Monday, July 31, 2017

The New NAZI Threat


First off, the person establishing this threshold is completely able to make the correct calculations and to understand  a non linear process.  Something seriously lacking in the so called climate debate.  Thus over the next decade autism will become epidemic.  

It also clarifies another issue.  The resurgent NAZI clone known as the NWO ( New World Order) has been floating the MEME for a huge reduction in global population as well as the actual (revenge ) destruction of the USA and the West.  To this end they have facilitated massive Islamic migration into the West by payoffs to politicians (useful idiots) however persuaded.   What remained to discover was the mechanism to decimate human populations.

It is now obvious that Roundup will actually serve the purpose rather well because its usage has been sky rocketed over the past decade in particular.  Obviously Monsanto is central to this strategy even unknowingly.

We must presume as well that additional channels aimed at introducing population death vectors have also been established and this all goes back to an elite NAZI cadre central to the global banking system and the global super corporations that has never been rooted out.

Greed is also now insufficient as an explanation for Monsanto's behavior.  They have to fully understand the meta stats here better than anyone.

This is the pattern emerging and we are already at war with Radical Islam as is Islam itself.  We are also in deep denial..

.Half of All Children Will Be Autistic by 2025, Warns Senior Research Scientist at MIT

ON DECEMBER 23, 2014

Why? Evidence points to glyphosate toxicity from the overuse of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide on our food.

For over three decades, Stephanie Seneff, PhD, has researched biology and technology, over the years publishing over 170 scholarly peer-reviewed articles. In recent years she has concentrated on the relationship between nutrition and health, tackling such topics as Alzheimer’s, autism, and cardiovascular diseases, as well as the impact of nutritional deficiencies and environmental toxins on human health.

At a conference last Thursday, in a special panel discussion about GMOs, she took the audience by surprise when she declared, “At today’s rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic.” She noted that the side effects of autism closely mimic those of glyphosate toxicity, and presented data showing a remarkably consistent correlation between the use of Roundup on crops (and the creation of Roundup-ready GMO crop seeds) with rising rates of autism. Children with autism have biomarkers indicative of excessive glyphosate, including zinc and iron deficiency, low serum sulfate, seizures, and mitochondrial disorder.

A fellow panelist reported that after Dr. Seneff’s presentation, “All of the 70 or so people in attendance were squirming, likely because they now had serious misgivings about serving their kids, or themselves, anything with corn or soy, which are nearly all genetically modified and thus tainted with Roundup and its glyphosate.”

Dr. Seneff noted the ubiquity of glyphosate’s use. Because it is used on corn and soy, all soft drinks and candies sweetened with corn syrup and all chips and cereals that contain soy fillers have small amounts of glyphosate in them, as do our beef and poultry since cattle and chicken are fed GMO corn or soy. Wheat is often sprayed with Roundup just prior to being harvested, which means that all non-organic bread and wheat products would also be sources of glyphosate toxicity. The amount of glyphosate in each product may not be large, but the cumulative effect (especially with as much processed food as Americans eat) could be devastating. A recent study shows that pregnant women living near farms where pesticides are applied have a 60% increased risk of children having an autism spectrum disorder.

Other toxic substances may also be autism-inducing. You may recall our story on the CDC whistleblower who revealed the government’s deliberate concealment of the link between the MMR vaccine (for measles, mumps, and rubella) and a sharply increased risk of autism, particularly in African American boys. Other studies now show a link between children’s exposure to pesticides and autism. Children who live in homes with vinyl floors, which can emit phthalate chemicals, are more likely to have autism. Children whose mothers smoked were also twice as likely to have autism. Research now acknowledges that environmental contaminants such as PCBs, PBDEs, and mercury can alter brain neuron functioning even before a child is born.

This month, the USDA released a study finding that although there were detectable levels of pesticide residue in more than half of food tested by the agency, 99% of samples taken were found to be within levels the government deems safe, and 40% were found to have no detectable trace of pesticides at all. The USDA added, however, that due to “cost concerns,” it did not test for residues of glyphosate. Let’s repeat that: they never tested for the active ingredient in the most widely used herbicide in the world. “Cost concerns”? How absurd—unless they mean it will cost them too much in terms of the special relationship between the USDA and Monsanto. You may recall the revolving door between Monsanto and the federal government, with agency officials becoming high-paying executives—and vice versa! Money, power, prestige: it’s all there. Monsanto and the USDA love to scratch each others’ backs. Clearly this omission was purposeful.

In addition, as we have previously reported, the number of adverse reactions from vaccines can be correlated as well with autism, though Seneff says it doesn’t correlate quite as closely as with Roundup. The same correlations between applications of glyphosate and autism show up in deaths from senility.

Of course, autism is a complex problem with many potential causes. Dr. Seneff’s data, however, is particularly important considering how close the correlation is—and because it is coming from a scientist with impeccable credentials. Earlier this year, she spoke at the Autism One conference and presented many of the same facts; that presentation is available on YouTube.

Monsanto claims that Roundup is harmless to humans. Bacteria, fungi, algae, parasites, and plants use a seven-step metabolic route known as the shikimate pathway for the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids; glyphosate inhibits this pathway, causing the plant to die, which is why it’s so effective as an herbicide. Monsanto says humans don’t have this shikimate pathway, so it’s perfectly safe.

Dr. Seneff points out, however, that our gut bacteria do have this pathway, and that’s crucial because these bacteria supply our body with crucial amino acids. Roundup thus kills beneficial gut bacteria, allowing pathogens to grow; interferes with the synthesis of amino acids including methionine, which leads to shortages in critical neurotransmitters and folate; chelates (removes) important minerals like iron, cobalt and manganese; and much more.

Even worse, she notes, additional chemicals in Roundup are untested because they’re classified as“inert,” yet according to a 2014 study in BioMed Research International, these chemicals are capable of amplifying the toxic effects of Roundup hundreds of times over.

Glyphosate is present in unusually high quantities in the breast milk of American mothers, at anywhere from 760 to 1,600 times the allowable limits in European drinking water. Urine testing shows Americans have ten times the glyphosate accumulation as Europeans.

“In my view, the situation is almost beyond repair,” Dr. Seneff said after her presentation. “We need to do something drastic.”


The reason i am interested in this is strictly esoteric.  And a strange story that is.  What does waiting for Pilar actually mean?  We were told to in fact wait for Pilar and that led to mostly a nothing burger.  Lots of allusions in the Spanish world not withstanding that Maria del Pilar is a common female name there.

Other strains in this esoteric led adventure includes the Navigator and a Templar all pointing back now to Columbus of all people.  Read this and it all gets stranger.

As said i have no idea where this might lead at all except to understand the real importance of this word Pilar to the Spanish world.  I never knew.

History of Our Lady of Pilar in Zaragoza

Pilar Church in Zaragoza, Spain (Lori Erickson photo)

Tradition dates the origin of the Our Lady of Pilar shrine to the year 40 A.D., when St. James the Apostle was sitting here on the bank of the Ebro River, discouraged and heartsick at his lack of success in bringing Christianity to the region. The Virgin Mary appeared to him and reassured him that his efforts would not be in vain. She also asked him to consecrate a church in her name, and left behind a pillar of jasper to mark the spot where she had made her appearance.

As Mary promised, St. James was indeed successful in bringing Christianity to Spain, and the place of his encounter with the Virgin became a holy place. Through the centuries—including years when Zaragoza was under Muslim control, when it suffered from plague and famine, and through years of civil war and unrest—this site has continued to draw the faithful. Holy men and women such as St. John of the Cross, St. Teresa of Avila, and St. Ignatius of Loyola have all made the journey here to show their devotion to Our Lady of Pilar, who is the patroness of Spain.

The most prominent miracle associated with the shrine happened in the seventeenth century to a poor beggar named Miguel Juan Pellicer from the town of Calanda. Unable to work because of an amputated leg, he had a great devotion to the shrine and frequently prayed there for help. The Virgin Mary answered his prayers by restoring his missing leg, and after word spread of the miracle, the number of pilgrims to the church greatly increased.

Multiple church structures have occupied the site, each one larger than the one it replaced. Today the Basilica de Nuestra Senora del Pilar, as it is formally known, includes 11 brightly colored tiled domes and is the second biggest church in Spain (only the cathedral in Seville is larger). Its construction was begun in 1681 under the direction of King Charles II. Parts of its interior date back even farther, including a magnificent main altar of alabaster designed by Damian Forment in the fifteenth century. Two of the frescos that line its domes were painted by Goya, the famous eighteenth-century Spanish artist who was born in the nearby village of Fuendetodos.

Our Lady of Pilar came to international prominence when in 1492 Christopher Columbus landed in the New World on her feast day of October 12. She was subsequently named patroness of the New World. In the early twentieth century, the shrine also played an important role in the founding of the Opus Dei movement. As a young seminarian in Zaragoza, St. Josemaria Escriva, the founder of Opus Dei, made daily visits to Our Lady of Pilar to pray for guidance. Opus Dei members continue to honor her feast day each year.

Real X-Men? Psychic Captives Used In Government Operations

Here is the problem.  I know that this deep secret program exists and it has existed for a long time as back to the fifties.  In this case, his friend was uniquely strong enough to stop someone's heart.  I do not think they would have had him do this otherwise.

I am also surprised this report came out, but it may also be part of a deliberate release.  It is thus possible to warn off bad boys long before they become a threat.  It is clearly a powerful weapon that can fall into bad hands.

however also consider that this makes criminal leadership highly undesirable and that may well be seriously valuable.  It may be the shape of the future, but then the future will reside leadership at the natural community level anyway and specific talents will be recruited only for specific tasks such a building a structure.

Real X-Men? Psychic Captives Used In Government Operations

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Mark in California called in to tell his strange account:

“I had a friend contact me concerning some research I was doing. I was really interested in this sort of thing. (the show that evening was about psychics and the Montauk Project) He seemed to have some psychic abilities. He was already in the Marine Corps as a sniper. Worked with the CIA. He was in Force Recon which is like the Marine corporation of the Navy Seals. He had refused an unlawful order along with the rest of his team when they had gone into a village during Operation Jawbreaker to target a high ranking member of the Taliban or Al Quaeda, and they found only his wives and children. They were ordered to kill these civilians and they refused. Then, one by one, the team members were being picked off. They were being killed in mysterious ways and so my buddy got out of the corps and became a mercenary. He was working in Africa. He didn't tell me where he was, didn’t tell me anything about the circumstances of his work there. But one night I had a dream involving a truck full of mercenaries in a little shanty village and the circumstances, so I described all this in an e-mail which he got 9 days later and his response to me was 'No way!' And it turns out the very things that I had described 9 days earlier had happened to him 2 days before I got my e-mail so it seems to show that his ability could actually move backwards and forwards through time as well, that he could have a stressful experience, transmit that to me back through time. I would get it in the form of a dream. So we began working with this. 

When he got back to the United States this fellow had an uncanny ability at playing poker. He could win all the time because he could get inside the mind of the people who were at the table with him. He would go to Las Vegas every weekend and come home with between 50 and 70 thousand dollars and it was because he could sort of insert his own consciousness into the minds of other people around him. He said it was all done through the eyes. The eyes were literally the windows of the soul. So as time went on we began experimenting with the possibility of helping to find missing people. This kind of thing. There was a murder case that happened in Mendocino Countywhere a local county supervisor had gone out to check on some property. Apparently there was a marijuana grow op out there and the man unfortunately was shot and killed by someone who was working this marijuana grow. They had a picture of this guy up on the website and my friend said he could get into the guys mind if he had a clear picture of his eyes. So I emailed him a picture of this guys eyes and he told me everything about where the perpetrator, the criminal, the murderer was. So I contacted the Sheriff's Department in Mendocino and I told them about this, told them where the guy was hiding, how he was hiding; he was resupplied by breaking into vacation cabin homes up in the mountains. Two days later a picture of this guy actually doing that was captured on a game camera that showed up in a local news, so I knew we were on the right track. Then he and I both noticed our computers were being hacked and then everything we were communicating back and forth was being followed very closely. They wind up getting this guy in a shoot out, he was shot and killed. So a couple of days later a bunch of black SUVs show up.

If I could, I would like to back up a little bit and explain something else that was going on behind the scenes. This individual had an unusual blood type which lead to excessive clotting if he had anything with vitamin K in his diet. At one point he had a blood clot that got into his brain he went into a coma. He was in a coma for about two weeks and when he came out he was paralyzed for most of the left side of his body. His girlfriend was a doctor, student. After about five or six months he had regained most of the motor control on the left side of his body but it had enhanced his physic abilities to the point where he could actually do things with his mind. He could actually psychically heal without touching people. He even healed me all the way from Dubai where he was living. But in a moment of anger. There was a question of a will as he came from a family of millionaires and he was written out of the will through an illegal process. And he imagined giving his father a heart attack all the way from Dubai and the next morning his sister called him to tell him his father had died from a massive heart attack the night before. So it took me about two weeks to talk him down. He thought he was going to Hell. That he'd be damned to Hell because he'd done this. And he wasn’t entirely sure he could do this until he began experimenting with people on the street. And if he could make eye contact he would find that he could actually get into their head and mess with their heart.

So getting back to this murder investigation in Mendocino and the tracking down of this individual. Our computers began to show signs of being hacked and sure enough there was this incident – three black SUVs pull up at his house in Lake Arrowhead down in southern California. He's essentially taken into custody by these government agents, driven for about three hours estimated to be in a northerly direction which would have put him in the center of China Lake Naval Weapons Station where he said he was brought down into a massive underground facility where there were a number of other individuals who could do things like something out of X-Men; people who could start fires with their minds, people who could move objects with their mind. Many of these individuals were young kids and very often their bodies were being pumped with all kinds of pharmaceuticals and supplements to enhance their abilities. You’d think it would wind up shortening their lives. Anyway, one of the things they found was that he could see through the eyes of a target. This was called 'a consciousness insertion.' This was how he was so successful at gambling. He would literally get inside the other competitors head and see what cards they were holding. But now he had this ability to either heal or to kill at a distance. And they begin testing him.

This was in December of 2011. They took him into a room and they sat him down with a number of photographs and they showed him just the eyes, a high resolution photograph of someone with sort of Asian looking eyes, and they said, 'Tell us what this guy is thinking.' So he looked in the eyes, captured the frequency of the consciousness of this target and he said, 'Well, I can't tell you what he's thinking because he's actually thinking in his native tongue. It sounds like it might be Chinese, Japanese or Korean.' He said, 'I can't tell you, but he knows that I'm inside his head and he's highly upset, highly agitated and very frightened. He's on a military train of some kind, he's with a bunch of military personnel. But I cant really tell you what hes thinking because he's thinking in his own native language.' They said, 'Okay, kill him!' So he stopped this guy's heart.

So a couple days later I hear from this guy and he basically says this is what they had me do. I said, 'Well, you don't know what happened while you were in this underground facility?' He said, 'No, why, what happened?' I said, 'the leader of North Korea died of massive heart attack on a train two days ago on the very day you were doing that targeting. Do you have any idea what this means?' He said, 'let me tell you what it means, they got people with these abilities just like mine that work with the Secret Service, CIA and these are people that can accompany the President. They can look out ahead in time. They can project any kind of assassination attempt might be attempted. They can see through time to who the operator will be and they can target that individual in advance, even give that person a heart attack before they even consummate the assassination attempt. So think about that for the implications for the political system and the idea that you might actually be able to threaten someone, maybe even someone on the Supreme Court. That makes a decision to break the tie-breaking vote that gets decided, for example, if Obamacare gets pushed through. Or is found legal. Things like this.' He says, 'it is extremely disturbing how this ability on the part of all these individuals is being used by people within the government.'”

Study Blows Greenhouse Theory Itself into the Dustbin of History


Yes it really does.  We now have a nicely testable model that applies to all planets including our own that can be tweaked and corrected for altitude and as new information arrives.

This means a real high confidence baseline to measure variations and other putative theories.  This reshapes the whole science of climate as local results can be now measured as plus or minus such a baseline.

The whole tale is so over.  Of course we will see no end of apologists attempt to hang on to the old.  Hopefully this is faster than what we have dealt with in the past.  Teachers need to suspend the whole tale until we get the textbooks rewritten..


'All observed climatic changes have natural causes completely outside of human control'


BOZEMAN, Mont. – A new scientific paper contends the entire foundation of the man-made global-warming theory – the assumption that greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere by trapping heat – is wrong.

If confirmed, the study’s findings would crush the entire “climate change” movement to restrict CO2 emissions, the authors assert

Some experts contacted by WND criticized the paper, while others advised caution.

Still others suggested that the claimed discovery represents a massive leap forward in human understanding – a “new paradigm.”

The paper argues that concentrations of CO2 and other supposed “greenhouse gases” in the atmosphere have virtually no effect on the earth’s temperature.

They conclude the entire greenhouse gas theory is incorrect.

Instead, the earth’s “greenhouse” effect is a function of the sun and atmospheric pressure, which results from gravity and the mass of the atmosphere, rather than the amount of greenhouse gases such as CO2 and water vapor in the atmosphere.

The same is true for other planets and moons with a hard surface, the authors contend, pointing to the temperature and atmospheric data of various celestial bodies collected by NASA.

So precise is the formula, the authors of the paper told WND, that, by using it, they were able to correctly predict the temperature of other celestial bodies not included in their original analysis.

The paper

The paper, published recently in the journal “Environment Pollution and Climate Change,” was written by Ned Nikolov, a Ph.D. in physical science, and Karl Zeller, retired Ph.D. research meteorologist.

The prevailing theory on the earth’s temperature is that heat from the sun enters the atmosphere, and then greenhouse gases such as CO2, methane and water vapor trap part of that energy by preventing it from escaping back into space.

That theory, which underpins the anthropogenic global-warming hypothesis and the climate models used by the United Nations, was first proposed and developed in the 19th century.

However, the experiments on which it was based involved glass boxes that retain heat by preventing the mixing of air inside the box with air outside the box.

The experiment is not analogous to what occurs in the real atmosphere, which does not have walls or a lid, according to Nikolov and Zeller.

The new paper, headlined “New Insights on the Physical Nature of the Atmospheric Greenhouse Effect Deduced from an Empirical Planetary Temperature Model,” argues that greenhouse theory is incorrect.

“This was not a pre-conceived conclusion, but a result from an objective analysis of vetted NASA observations,” Nikolov told WND.

The real mechanisms that control the temperature of the planet, they say, are the sun’s energy and the air pressure of the atmosphere. The same applies to other celestial bodies, according to the scientists behind the paper.

To understand the phenomena, the authors used three planets – Venus, Earth and Mars – as well as three natural satellites: the Moon of Earth, Titan of Saturn and Triton of Neptune.

They chose the celestial bodies based on three criteria: having a solid surface, representation of a broad range of environments, and the existence of reliable data on temperature, atmospheric composition and air pressure.

“Our analysis revealed a poor relationship between global mean annual temperature] and the amount of greenhouse gases in planetary atmospheres across a broad range of environments in the Solar System,” the paper explains.

“This is a surprising result from the standpoint of the current Greenhouse theory, which assumes that an atmosphere warms the surface of a planet (or moon) via trapping of radiant heat by certain gases controlling the atmospheric infrared optical depth,” the study continues.


The paper outlines four possible explanations for those observations, and concludes that the most plausible was that air pressure is responsible for the greenhouse effect on a celestial body.

In essence, what is commonly known as the atmospheric “greenhouse” effect is in fact a form of compression heating caused by total air pressure, the authors told WND in a series of e-mails and phone interviews, comparing the mechanics of it to the compression in a diesel engine that ignites the fuel.”

And that effect is completely independent of the so-called “greenhouse gases” and the chemical composition of the atmosphere, they added.

“Hence, there are no greenhouse gases in reality – as in, gases that can cause warming,” Nikolov said when asked to explain the paper in layman’s terms.

“Humans cannot in principle affect the global climate through industrial emissions of CO2, methane and other similar gases or via changes in land use,” he added. “All observed climatic changes have natural causes that are completely outside of human control.”

For the first time, Nikolov said, there is now empirical evidence from NASA data that the greenhouse effect of the atmosphere is not caused by the trapping of heat, but by the force of atmospheric pressure.

The pressure is the weight of the atmosphere, he added.

And the combination of gravity and the mass of the atmosphere explains why the Earth, for example, is warmer than the moon.

“The moon receives about the same amount of heat from the sun as Earth, yet it is 90 degrees [Celsius] colder than the Earth, because it has no atmosphere,” Nikolov explained.


What it all means for science and the climate debate

This is not the first paper to reject the greenhouse-gas theory entirely.

In 2009, for example, Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf Tscheuschner published a paper titled “Falsification of the Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics” in the International Journal of Modern Physics.

They wrote that the “atmospheric greenhouse effect” that “is still supported in global climatology” basically “describes a fictitious mechanism.” The second law of thermodynamics, they said, shows that “can never exist.”

However, their paper did not propose a mechanism to explain the higher temperature of Earth relative to the moon.

The new paper by Nikolov and Zeller does propose such a mechanism – atmospheric pressure.

If correct, the implications of the discovery would be enormous, multiple scientists told WND.

For one, it means the climate projections used to forecast warming doom and justify a wide range of policies are completely wrong.

That is because they were produced by computer models built around a “physically deeply flawed concept, the radiative greenhouse theory,” said Nikolov, who works as a federal scientist but did the new study completely on his own time.

“One major implication of our recently published study is that there is indeed a fundamental problem with the physics of current radiative greenhouse concept,” he told WND, highlighting the origin of the “inaccurate” theory in two 19th century papers.

“The foundation of the greenhouse theory was born of an assumption, it was never shown experimentally, and our results show this is completely wrong,” Nikolov said. “Our study blows the greenhouse theory completely out of the water. There is nothing left.”

“Hence, the public debate on climate needs now to shift focus to the fact that the basic science concept underlying current climate projections by the UN [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] IPCC and other international bodies is physically flawed,” Nikolov added, saying the new findings require a “fundamental overhaul of climate science” and that Earth may be heading for a cooling period.

“This is what the data shows,” he said. “We didn’t start with a theory, we started with the data, which is the opposite of how the greenhouse theory came about.”

The greenhouse theory, Nikolov explained, is based on the assumption that a free convective atmosphere – an atmosphere with no “lid” on it – can trap heat.

“This was an assumption born out of a misinterpretation of experiments involving glass boxes in the early 19th century by Joseph Fourier, a French mathematician,” he said.

“Glass boxes get warmer inside when exposed to the sun not because they trap long-wave radiation, as thought by Fourier, but because they hamper the exchange of air between the inside of a box and the outside environment,” he added.

Next came Svante Arrhenius, a Swedish scientist, who assumed Fourier was correct and in 1896 created an equation to calculate the Earth’s temperature based on CO2 in the atmosphere.

“This equation is both mathematically and physically wrong,” argued Nikolov. “Yet, this paper is still cited as ‘evidence’ that the physics of the greenhouse effect have been well-known for over 100 years.”

The atmosphere does, indeed, increase heat near the surface of celestial bodies.

“But until our paper, the mechanism to explain this – pressure – was not known,” Nikolov continued. “All of the climate science has been based on these false assumptions, all the computer models were based on the assumption, but it’s incorrect.”

Zeller, a retired U.S. Air Force reserve colonel and a retired research meteorologist who worked for the U.S. Forest Service and NOAA, also said that the monumental implications of the findings would extend even beyond the climate debate.

“The implications, beyond the scientific ones, of this study, are that once understood, it may be an opportunity for healing by looking back and seeing that even in this day and age science can be wrong,” he told WND.

“Possibly this will demonstrate that the world’s peer-review system needs to be rethought so that it doesn’t continue retarding the advancement of human evolution: Medicine, pharmaceuticals, cancer cures, proper dietary guidance, etc. are all hampered by combinations of greed and strongly held beliefs,” he added.

In terms of advancing scientific inquiry, “our formula, if we can get it out there to the world, is going to open up all sorts of new lines of research,” Zeller continued.

Among other examples, he noted that if the formula is applied to the earth’s temperature record stretching back to previous warm and cold periods, it would explain everything from the observed reduced differences in temperature between the earth’s poles and the equator, to how pterodactyls could fly despite the physics of flight not working based on today’s atmospheric density.

While describing himself as a “flaming, bleeding heart liberal,” Zeller noted that this should all be about science, not politics.

“This climate controversy is costing billions, making the wrong folks rich, and keep us from solving real environmental problems,” he explained.

What supporters say:

WND reached out to a wide range of scientists around the world working in a variety of fields related to physics or climate.

Most either did not respond, or said they did not have the technical knowledge needed to evaluate the new study’s validity.

However, of those who responded with an opinion, most suggested that the paper was interesting and important.

Nils-Axel Mörner, the retired chief of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics Department at Stockholm University, was among those who expressed support for the findings.

“The paper by Nikolov and Zeller is exceptionally interesting, a big step forward, and probably a door-opener to a new ‘paradigm’,” he told WND.

Mörner, who served as an expert reviewer for the UN IPCC until realizing that it was not truly interested in science, added that he “fully” endorsed the conclusions offered by Nikolov.

Professor Philip Lloyd with the Energy Institute at South Africa’s Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) also expressed support for the paper.

“Nikolov’s work is very interesting, and I think the underlying physics is sound,” he told WND in an e-mail.

Lloyd, who was educated in nuclear physics at MIT and also served on the UN IPCC, noted that “slightly more than half of all climate scientists have just a bit of doubt about the ‘human-made carbon dioxide causes global warming’ hypothesis.”

“However, they face the question, if not carbon dioxide, what is it?” noted Lloyd, who also serves as a professor at the Agricultural University of Beijing and was nominated by the UN IPCC in 2007 as part of the team to share the Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore.

“Nikolov and Zeller may have found the answer – the sun,” he said. “We have known for some time that solar activity and global temperatures are highly correlated, but correlation and cause are not the same. However, Nikolov has managed to link the two in what seems to be a scientifically sound manner.”

One important element to note is that the theory advanced by Nikolov and Zeller has made predictions about the surface temperature of other bodies in the solar system, he explained.

That means the theory can be tested.

“One of the reasons why many of us have doubts about the carbon dioxide hypothesis is that it, too, makes predictions, and many of those predictions have turned out to be wrong, so it is really nice to have something else we can test, rather than trying to tweak the carbon dioxide hypothesis to make it fit the facts better,” he concluded.

Emeritus Professor David South of Auburn University, who has testified before Congress on issues related to atmospheric CO2 concentrations, first learned in 2012 of the “new discoveries” made by Nikolov and Zeller.

He promptly invited Nikolov to give a lecture on the “Unified Theory of Climate” to the faculty at Auburn University.

“When I introduced Ned, I said the professors would learn about a paradigm-shifting discovery,” Professor South told WND in response to questions about the new paper.

“Using correct math procedures, Nikolov and Zeller realized our atmosphere warms the Earth by about 2.7 times more than is commonly believed,” he said. “The reason for this extra warmth is simply due to the pressure from the mass of the atmosphere.”


“Using Ned and Karl’s simple equation, people can now accurately predict the average temperature of many planets by just knowing two things, the total surface atmospheric pressure and how much sunlight reaches the atmosphere,” he explained.

“Thanks to the groundbreaking research by Nikolov and Zeller, we know more about our Earth than we did a few years ago,” he concluded.

But of course, it will take time for the new knowledge to catch on and become accepted, he cautioned.
“As with any new discovery, many from the old school choose not to accept new ideas,” South continued, pointing to the early dismissal of the continental drift theory when it was first outlined in 1915.

Today, a similar pattern is happening, with some “older experts” who assume that “ignoring the paradigm shift will somehow protect their reputation” choosing not to believe in “the Nikolov-Zeller (N-Z) equation” or to “admit their math errors,” South said.

“I find many advocates will choose not to learn about new findings while true scientists will admit to math errors,” he added. “There will continue to be those from the old school who refuse to accept correct math and who choose to ignore the fact that atmospheric pressure affects the temperature of the Earth.”

‘If it disagrees…’

South also quoted physicist and Nobel Prize laureate Richard Feynman, who said: “It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it does not make any difference how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is – if it disagrees with experiment, it is wrong! That is all there is to it.”

Yet another prominent expert who suggested the new paper was important and needed to be considered was Nicola Scafetta, a professor at the University of Naples Federico II.

Like many other experts who spoke with WND, Scafetta said the paper was “interesting.”

“Although this paper appears to contradict the atmospheric greenhouse theory, I believe that it needs to be taken into account for a very simple motivation: at the moment there is a severe uncertainty regarding the effect that CO2 causes to the Earth’s climate,” he said.

After outlining what he said were the flawed views on CO2 advanced by many governments and man-made warming theorists, he argued that the “claim that science has ‘determined’ what [greenhouse gases] such as CO2 can do to the atmosphere is false.”

“The uncertainty is simply still too large,” he added, pointing to his own research findings showing “at most a small climate sensitivity to CO2.”

“Might the above uncertainty and the fact that more and more studies are indicating a smaller and smaller climate sensitivity to CO2 be due to some fatal error that the study by Nikolov and Zeller would suggest?” Scafetta asked. “I say that there is a need to be open to alternative interpretations and evaluate them carefully.”

Another scientist who highlighted the potential significance of Nikolov’s and Zeller’s findings was Gary L. Achtemeier, a retired federal research meteorologist.

Achtemeier noted that the geophysical heating mechanism proposed by the two scientists – the pressure produced by the atmosphere – explained the entire temperature difference between the Earth and the moon.

Combined with an earlier paper published by Nikolov and Zeller (under the pseudonyms Volokin and ReLlez), Achtemeier said the findings “challenge the foundations of the current climate theory.”

“Their success resides in the inclusion of knowledge of the thermodynamics of other planets and moons with atmospheres residing in our solar system,” he said.

The implications could be enormous.

“The current climate theory which depends exclusively on greenhouse gas heating to explain the thermal effects of Earth’s atmosphere is demolished,” Achtemeier said.

Still, it could take years for the scientific community to fully confirm the results, he added.

“If the results withstand what is sure to be fiery scrutiny, then the global warming hypothesis, alarmist hysteria, 97 percent consensus, political movements, and climate treaties are reduced to hogwash,” the retired meteorologist concluded.

No comment, neutral, and unsure:

A number of independent experts and scientists contacted by WND said they did not have the technical expertise to offer critiques or comments on the paper.

WND also reached out to many of the world’s most prominent advocates of the man-made global-warming theory, including Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt, and James Hansen.

None of the three responded to requests for comment on the study by press time.

Other scientists declined to comment on the study itself, but did point out that they did not believe man’s CO2 emissions were responsible for the observed variations in climate.

“Years ago I decided to concentrate on the sun’s role in climate variation, especially since CO2 and in particular, that caused by man, has little to do with the ups and downs of climate,” explained longtime climate researcher and former NASA scientist John Casey, who is now the president of the science and engineering consultancy Veritence Corporation. “Therefore I don’t get involved in wasting my time in debating CO2 climate impacts.”


Instead, pointing to his latest book “Upheaval! Why Catastrophic Earthquakes Will Soon Strike the United States,” Casey told WND he focuses on what he believes will be an upcoming period of global cooling that will produce effects such as earthquakes and volcanic activity.

Some experts were unsure what exactly to make of the new paper at this point.

Physicist Gordon J. Fulks, PhD, for example, said the paper is “interesting” and “may have some value.”

However, he also told WND he would be “very cautious about over-hyping it.”

“Far too many articles published today do not replicate,” said Fulks, who has worked for the Laboratory for Astrophysics and Space Research at the Enrico Fermi Institute of the University of Chicago in addition to his work for a think tank supporting the U.S. Defense Nuclear Agency.

Specifically, like many other scientists, Fulks offered general criticism of today’s peer-review process as inadequate at the very least or in some cases non-existent, especially in “open access” journals such as the one that published the study by Nikolov and Zeller.

“This is not to say that the Nikolov and Zeller paper you found is problematical,” he added. “It may be fine. But I cannot tell with just a cursory reading, because I have not encountered their lines of reasoning before.”

Fulks said that with the amount of time available to him prior to publication of this WND article, he would not be able to do a careful review and draw any solid conclusions.

Even though it can be shown that man-made CO2 ““is very clearly not the culprit” in explaining current climate behavior, Dr. Fulks said it cannot yet be known definitively which phenomenon might be dominant in terms of driving changes in climate.

“My advice is to be skeptical,” he said.

What the critics say:

Two respected climate experts contacted by WND responded by rejecting the new paper: Physicist William Happer of Princeton University, and Lord Christopher Monckton who, while not a scientist per se, is widely recognized as an expert in the field.

Happer, a well-known skeptic of what critics refer to as “climate alarmism,” took aim at the idea put forth by Nikolov and Zeller that the radiative greenhouse theory was flawed.

“There is not the slightest doubt that the Earth is warmer due to the greenhouse effect of clouds, water vapor and CO2 than it would be without them,” Happer told WND, noting that computer models were not needed to understand that.

As an example to illustrate the concept, he pointed to the fact that frost is more likely to form on a clear, calm spring night than it is when it is cloudy or windy.

“On a cloudy night the upwelling radiation from the ground is partially compensated by downwelling radiation from the bottoms of clouds and from any intervening water vapor and CO2,” he said. “So the surface does not cool so quickly on a cloudy night.”

But on a clear dry night, “there is little downwelling radiation and you can get frost,” said Dr. Happer, who has been among the prestigious experts consulted by President Donald Trump for insights on climate.

Happer did acknowledge that the current climate models are seriously flawed.

But the problem, he said, is that they “grossly exaggerate the greenhouse warming due to more CO2.”

“It is not that they don’t fully understand the correct parts of Nikolov’s message,” Happer added. “The effects Nikolov has fixated on are built into climate models from the very beginning, for example, in the approximately 6.5 C/km temperature lapse rate in the Earth’s troposphere.”

A more detailed criticism of the paper was offered by Lord Monckton, who advised the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and has long been a major figure in the global climate debate.

Among other concerns, Monckton suggested that the authors of the new paper had made an incorrect assumption about the strength of the greenhouse effect on the earth.

He also said that the paper’s conclusions were based on a “curve-fitting exercise” that relies on only five or six planetary bodies, which he called “far, far too small a sample size to draw the conclusions the authors have drawn.”

While Monckton acknowledged that there are few planetary bodies with atmospheres that have been observed with “sufficient resolution,” he maintained that the sample size was “altogether inadequate to permit definitive conclusions such as that which the authors have drawn.”

“Thirdly, the paper uses approximately a dozen different curves, selecting one as the best fit,” he said. “I have seen too much curve-fitting in the climate debate to place much faith in it as a method, unless a clear physical mechanism explains the curve.”

Monckton argued that the paper did not sufficiently explain the physical process by which the warming caused by mere atmospheric pressure was thought to arise.

In addition, he questioned the lack of analysis of temperature at altitudes beyond the surface of the celestial bodies that were analyzed in the study.

“The result (if it were real) would be greatly strengthened if the formula used by the authors were able to predict the temperature at various altitudes as well as at the surface,” Monckton said, adding that the authors of the new paper had not tested their theory at different altitudes.

“Those are the reasons why I should urge caution,” he concluded. “I do not think the result will withstand international scrutiny unscathed.”

Instead, Monckton told WND at a conference in Montana that he and a group of other experts were about to have a new paper on climate published in the near future that would have major implications.

The new study, he explained, will expose a crucial mathematical flaw in the current narrative of “climate alarmists.”

He said the results had already been confirmed by a government laboratory.

Response by Zeller and Nikolov:

The authors responded to much of the criticism by arguing that the critics were not understanding the full implications of the study, and that they continue trying to leave a role for greenhouse gases in temperatures when there is none.

Nikolov also provided lengthy but highly technical responses to the criticisms offered by Happer and Monckton.

For example, Nikolov argued that Happer’s explanation, which is also found in some textbooks, confuses local drivers of weather with the drivers of the global climate.

“You cannot argue against empirical data,’ Nikolov said.

On a broader level, he suggested that the lack of widespread and enthusiastic support for the new study was to be expected in science.

“The reason you are getting mixed responses to our paper even from skeptics is not because there is something scientifically wrong with our results, but because the implications of our empirical findings are so different from any existing climate concept at the moment,” Nikolov told WND.


“When you have something qualitatively that different, people do not have a conceptual context to put it in and tend to respond with a dismissal,” he continued.

“But again, this is how new paradigms are typically met in science and in society in general,” he concluded. “That’s why one needs to strictly follow the evidence (empirical data) wherever it may lead, and not impose pre-conceived judgments on the physical reality.”

Earlier controversy:

This is not the first time Nikolov and Zeller have made waves with their findings.

Last year, the pair even earned a writeup in the Washington Post after it was discovered that they had published an earlier, related paper on their ideas about the greenhouse theory and atmospheric pressure under fake names: Den Volokin and Lark ReLlez.

Eventually, their true identities were discovered, and so, the journal, Advances in Space Research, retracted the paper, though the editors acknowledged that the retraction was “not related to the scientific merit of the study.”

Nikolov told WND that the main reason for using fake names was federal policy under the Obama administration.

“I was told by my superiors that I could not publish anything on climate as a government employee,” he said, adding that he works for the U.S. Forest Service but that the research “was done in my private time, has nothing to do with my work, and does not represent the position of my employer.”

Zeller, who retired from federal service, did not face any such restrictions.

The two decided to start investigating the climate issue after the notorious “ClimateGate” scandal, in which hacked e-mails from leading climate scientists revealed what was widely perceived as inappropriate and unethical behavior aimed at promoting the man-made warming theory.

While the use of pseudonyms to publish papers was criticized by some scientists and analysts, others, including some man-made warming theorists, defended the decision to do so.

None of the scientists supporting the man-made global-warming theory responded to WND’s requests.

Saturday, July 29, 2017

Mars covered in toxic chemicals that can wipe out living organisms, tests reveal

Mars is bathed in ultra violet light which turns the Martian soil sterile.  

Unsurprisingly the planet needs a foot or two of water.  Pretty unlikely unless we impact a wet comet if such actually exists.

This is also likely on other planets with atmospheres and scant water.

Yet i do think that the planet has plenty of water deep down.  Sublimation has built up those ice caps from somewhere.


Mars covered in toxic chemicals that can wipe out living organisms, tests reveal

Discovery has major implications for hunt for alien life on the red planet as it means any evidence is likely to be buried deep underground

The chances of anything coming from Mars have taken a downward turn with the finding that the surface of the red planet contains a “toxic cocktail” of chemicals that can wipe out living organisms.
Experiments with compounds found in the Martian soil show that they are turned into potent bactericides by the ultraviolet light that bathes the planet, effectively sterilising the upper layers of the dusty landscape.
The discovery has wide-ranging implications for the hunt for alien life on the fourth rock from the sun and suggests that missions will have to dig deep underground to find past or present life if it lurks there. The most hospitable environment may lie two or three metres beneath the surface where the soil and any organisms are shielded from intense radiation. “At those depths, it’s possible Martian life may survive,” said Jennifer Wadsworth, a postgraduate astrobiologist at Edinburgh University.
Wadsworth’s research was driven by the discovery of powerful oxidants known as perchlorates in the Martian soil some years back. Hints of perchlorates first showed up in tests performed by Nasa’s Viking lander missions 40 years ago, but were confirmed recently by the space agency’s Phoenix lander and Mars rover, Curiosity. In 2015, the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter spotted signs of perchlorates in what appeared to be wet and briny streaks that seeped down Martian gullies and crater walls.
Many scientists suspected that perchlorates would be toxic for microbial Martians, but in theory at least, alien bacteria might find a way to use the chemicals as an energy source. If life could thrive in perchlorate-rich brines, then aliens might be thriving in the damp patches on Mars.
Working with Charles Cockell, an astrobiologist at Edinburgh, Wadsworth looked at what happened to Bacillus subtilis, a common soil bacterium and regular Earthly contaminant found on space probes, when it was mixed with magnesium perchlorate and blasted with ultraviolet rays similar to those witnessed on Mars. She found that the bugs were wiped out twice as fast when perchlorate was present. Other perchlorates found on Mars had a similar bactericidal effect.

Further tests found that the UV rays broke down the perchlorate into other chemicals, namely hypochlorite and chlorite, and it is these that appear to be so destructive to the bacteria.
The scientists followed-up with another round of experiments that looked at the toxic effects of iron oxides and hydrogen peroxide, which are also found in Martian soil. These tests yielded even more bad news for microscopic Martians: when the bacteria were hit with UV rays in the presence of perchlorates, iron oxide and peroxide, the bugs were killed 11 times faster than with perchlorates alone. Writing in Scientific Reports, the researchers say that the inhospitable conditions on Mars are caused by a “toxic cocktail of oxidants, iron oxides, perchlorates and UV irradiation.”
The findings mean that damp streaks on the Martian surface that have been spotted from orbit may not be prime spots to find alien microbes. The briny patches would be likely to concentrate perchlorates, making the streaks even more toxic than the surrounding soil.
“I can’t speak for life in the past,” said Wadsworth. “As far as present life, it doesn’t rule it out but probably means we should look for life underground where it’s shielded from the harsh radiation environment on the surface.”
Chris McKay, a planetary scientist at Nasa Ames Research Center in California, said the study was “a big step forward” in understanding the ramifications of finding high levels of perchlorate on Mars. From a Mars exploration point of view, he said the results were both good and bad news. On the plus side, it means that any microbes that hitch a ride on landers sent to Mars will be swiftly destroyed on the surface, alleviating concerns about contaminating a potentially inhabited planet. “This should greatly reduce planetary protection concerns as well as any concerns about infection of astronauts,” he said. “But the bad news is that this means we have to dig to quite some depth to reach a biological record of early life that is not completely destroyed by the reactive UV-activated perchlorates.”
In 2020, the European Space Agency plans to send its ExoMars rover to the red planet on a mission to search for alien life. The rover is equipped with a drill that can bore two metres into the ground to retrieve soil samples in which microscopic Martians may be found.
Andrew Coates, a planetary scientist at UCL who leads the ExoMars panoramic camera team, said the work shows that the surface of Mars today is more hostile to life than thought. “This, combined with the solar and galactic particle radiation environment at the Martian surface, makes it all the more important to sample underneath the surface in the search for biomarkers,” he said.

“With the ExoMars rover, we will drill to retrieve and analyse samples from up to 2m under the surface,” he added. “This is important as a millimetre or two will get us below the harmful ultraviolet, one metre will get us below the oxidants such as perchlorates, and 1.5m gets us below the ionising radiation from the sun and galaxy.” 

Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%