the AR5 and AR6 reports[17] do not reproduce the important North Atlantic Ocean Oscillation (“NAO”). The NAO-like signal that the models produce in their simulation runs[18] is indistinguishable from random white noise. Eade, et al. report:
“This suggests that current climate models do not fully represent important aspects of the mechanism for low frequency variability of the NAO.”[19]
Eade, et al., 2022
All the models in AR6, both climate and socio-economic, have important model/observation mismatches. As time has gone on, the modelers and authors have continued to ignore new developments in climate science and climate change economics, as their “overelaboration and overparameterization” has become more extreme. As they make their models more elaborate, they progressively ignore more new data and discoveries to decrease their apparent “uncertainty” and increase their reported “confidence” that humans drive climate change. It is a false confidence that is due to the confirmation and reporting bias in both the models and the reports.
As I reviewed all six of the major IPCC reports, I became convinced that AR6 is the most biased of all of them.[20] In a major new book twelve colleagues and I, working under the Clintel[21] umbrella, examined AR6 and detailed considerable evidence of bias.
“AR6 states that “there has been negligible long-term influence from solar activity and volcanoes,”[23] and acknowledges no other natural influence on multidecadal climate change despite … recent discoveries, a true case of tunnel vision.”
“We were promised IPCC reports that would objectively report on the peer-reviewed scientific literature, yet we find numerous examples where important research was ignored. In Ross McKitrick’s chapter[24] on the “hot spot,” he lists many important papers that are not even mentioned in AR6. Marcel [Crok] gives examples where unreasonable emissions scenarios are used to frighten the public in his chapter on scenarios,[25] and examples of hiding good news in his chapter on extreme weather events.[26] Numerous other examples are documented in other chapters. These deliberate omissions and distortions of the truth do not speak well for the IPCC, reform of the institution is desperately needed.”
Crok and May, 2023
Confirmation[27] and reporting bias[28] are very common in AR6. We also find examples of the Dunning-Kruger effect,[29] in-group bias,[30] and anchoring bias.[31]
In 2010, the InterAcademy Council of the United Nations reviewed the processes and procedures of the IPCC and found many problems.[32] In particular, they criticized the subjective way that uncertainty is handled. They also criticized the obvious confirmation bias in the IPCC reports.[33] They pointed out that the Lead Authors too often leave out dissenting views or references to papers they disagree with. The Council recommended that alternative views should be mentioned and cited in the report. Even though these criticisms were voiced in 2010, I and my colleagues, found numerous examples of these problems in AR6, published eleven years later in 2021 and 2022.[34]
Although bias pervades AR6, this series will focus mainly on bias in the AR6 volume 1 (WGI) CMIP6[35] climate models that are used to predict future climate. However, we will also look at the models used to identify and quantify climate change impacts in volume 2 (WGII), and to compute the cost/benefit analysis of their recommended mitigation (fossil fuel reduction) measures in volume 3 (WGIII). As a former petrophysical modeler, I am aware how bias can sneak into a computer model, sometimes the modeler is aware he is introducing bias into the results, sometimes he is not. Bias exists in all models, since they are all built from assumptions and ideas (the “conceptual model”), but a good modeler will do his best to minimize it.
In the next six posts I will take you through some of the evidence of bias I found in the CMIP6 models and the AR6 report. A 30,000-foot look at the history of human-caused climate change modeling is given in part 2. Evidence that the IPCC has ignored possible solar influence on climate is presented in part 3. The IPCC ignores evidence that changes in convection and atmospheric circulation patterns in the oceans and atmosphere affect climate change on multidecadal times scales and this is examined in part 4.
Contrary to the common narrative, there is considerable evidence that storminess (extreme weather) was higher in the Little Ice Age, aka the “pre-industrial” (part 5). Next, we move on to examine bias in the IPCC AR6 WGII report[36] on the impact, adaptation, and vulnerability to climate change in part 6 and in their report[37] on how to mitigate climate change in part 7.
IPCC is an abbreviation for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a U.N. agency. AR6 is their sixth major report on climate change, “Assessment Report 6.” ↑
There are several names for climate models, including atmosphere-ocean general circulation model (AOGCM, used in AR5), or Earth system model (ESM, used in AR6). Besides these complicated computer climate models there are other models used in AR6, some model energy flows, the impact of climate change on society or the global economy, or the impact of various greenhouse gas mitigation efforts. We only discuss some of these models in this report. (IPCC, 2021, p. 2223) ↑
(Manabe & Bryan, Climate Calculations with a Combined Ocean-Atmosphere Model, 1969), (Manabe & Wetherald, The Effects of Doubling the CO2 Concentration on the Climate of a General Circulation Model, 1975) ↑
(McKitrick & Christy, A Test of the Tropical 200- to 300-hPa Warming Rate in Climate Models, Earth and Space Science, 2018) and (McKitrick & Christy, 2020) ↑
“The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assesses the scientific, technical and socioeconomic information relevant for the understanding of the risk of human-induced climate change.” (UNFCCC, 2020). ↑
Usually, ECS means equilibrium climate sensitivity, or the ultimate change in surface temperature due to a doubling of CO2. but in AR6 sometimes they refer to “Effective Climate Sensitivity,” or the “effective ECS” which is defined as the warming after a specified number of years (IPCC, 2021, pp. 931-933). AR6, WGI, page 933 has a more complete definition. ↑
Confirmation bias: The tendency to look only for data that supports a previously held belief. It also means all new data is interpreted in a way that supports a prior belief. Wikipedia has a fairly good article on common cognitive biases. ↑
Reporting bias: In this context it means only reporting or publishing results that favor a previously held belief and censoring or ignoring results that show the belief is questionable. ↑
The Dunning-Kruger effect is the tendency to overestimate one’s abilities in a particular subject. In this context we see climate modelers, who call themselves “climate scientists,” overestimate their knowledge of paleoclimatology, atmospheric sciences, and atomic physics. ↑
In-group bias causes lead authors and editors to choose their authors and research papers from their associates and friends who share their beliefs. ↑
Anchoring bias occurs when an early result or calculation, for example Svante Arrhenius’ ECS (climate sensitivity to CO2) of 4°C, discussed below, gets fixed in a researcher’s mind and then he “adjusts” his thinking and data interpretation to always come close to that value, while ignoring contrary data. ↑
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 