Food-Shortage Hoax
or
Elisa Lam Revisited
The Russians should not be deceived by the Turks, but for now, they welcome the new Turkish twist:
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu is to make a visit to Russia [what? you're kidding?] and attend in a regional summit in Sochi upon the invitation of the Russian government, Hurriyet daily said....The report comes a day after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan expressed his "regret and sorrow" [yeah, sure] to Russian President Vladimir Putin in a letter addressing the downing of a Russian jet and the killing of two Russian pilots in 2015.
http://www.kurdpress.ir/En/NSite/FullStory/News/?Id=13568#Title=Turkish FM to visit Russia
It seems that this new move by Turkey is to take a shot at the United States for forming an alliance with the Syrian Kurds at Manbij (some call it "Manjib"). The day after the Turkish president almost apologized to Russia, we find the United States stabbing the Manbij Kurds in the back:
The Pentagon Spokesman stated that local forces [not the Kurds] will take hold of the Syrian northern city of Manbij and the city's control will not be like the Kurdish city of Kobani....Peter Cook stated that the democratic forces are one kilometers away from the center of the city and are continuing their advance despite the IS resistance.
He further said that most of the SDF forces are Arabs not Kurds and the Arabs are leading the forces, adding that local people of the city will control it not the Kurds, as the situation is in Kobani.
Oh, I see. Up until now this was a Kurd-led battle, and the Americans even put Kurd logos on their own uniforms to make the Kurds embrace them, but suddenly the Kurds are to take a back seat to the Arabs now that Turkey is going closer to Russia. All in a day's typical, hypocritical work.
Fallujah is fully liberated, the Iraqi's claim. ISIS is defeat-able without U.S. support. The Mosul operation is moving forward as we speak. It's going to be another blow against the Kurds because the Iraqi's are not prone to granting the city to them; and the Kurds whom have been ready to help liberate the big city were hoping to be the pal of the U.S. in doing so, hoping the U.S. would help it to achieve some powers within it. At this moment, all Kurds everywhere might be thinking to go over to Russia, have a little chat.
Turkey is making it clear that it's not apologizing for downing the pilots and killing one. Turkey really doesn't want to go over to Russia, but is feigning it.
Ha, "U.S. President Barack Obama has set out a possible new agreement on military cooperation between Russia and the U.S. in Syria, the Washington Post reported Thursday. The agreement would see the two countries cooperating more closely in the fight against the Islamic State if Russia agrees to stop the Assad government from bombing U.S-backed rebel groups, an unidentified White House official told the newspaper. The text of the agreement was sent to the Russian government on Monday, the official said." So, in return for destroying 10 terrorist guns per week, Assad must acknowledge the untouchables. That is, he is not to fight against the American-supported rebels that America hopes to replace Assad with. It's a little like offering Assad a footing to stand on, and asking him to shoot himself in the foot at the same time.
Days later, Turkey is claiming that it will oppose Nusra Front, making no sense at all. Suddenly, Turkey appears to have evolved into Assad's best friend. What's going on? I'm going to guess that Turkey and the U.S. together are hoping to chase Nusra fighters into the anti-Assad untouchables groups. "According to Sergei Lavrov, Turkey has accepted the new rules of the game in Syria. Now, if moderate opposition forces do not leave the areas controlled by the [Nusra] terrorists they will be considered as terrorists' accomplices." In other words, Turkey and the U.S. appear to be gearing up for a fight against Nusra under the condition that certain fighters abandon it, and these fighters can then be funneled into the untouchables. This is not at all to Assad's benefit, and the Americans are probably seeking to preserve their "moderate" fighters before Assad and Russia go in and slaughter them along with Nusra.
http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160702/1042338086/russia-turkey-syria-terrorists.htmlBy now, many ISIS fighters escaping Manbij have been counseled to enter the untouchables groups. It should be clear to Assad that the U.S. is playing save-the-terrorist. As Assad and Russia clamp down on the terrorists, the latter will suddenly transform themselves into untouchables material, if such groups are formed.
How is it that Iraqis destroyed more ISIS vehicles than the Americans, as many as three times as many:
"The Iraqi military provided different numbers, saying coalition and Iraqi forces destroyed a total of 750 ISIS vehicles in the two convoys and killed hundreds of ISIS militants....Iraqi air force and coalition airstrikes attacked the convoy throughout the night and into Wednesday morning," Garver said. "We estimate coalition strikes destroyed approximately 55 Daesh vehicles and we know the Iraqi security forces destroyed more."...
On Wednesday, a second group of ISIS vehicles and fighters formed east of Ramadi, in the Albu Bali neighborhood, Garver said. "When strikes from both Iraqi and coalition air hit the convoy, the Daesh fighters abandoned their vehicles and fled on foot," he said. "We estimate coalition strikes destroyed approximately 120 Daesh vehicles. Again, we know the Iraqi security forces destroyed more."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/30/middleeast/iraq-militants-airstrike/index.htmlMaybe the U.S. wasn't trying very hard. Maybe they were bombing vehicles that had no men. Maybe they were missing the targets more than hitting them. The U.S. had no excuse but had to join the Iraqi bombardment.
The new Canadian prime minister is the first one ever to join a Gay Pride event, which is not surprising because previous generations were normal. But Mr. Trudeau is, like his father before him, a rabid anti-Christian, and this is why he's partaking in the cesspool, to get into the faces of Canadian Christians. He's the prime minister for people only like himself, and other Canadians are, according to his own actions, his enemies. Mr. Trudeau is a fool for choosing to go up against God. The situation has come around, now, to where a national leader feels politically safe to identify with Gay Pride. How has the world come round to this? All by itself naturally? No, but forces in upper level satanism have brought the world to this point. It may not be a religious satanism, but that's the correct word for it. Mr. Trudeau is identifying with human pigs, unashamed, because he has a satanic spirit. That would be the view of all of the Apostles of Jesus Christ. His fight is against Jesus, not Canadians only.
A man who desires to be inside another man's anus is a pig. A man who desires another man to enter his anus is a pig. Knowing it to be wrong, he permits it because of people like Trudeau sending him the message that it's fine. If a small group of people came along who advocated the eating of "shit," and if people started to hate this group, why, Mr. Trudeau would support it and call it an "alternative lifestyle." The shit-eaters would be permitted to advance their cause, in an effort to make others try it too, and before long their would be shit breakfast cereal, shit snacks, all to be legalized just as Trudeau wants pot to be legalized. Anyone who railed against this new practice would be labeled a shitphobe. Instead of viewing it as demonic, the liberal world would revel in the fact that it makes Christians livid. This is what liberals love to do. They celebrate evil behavior.
Being stoned on pot alters the mind to an unnatural point, and Mr. Trudeau thinks nothing of a nation practicing such a thing, meaning that he's not interested in a better, stronger, healthier nation. He's more interested in getting into the faces of his spiritual enemies. Here we have liberals pretending to advocate human progress to better things, and meanwhile they would see the nation revert to tribal tendencies of ancient savages. Talk about backward. I don't need to call Trudeau a fool; he has announced it all by himself. When Mr. Trudeau speaks, I see shit at the corners of his mouth, as evidence for what he's been into. No one put it there but himself. He willingly received it.
As for me and my household, we shall be clean. It's not a new concept to be clean, but Mr. Trudeau would have the nation believe that Jesus is backward, passe, not in style. Jesus wasn't really enlightened, he was a bigot. He went against the political establishment, and for his troubles, he was killed by it. They didn't execute him based on anything dirty that he had done. They killed him because he was making too many converts. The nation was going over to his way of thinking. The leaders felt that, to allow this to continue, the people would come to despise them, and throw them out. It was exactly the will of Jesus for the people to do this. It is exactly my will to have the people throw Trudeau out of power, and it is God's choice as to what the prime minister will accomplish against Him. After his efforts, Trudeau will need to deal with his punishment. It is not far in the future, and it starts now. It starts as soon as he attacks the people of God.
What do people advocate when they promote Jesus? Are they advocating robes and sandals? Are they advocating Jewishness? What is it about Jesus that Trudeau hates? Jesus is defined as one who sought to bring the community in relationship with God, the rightful owner of the planet, and good churches stress these very things. There is such a thing as good churches. Jesus attempted to make people into children of God, and the best place to condition the mind for to become children of God is in a good church. There are also corrupted churches. He made it very clear that God was in favor of healthy human qualities, things that promote community, brotherhood, and unity in a "Father." The latter term is powerful in making a stink of typical pagan gods. "Father" denotes a caring Creator, very attractive in a world made cold by Roman steel. A shaft of the Roman machine was stuck into the heart of Israel, for the political leaders that Jesus railed against were Roman puppets. Rome honored pagan zeroes. The leaders of Rome were dimwits, darkened fools, the epitome of greed and brutality. Washington, a liberal bastion, has patterned itself after the Roman senate; it's just a matter of time before the brute Roman beast reveals itself at the corners of Washington's mouth.
The spirit of Rome continues into the modern age. It was able to corrupt church-concept into a facilitation of Roman imperialism. Finally, when the corrupted church no longer had the Roman empire as its partner, the "Enlightenment" subdued and overcame it. This Enlightenment is what Trudeau is all about, freedom from Christ in any shape or form, whether Catholic or Protestant, but especially freedom from evangelical thought. Obama is just like Trudeau because there is a school of thought in the elite world that has mixed itself into the dough of humanity. The builders have rejected the Capstone. Catholicism corrupted the Capstone, but Masonic Enlightenment has throw if off completely, replacing it with a one-ness program that includes all of His enemies. Trudeau is in power today thanks to the Toronto area of Canada, which served as Canada's "multi-cultural" experiment, where the city was packed with immigrants, with religions foreign to Christ, and swayed into liberal, political camps, as is the case in the United States too. The minorities in both countries are what tilt the balance of voting season slightly toward liberalism at times, allowing them to achieve power.
God is for multi-culturalism too, but only if he is the Head. God can't betray his own program, where a human community is under He as head. That is the only possible future. It cannot be any other way. There cannot be a human Head with God in submission to it. It is logical for God to be the capstone, but Obama and Trudeau think that man should play God. This is the vast problem with American imperialism. World powers in the EU are willing to partner with American imperialism as long as its a liberal one, but this is a monster capable of sitting upon God's throne as though it belonged there. Let's see what they accomplish without God's help. Actually, we are seeing it before our eyes. They have put Obama and Trudeau in power, and are threatening to put the Clinton circle back in power. With a Clinton-Trudeau orgy, expect the red-light district of humanity to prosper greatly. With spy systems in place, any diabolical thing that they conspire against Christians can be greatly enhanced. This is where the world will go just as soon as the anti-Christ spirit starts to speak out with pointed animosity.
The more they make sin appear as the norm, the more they can accuse Christians of being rebels and bigots together. The more that they promote sin with provocative schemes, the more they show willingness to fight Christianity. Vivid promotion of queers is the way of choice, at present, to show animosity against Christians. The latter have been portrayed simultaneously as opposed to women's rights; everything has been set up deliberately to tarnish, not just Christianity in general, but Christians themselves. Anti-Christian lunacy has long been in my generation; it has learned how to operate in more-effective ways. Step by step, this monster will arise just in time for the Day of the Lord.
My advice is for all Christians to start their own Christian-based websites. Mine costs me a whole $5 per month. Every Christian should be out there sending the world the true message of Jesus in every way possible, and in the meantime to stack the Internet with a revelation of Jesus' enemies, how they operate with deception. The goal should be to get Jesus involved in fighting this monster, and to throw the Trudeau's and Clintons of the world out of power. If we do not get His message out, they will get their message out. If Google tries to hide Christian articles and websites, it allows God to take action. It is NOT in vain to fight for God just because anti-Christian powers have more pawns in high places. God is the queen upon the chess board. He has the choice of moving in any direction, and knows how to form traps for the king. God can expose Google's backbone, and in fact Google has already been exposed to a degree. If it wants to be exposed again, let it continue doing wrong. If you want to serve God and haven't the money or situation to become a missionary, spend $5 per month to communicate with the world with your very own "ministry." You do not need Bible college to speak for Jesus. But you do need to believe that his Apostles were telling the truth about Him. Trudeau doesn't think so. But Trudeau goes further than simply not believing; he becomes an anti-Christian activist.
So here is what God decided to do. He would remain silent in the last generation(s) as the world latches onto an anti-Christian spirit promoted by people, both men and women, with satanic spirits showing the way. God would be mindful of the difference in people who come to lose faith simply due to his silence and related developments in the world's philosophies, versus the people that show tendency toward sin and adamant anti-Christian thought. Prophecy predicts loss of faith in the end times (Matthew 24). As a countermeasure to His silence, God decided, long ago, to provide prophecies speaking, to the end-time generation, of His existence, and when these prophecies start to occur, the wise whom have not engaged sinful trends will take heart, and their faith will strengthen, lifting their heads toward God. Keep your lamp burning, in other words, and do not partake with the Trudeau's of the world.
Mr. Trudeau is calling peoples of the world to join him. His government has recently passes a law allowing suicide assistance from physicians. It's a great way for doctors to murder patients in a global population-control program, if they can make this as popular as they have made queers and porn stars. I see the day when elderly will be made to feel good about ending it early. And I expect that a doctor-assisted suicide will pay the doctor very richly. He won't do it for free, because, in the world of demonism, money makes it go round. Trudeau would force every kind of doctor to kill a patient, in the same way that Trudeau would force every kind of pastor to marry a male couple. While the liberals use "choice" as a method of advancing their sinful lifestyles, Christian doctors and pastors will have no choice in the face of it. The aim is to turn every Christian into a God-dishonoring tool, a hypocrite, a traitor of Christ.
The great thing about Jesus' words, "I am the way, the truth," is that the believer needs to search no longer for the foundation of the cosmos, the meaning of life, the reason for existence. In one sentence, Jesus had satisfied the soul that yearns to know. When he said that he is the life, he meant that all of life hangs on his existence, and his "partnership" with the Father. "The way" means that he's one with the Father. The way where? To the Father. By putting yourself in the way of Jesus, all your fears should vanish. Your life becomes more abundant because you now have an assortment of debilitations gone by the way side. You have come to health, or, as the Bible puts it, to holiness. You are healthy in God. But the Trudeau's of the world choose to carry their rot and debilitations like trophies to be proud of, which is a definition of playing the fool. Canada is now led by a fool, after nearly eight years of a fool leading the Unites States. But, although they lead, not everyone follows. And this will make them angry. They will become prone to forcing everyone to follow.
What should be done about citizens like me who refuse to follow satan's grime? It depends on how foolish the fool in power is. Should I pray for Trudeau? Yes. I should pray that he has no power over God's people, and that he should decide to step down willingly, let someone much better lead the country. And Someone better is coming, and is also watching.
When we decide to take Jesus with a pure faith, a more abundant life results in the sense that fears, anxieties, and uncertainties vanish. In essence, the sky becomes a softer more deeper blue than it was before. Instead of looking up at the unknown universe, we see it suddenly as the eternal promise of someone that Jesus calls our Father. The Trudeau's of the world would have us look into the sky and see fearful things such as aliens, or the evolution of the cosmos void of a Creator. But when a Father is in the picture, even the stars get softer to our view. Danger and eeriness is no longer seen lurking in the heavens, but is now identifiable with people in our midst. Danger is in people like prime minister Trudeau. They are the ones who would spoil our abundant life. They would keep reminding us that they have succeeded in protecting sinfulness by law and democracy. But Jesus said that we should not allow the fools to spoil our joy in Him.
If they persecute us, we are to celebrate our position with the Father. No one can snatch us out of His hand, least of all a fool that exposes his folly openly. The greatest danger is in an angel-of-light fake, such as George Bush, but Trudeau exposes that he's on the dark side before he even begins to know what ruling a country is. He has already announced to all Christians that he's the enemy.
Abundant life is the quality of life itself, not the outer multiplication of things you own, or the escapes you manage in the world of recreation and entertainment. Abundant life is also the quantity of life, as in not temporary. When fears and anxieties vanish, it's called peace. "My peace I give to you," He said. The Trudeau's of the world would not have us experience this peace. Peace makes for a healthier person than does frantic. There is His statement, "In this world you will have trouble." That doesn't sound like peace. It sounds more like a tree swaying in gusts of wind. But trees are made flexible, just like us. We have a breaking point, but God promised that the world would never be able to take us to more than we can handle.
And then there are the people who abandon the storm before getting to breaking point. A tree doesn't have that option. We sometimes do. The fury of satan is predicted to become more harsh. If the enemy can weaken our faith now, how will we fare in the fury? If faith is a gift, doesn't it go to someone trying to serve God in some way? If Jesus comes round to dig around your tree, and that tree is you, and if he digs around it to allow more oxygen to get to the roots because it's dying, and if that tree refuses to grow after Jesus comes a few times to make all the conditions better for your receiving your service, then, eventually, your tree will simply die without cure.
In return for abundant life, the Father is asking us to stick ourselves into the ground where we might have trouble. I prefer the peace and the abundant part. A nice gentle breeze would be terrific, but I'm not relishing any storms...unless I despise my enemies and want to see them powerless. If I have zeal for Jesus, I will also pray for the crushing of his enemies. I'd be willing to endure some discomforts if in the end I could clear up some nasty things. The greatest harm we can do to enemies of Jesus is to "love" them. We are to destroy their power bases by not retaliating, for if we resist retaliation, we put situations into God's hands. There is no better way to destroy the enemy but to allow God to do it. He chooses the methods of destruction, and sometimes they are painful deaths, others times not. O'Hara was cut into pieces. The wife of Trudeau's father shamed him when he was the prime minister (started in the 1960's). I'm not going to say whether God was behind the death, in an avalanche, of the current prime minister's brother, but there you have the possibility.
If you want evidence that Jesus was in the Old Testament, you simply go to Daniel 9. The prophet predicts the destruction of Jerusalem in less than 70 weeks from the start of that city's rebuilding. The destruction of Jerusalem didn't happen within 70 weeks of that time. It didn't happen until the generation after Jesus. No prophecy is expected to get any traction with a blatant error such as that, and no prophet is expected to get any credibility. Yet, the book of Daniel survived afterward, all the way to Jesus' day, and Jesus even claimed that Daniel was a true prophet. Jesus even patterned his return in the clouds (Matthew 24) as a take from the same of Daniel 7; the latter has the destruction of the Roman empire at that Coming.
Daniel says that, after the 69th week, the Messiah would be "cut off, but not for Himself." If we view a "week" as a period of seven years instead of seven days, it brings one smack to the time of Jesus' ministry. After the Messiah is cut off, a ruler is predicted to come destroy Jerusalem, and that happened too. Daniel was a remarkable prophet, and we can gather by the use of "weeks" that God didn't want Israel to know, with certainty, anyway, that Messiah was going to appear in roughly 30 AD. The prophecy is useful after it has come to pass for to prove that Jesus was the Messiah.
The phrase, "cut off, but not for himself," is not normal by ordinary standards. "Cut off" is a negative thing that happens to him. You are not supposed to predict that a negative thing is useful. The way Daniel has it, the Messiah is cut off to produce a benefit for someone(s) other than himself. It's completely radical, and the one cutting him off can only be the Father. It's a Father-Son team for the benefit of Israel, if only Israel would receive the Team.
So, along comes this Jesus fellow, and he gets a massive following right in time to fulfill Daniel 9. At one point he claims that he's the "son of man" of Daniel 7, but no one expects this wildcat to amount to much if he were just a nobody, yet he goes on to form a following of untold millions amongst the so-called Gentiles, and somehow managed to convert even me more than 1900 years later. His apostles reported that he died for the sins of Israel. You can find this in Isaiah 53 too, where he is called, "the servant." Isaiah 53 even has his Resurrection. Why didn't my schools inform me of these things? But, now, we have the Internet to inform people of all ages. At one time, Christians were unable to communicate with the world at large as we're able to do now. Let's not waste this opportunity while they are still allowing us to write.
Food-Shortage Hoax
Media came out last week to say that members of the U.S. state department were some of the high-level peoples meeting to discuss the coming food crisis starting about 2020. They are predicting a decade-long food crisis -- high food prices -- at that time due to "climate change" and other factors. We now have the global-warming hoax involved in what looks like, not a prediction of a food crisis, but an artificial increasing of food prices for to make the peoples gasp. To deflect the blame from themselves, they will blame it on "climate change." Note that, as people are not taking well to "global warming," the fiends changed it to "climate change" so that any extreme weather pattern can be blamed on greenhouse gases. All such plots are not predicted to work well because these play-God fanatics are going up against God. The plotters plan their dominoes to fall, but God can keep any one domino from falling, ruining the entire plot. For example, global-warming has itself become suspect by most of the world as an artificial plot, a hoax.
So, now, to explain why they are still pushing global warming, we now have, as a theory, this particular domino that suggests artificial increases in food. High prices of our basic needs strangles the populations, making them less resistant when it comes to moving them into a certain direction desired by the satanic bastion. For tribulation survival, high food prices are very detrimental. But it's this very thing that can cause God to act in spoiling their plots. Here is where you can find information on the 2020 food crisis:
https://www.google.ca/search?q=%22food+crisis%22+2020+&hl=en-CA&gbv=2&oq=%22food+crisis%22+2020+&gs_l=heirloom-serp.12..0i30.348376.358594.0.361281.21.18.0.0.0.0.2146.4645.2-1j0j1j0j2j9-1.5.0....0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-serp..18.3.1620.kmq6EAJ26Mw
The study was a simulation that was conducted last November. It involved the participation of 65 government officials from countries all over the world, and was commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund, the Center for American Progress, and the Cargill corporation. It was set up like a game, with each participant leading their respective nations through a hypothetical global food crisis. The game was designed to see how these nations would interact with each other, and what kinds of solutions could be produced to solve the crisis.The food crisis in this game lasted between the years 2020 and 2030, and was caused by a combination “of food price and supply swings amidst burgeoning population growth, rapid urbanization, severe weather events, and social unrest.” In the scenario, crop failures in key regions caused by climate change, higher fuel prices, and poor responses by the international community, eventually led to food prices rising 395%. Not surprisingly, the game found that civil unrest would be widespread during this period.
What is surprising however, is how this scenario concluded with such a happy ending, against all odds and all logic. The high food prices stimulated more food production, and as weather conditions improved, the world's food stocks were replenished.
Doesn't it sound as though they are in control of the prices? After a decade or so, or after they have achieved their slated goals, they just bring prices back down. And it sounds as though they might even brag on defeating global warming by then; having used that hoax for their purposes, they will no longer need it.
This is the kind of control-thing expected of a global-government bastion. Peoples seeking to cozy up under the feathers of globalism are about to be greatly pained by their own hen. It's the lesson of history, that when the people trust in their leaders, their leaders use and abuse them. Over and over, this has been the lesson of history. Globalists are predicted to conduct many experiments to see how well their reins of control can be made to work for them, and how best to strengthen those reins for future operations. The world masses are their guinea pig.
The Internet is a means to kill globalist plots, for in this forum, people can communicate with one another on what the globalists might be up to at any given time. The longer we are permitted the freedom to operate on the Internet, the greater the number of peoples who will start to see that, yes, maybe there is a globalist apex with plotters and fiendish schemers. To their advantage, they have the owners of the Internet, and Microsoft, on their side. But even that partnership can be upset in a critical moment of time when they least expect it. Just when they expect the water to run, God can put his finger into the tap.
Whatever their plots were in high fuel prices, they realized that it was making Russia strong again, and so they had to end that scheme. They kept gasoline prices high, anyway, but the price of crude came way down. Perhaps they have simply altered their scheme to send food prices high instead of fuel prices. Or, perhaps both of these things are simply their experiments to check out how the nations operate under certain situations, or how best to manipulate them when its needed. Needless to say, the cost of globalism is paid by the masses, not by the globalists. The goal is to collect tax money from all member nations for to run yet another tier of government.
If globalists want to bring trouble to themselves, let them begin a food shortage. But how possibly could they cause a food shortage if there isn't one? They don't need to. They need only to increase food prices to get roughly the same effect as a food shortage, and meanwhile they rake money off the top of the high prices. There is no logic in food prices shooting up in all nations. It is impossible for there to be a food shortage based on too little rain or too much rain because this may happen in one area of the world and not another. Just be thankful that they can't control the weather, or they would.
How does one go about raising food prices globally? Will they get the farmers and ranchers to increase? Or will it be the food stores only? Where will the justification be? With oil, they used supply-and-demand smoke and mirrors. But are people going to suddenly start eating more? That doesn't sound right, because globalism has a war on overweight people as we speak. Where will the greater demand for food come from? Will aliens come down to steal our potato chips? Is the 2020-2030 scheme nothing more than a story released to frighten the world? Yes, it can be just that, because a 666 system predicts that there will be a great demand in food, overnight, as Christians stock up for tribulation endurance. The bastion would prepare in advance to keep Christians from stock-piling, and what greater method of accomplishment can there be but to make the world think that a food crisis is at the brink just as they plot to release their 666 system? This will make the world hate Christians for hoarding at the worst-possible time.
The following was written in 2009 by a UN organ:
Closely linked to climate change, the global food crisis [what crisis?] was a wake-up call for the international community [globalist phrase].... The representative of the Comoros said the spike in food prices and food insecurity could push 100 million more people into poverty [scare], 10 per cent of them children [scare]. If nothing was done to mitigate climate change, agricultural production could be halved by 2020, and the rise in global temperature could put between 100 million and 400 million people at risk of hunger and malnutrition. The Comoro Islands could disappear in 50 years, he warned.
One clearly sees the close relationship between global warming and the food crisis, making the food crisis suspect as a hoax as much as global warming is. More and more, I'm seeing articles like this as contrived for fulfilling an agenda. There never was a food shortage after 2009. Food prices increased about the time that gasoline increased, but that's all. The poor in my area had to do with less beef, fish and chicken, relying more on pork, and they were forced to purchase more no-name brands and on-sale items, but that's all. The rains came, the foods grew, no food shortage due to global warming; a side of the planet actually didn't fall off yet. The article calls for more gifts granted by nations to agricultural corporations, suggesting that certain globalists in that business are bucking to get their hands on these tax dollars. Thanks to the Internet, Monsanto has been tarnished, as it deserves. Monsanto has devised a way to destroy the seeds of garden foods, and wants to force the world of farmers to purchase vegetables with impotent seeds.
The article above the UN article was written this past week. But here's one from 2011 mentioning the 2020 date, very suspicious: According to the non-profit Universal Ecological Fund, the world will be faced with food shortages by 2020 if, as a UN-backed panel has predicted, global temperatures rise to a level 2.4 degrees Celsius above those in pre-industrial times. Ignore this garbage, yet be alert to the schemers behind it.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/286813.htmHow many people still trust the American national security "industry"? Is this not at the very pinnacle of the satanic bastion?
The US national security industry is planning for the impact of an unprecedented global food crisis lasting as long as a decade, according to reports by a government contractor.The studies published by CNA Corporation in December 2015, unreported until now, describe a detailed simulation of a protracted global food crisis from 2020 to 2030.
The simulation, titled "Food Chain Reaction", was a desktop gaming exercise involving the participation of 65 officials from the US, Europe, Africa, India, Brazil, and key multilateral and intergovernmental institutions.
The scenario for the "Food Chain Reaction" simulation was created by experts brought in from the STATE DEPARTMENT [caps mine], the World Bank [no guff?], and agribusiness giant Cargill, along with independent specialists. CNA Corp's Institute for Public Research, which ran the simulation, primarily provides scientific research services for the Department of Homeland Security [awash in sin] and the Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA].
...By 2024, the scenario saw global food prices spike by as much as 395 percent due to prolonged crop failures in key food basket regions, driven largely by climate change, oil price spikes, and confused responses from the international community [one can see here how food prices are increased artificially].
"Disruptions affected developed and developing countries alike, creating political and economic instability, and contributing to social unrest in certain areas," the project's technical report states.
What we have here is what could be construed as a forecast of civil chaos, a great opportunity for the contrivers to experiment with their crowd-control capabilities, what some would see as martial-law apparatus. The contrivers then get to focus on various groups, especially the gun-toting groups. With a food shortage, they can fake robberies of food by armed citizens, and argue that a nation without guns is safer. The reality is, they want nations without guns so that their control apparatus succeeds much-more smoothly.
The article continues, and shows that reliance for the crisis will rest on Homeland Security, a bastion created by George Bush:
Although the scenario was not produced as a forecast, it was designed to provide a plausible framework to test the resilience of the national security system from the perspective of the US government, private industry, and civil society.CNA Corporation is a government contractor established in 1942 to provide scientific research for the US Navy and Marine Corps..
Four different organisations commissioned CNA Corp to conduct the exercise: the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the Center for American Progress, giant food corporation Cargill, which controls a quarter of US grain exports, and Mars Inc., the global sweet manufacturer.
One outcome was a panel hosted on Tuesday by the Center for American Progress on "The National Security implications of Climate Change and Food Security" [the two are paired together like brother and sister], featuring Nancy Stetson, the US State Department's Special Representative for Global Food Security.
...Part of that optimistic scenario involves fortuitously massive Band Aid-style worldwide donations to the UN's World Food Programme.
Ah, all governments will be forced to grant money, not food, to the UN. I get it. And not just to the UN, we may safely assume. This is a scheme to pillage tax dollars.
Let's not lose site of increased oil prices being part of the scheme. At any time, they can bloat such prices and begin their food-shortage scheme. Perhaps the past oil crisis is now being assessed in various ways for to learn how best to swing it again in the future.
Okay, so now we're up to speed on the reason for a global-warming hoax. They intend to increase food and utility prices, and they know what the ramifications are in such an event, where they can capitalize all the more on the misfortunes of their victims. Both the real-estate crisis and the banking crisis fell at the feet of George Bush. Tax money was used as the cure. The schemers funnelled tax money into their own coffers, and it generally coincided with Obama's fiscal-cliff hoax for which he stole 800 billion, adding it to the debt bill of American families. If you still want globalism, you must be one incredible idiot. If you want globalism, you likely believe that global warming is threatening to sink whole cities under the sea.
The globalist should be offended by my use of "idiot." The globalist should be offended by the fact that he is an idiot. Placing the hands of the world into one body seeking to create itself is like trusting in thieves. No body of men would seek to create a global government unless it were plotting something sinister for itself. Good men have better things to do. Success in the creation of a global government requires reasons behind it, such as crises. Some international body, they will argue, needs to be in charge of far-reaching crises, and, of course, they will manufacture scare stories to make the idiot believe that a global government is definitely needed.
A global government already exists, even if there is no vote-casting for it. There is global consensus already on an array of projects. How does that come about unless there are global-minded men working together? Hillary herself used "global village." The global word is everywhere, and the idiot sings a song like it's a good idea. He envisions peace amongst the nations, one-ness, tranquility and prosperity. But, the greater the empire, the greater the in-fighting for to control it. Who gets to be the biggest cheese? Not for long, because there's someone right behind him with a knife, and both of them are selfish and evil, or they wouldn't be there in the first place.
Here is from England in 2008:
Across the world a crisis is unfolding at alarming speed. Climate change, China's increasing consumption and the dash for biofuels are causing food shortages and rocketing prices - sparking riots in cities from the Caribbean to the Far East. Robin McKie and Heather Stewart report on the millions facing starvation - and the growing threat to global securityhttps://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/apr/13/food.climatechange
It looks like the food scare-project was under way at that time. The evidence in the article is not compelling. One can single out poverty at any time in the history of mankind, but this article does this to "prove" that a dire food situation was taking shape at the time. The goons start their article with "Across the world...at alarming speed," all based on global warming. Fortunately, global warming came to be recognized as a hoax by too many. The culprits appear not to have a plan B because global warming is still being pushed, and they are seeking to undo the damage done to it. Simultaneous with the exposure of its fraudulent members, the world experienced cold temperatures, a double whammy against them. But it was at this time that they altered "global warming" to "climate change," as if to suggest that both cold and hot are the result of global warming. The idiot will believe it, and if you are one of these idiots, it's you who needs to apologize.
The article repeats its first sentence:
It is a grim, unsettling story. Yet it is certainly not an exceptional one. Across the world, a food crisis is now unfolding with frightening speed. Hundreds of millions of men and women who, only a few months ago, were able to provide food for their families have found rocketing prices of wheat, rice and cooking oil have left them facing the imminent prospect of starvation. The spectre of catastrophe now looms over much of the planet.In less than a year, the price of wheat has risen 130 per cent, soya by 87 per cent and rice by 74 per cent. According to the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation, there are only eight to 12 weeks of cereal stocks in the world, while grain supplies are at their lowest since the 1980s.
In my view, this serves only to show that their food-crisis program was already in full swing. Why did they abandon it? Maybe they didn't. Maybe they succeeded in robbing the nations. Yet this "game" that we are now hearing may suggest that they did abandon it, for a later time. "[VeriChip] was discontinued in 2010 amid concerns about privacy and safety. Still scientists and engineers have not given up on the idea." Was the food-crisis program abandoned when it turned out that the world wasn't ready to go to a skin chip? How have they been plotting to make the world ready for a skin chip? Are they gunning for 2020 - 2030?
You may have noted above that one of the factors to blame for the food shortage is greater consumption by China. We are to envision a gluttonous monster responsible for everyone else's starvation. But doesn't China already have population-control methods in place? How does that make it the most demanding food buyer in the world? It doesn't. The idiot reads it, and thinks, that sounds logical. After all, he hates China. Why does he hate China? Because the globalists told him that China is hateful. Why? Because China resists the globalists. China also resists porn, but American drinks it up like coffee, morning, noon, and night.
Here is another article of 2008:
Although the credit crunch has lowered the price of food, a global recession now raises the hunger pains of the most vulnerable. The stage is set for the next international food crisis, says Joachim von Braun.Just a few months ago, the 'crisis' on everyone's mind was the spike in food prices. Then the financial crisis gripped the world, food prices declined somewhat, and agricultural concerns lost their sense of immediacy.
Ah, so, the prices spiked, then went down in the midst of another global crisis. It seems that none of the global plots worked very well. Oil had to come back down to take the grease out of Russia's new machine, and so Russia stepped in to give the globalists something else to focus on, and here we are, waiting for the next phase in Syria. This is a time of embarrassment for Obama, and he has so little time left that one wonders where he'll get the motivation to so much as climb out of his hole. Russia punched him out and beat him into the ropes. Obama called time out (in Syria). He wants all eyes off of Syria while he tries some tricks to get it back on the globalist track. He's was so beaten up lately by the losses of ISIS that he's willing to do what he refused a week ago: enter a military partnership with Putin. It's a risky trick, but he's apparently down to his last straw.
Believe it or not, there are American Christians who agree that there's a globalist plot, yet they are unwilling to view the U.S. military in the Middle East as part of it. These Christians think very highly of the U.S. military, as though it somehow belongs to Republicans. One would think that, by now, Christians would have realized that globalism involves the U.S. military chiefly. But, no, they refuse to look at it in this way. My updates lost many of these readers. But I won't change my position. I will continue to say that the Russian and Chinese governments appear more moral than the present American government. I will continue to agree with Iran that America (the government) is the Great Satan.
It seems that globalists were sending their message via the EU to all the world, and the EU itself was being made responsible for feeding the crisis monster with money. So, all of you EU idiots that agree with EU globalism, start paying for this hoax, and don't complain; put a little money aside for near-future hoaxes too. Never mind trying to enjoy yourself with your own money; your globalist leaders have been eyeing that extra money of yours for to take it from you in any possible way; the more idiotic you can be made, all the easier it will be. An idiot is a willing partner with one who robs him.
I don't know what other language to use. If you are a globalist supporter, you think you are wise in your own eyes. You think you can see the way to human happiness. You trust all the establishments to work together in sync, all desirous of helping the world in any way possible. You have been fooled into believing that they are humanitarian at their souls. You are therefore willing to give your money to them. A perfect idiot. How much will it cost to fix the world's problems when the Plagues of God begin to fall? To be SuperIdiot, you will pay money to the globalists at that time too.
We are all being forced to pay for it whether we believe in globalism or not. A country can give directly to a nation in crisis, or a government can be turned into an idiot. In the latter scenario, money no longer goes directly to the nation in crisis, but rather to a globalist middleman disguised as an international humanitarian agency. The middleman delivers only part of the money to the nation in crisis. The Red Cross was founded by a Freemason, wasn't it? Didn't the previous UN chief steal money from the Iraqi crisis? Yes, he did. How many others did who didn't get caught? And who started the Iraqi crisis? Ahh, now we get it. They start the crisis, then beg the world to pay for it through their middlemen agencies. No one in all the world is happy when a natural disaster strikes, except the globalists wielding their middleman agencies.
The "expert" 2002 article below, from a Washington organization (red flag), first of tells us that food shortages are directly related to insufficient ground water, and then asks the question on whether there will be enough ground water for farmers by 2025. The answer, the report says, in uncertain, and the report can be deemed for population-control measures as much as for water management. This fear that water will be in short supply by 2025 seems way over the top because farmers are not going to be using much more water then than they were in 2002, and, besides, there is plenty of ground water in most places to meet the increased demand.
http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/16144/1/fp02ro01.pdfI once lived above the ground water (hundreds of feet below ground level) that supplies all the water for San Antonio, Texas. I never heard that there was a water crisis there, even though the water source is in a dry area with roughly 24 inches of precipitation annually. I never heard that ranchers had their irrigation water cut off. If and when a water crisis threatens the San Antonio area due to a large shift in its population, people have plenty of time to move away to an area having more rain water, if they are convinced that a problem has begun to take hold.
The article says that the projected increase in global water consumption between 1995 and 2025 will be at least 50 percent, and "therefore SEVERELY limit irrigation withdrawal." It's a crisis word. I don't see how a population increase from 5.7 billion in 1995 to a projected 8 billion in 2025 justifies a 50-percent figure for extra ground water, suggesting that this figure is akin to the false temperature-increase figures circulated by global-warming freaks. People are being set up to freak out so that some population-control program will be accepted no matter how harsh. Abortion and euthanasia are just the beginning.
You can't expect food prices to stay low if globalists are sticking their fingers into food and water management. If they would just leave things alone, things will remain normal. But as soon as globalists start to create a crisis, and its solution, they are bound to be doing it for a vast reaping of money, and as someone needs to pay it, it'll be bound to show in the cost of YOUR food and water. All of our basic needs are being exploited, and the idiot is gladly allowing himself to be made weaker in this way. The richer the globalists become, the weaker we all are to combat or control them. It is possible to control them with a mass-movement, but idiots are expected not to complain. One of the most idiotic countries in the West is Canada. Canadians are proud of not complaining, ever. A typical Canadian is a proud idiot. Think of it.
Jesus complained about Israel's government. Jesus blasted the leaders. He pointed out their greed and their duplicity. It's okay to complain if you care about the nation, your neighbors. But if Canada allows a tiny house in Toronto to increase to $500,000, as it did years ago, the idiot who owns the house will be very happy, even though his three teenage children will now need to pay that much to own theirs. These houses later approached one million. There was no mass movement complaining about house increases to an obscene level. And if they fail to complain about that, they are not predicted to start a mass movement when mere beef doubles or even triples. The globalists have the idiots right where they want them, in fear of complaining when it's been made out of fashion to complain.
What did Canada do? It added an eight percent Goods and Services Tax (GST) for any builder re-selling a property for profit, which tax is then passed on to the home buyers. In Canada, builders also need to pay tax on any profit they make due to the increase in property value between the time they purchase and the time they sell, and that too is passed on. Dirty, filthy Canadian government, ruling over a land of spineless government-worshiping idiots. Praise father government, praise father government, it's so kind to the poor. Yeah, with your money it's so kind to the poor. Yeah, but we live like kings, our fridges are always filled with good food. Not for much longer...because you failed to raise a stink. No one in the world has fine houses like we do; yeah but you pay for them over 25 years of labor, and a good chunk of it goes to the bankers by design.
The government allowed a house costing $40,000 in building materials to shoot up to $300,000 so that virtually no young couple would be able to purchase or build a house in cash. The house's materials are $40,000, and the dirt underneath it is $250,000. What's wrong with that picture? Can't the government put a limit on how much real-estate dirt can cost per square foot? Of course it can. Will the bankers like it? Who cares what the bankers think? It's none of their business. Foul, rotten, senseless, traitorous national governments, fornicating with the never-satiated rich. A curse is on the West, and it's not going to be pretty.
Here is a headline out last month:
"Feds [Trudeau government] considering luxury tax to cool housing market". Ahh, the prices of luxurious housing is going up too fast, and one way to cool it is to add more tax. That's absolutely logical, if you're a dirty-swine government with a hairy snake as your prime minister. Mr. Trudeau, my wish is that I could have a few words with you in Hell."Vancouver housing prices keep going up and breaking records month after month -- including in May when new numbers from the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver indicated the benchmark price for a single detached home in Vancouver hit $1,513,800 -- up 36.9 per cent from the same month last year." I can't understand how people can afford this. Are people nuts? Apparently, they are. A house with $60,000 of building materials, and its dirt at more than 1.4 million dollars. And the government's solution is more taxes. It's just as though the government wants in on a piece of the action. Does that sound like a father to you?
There is a good side to all this that will thwart the globalists, and they will be burned, I think. Let's say that you have been a Christian homeower in Vancouver since the price of the average home was $300,000. The prices of a remote 50-acres tract of country land hasn't gone up by more than $5,000 since the Vancouver house shot up from $300,000 to 1.5 million. What do you see? I see a rich Christian family on a wilderness survival tract in the 100s or 1,000s of acres. I see him sharing his Vancouver fortunes with fellow believers who haven't the money for their own camps.
It's not a problem whatsoever for someone making $20,000 of annual income in Vancouver to purchase a 1.5 million dollar home, if they sold their own home for 1.5 million. But what about the kids? They don't have homes to sell. Where is the prime minister in this picture? Where are the law-makers. In Retard Land? How are the kids going to be able to buy a house in Vancouver? The retards are abandoning young couples to basement-rental units at obscene rental costs. New children are going to grow up in Vancouver basements with parents who never have equity in their own homes. They are going to retire without owning their own home outright. But in Retard Land, they drink the finest of wines, and live a life of luxury in every way conceivable. Isn't it time yet to raise a stink? Ahh, but, no, Canadians don't complain; they are so great.
Bankers haven't lost a dime. Although interest rates are half as much, housing prices are twice as high. They lose nothing during a low-interest-rate era. But when interest rates go up again, it'll be a bonanza, with housing prices tripled, quadrupled, or even more. Poor world-class idiots who trusted their globalist buddies. Pay up, ungodly, become a slave. But as for Christians, they will be called out.
Here is a Canadian article out last month. Keep in mind that Canada, as the second-largest country in the world, geographically, is so heavily populated that people are stepping on each other's toes:
Population growth seriously threatens global peace and stability. It is the primary cause of humankind's most challenging problems [freak-out garbage]...Overpopulated? For most, the question is absurd. Surely Canada is a huge land of open spaces, abundant resources and endless room for ever more people. Well, think again...
You don't want to read the rest only to have your intelligence assaulted by globalist goons. If they say that even Canada is over-populated, you know they have been working over-time to come up with a smoke-and-mirrors crisis. The article says it's necessary to reverse the 1.2-percent population growth in Canada, just as if an elite cake-eater is worried that someone will come disturb him at his pristine, Hudson-Bay walrus hunt. We can't have yuckie people walking around ruining everything for the pristine paradise. They might leave some toilet paper around, offending the cranes. Just as you're gliding a canoe along the lake's morning mirror, there, in the water, a plastic bag a-floating. Damned Torontonians. The vacation is ruined. That's it; Canada has got to lower her population. But how? I was afraid you might ask. One just never knows what's going on in the mind of a lunatic globalist. But we do, don't we?
After being as negative as possible on as much as possible, the article says: "At some point common sense or the laws of nature must lead to a halt in endless population growth." Yeah, but why talk about "common sense" now since the day of need is centuries in the future? Should we start to become worry warts now? And what secret thing is couched by saying that "common sense" will be used to reduce population? Hmm, I don't think I like that. Who is this jerk, David Suzuki? I think it's time to fight back against these global-warming Suzuki's before they force women to abort all but two children. I say the best common sense is to abort the Suzuki's of the world. Yes, better to kill them than to kill the unborn. Chances are, the unborn will turn out to be better people. He says: "Canada should...encourage smaller families..." What he means is, Canada should encourage, and if that doesn't work, make a law.
I say that before we start aborting every woman's third child, we should rob herons of their water. The Suzuki's of the world say, "Are you nuts? Crane's are so beautiful, and babies are so annoying. And the thought of all those plastic diapers; I just can't take it." Note that the article above begins by mentioning global population, even though it's about Canada's population. Why do they mention global population? Is the following Canadian leader a globalist puppet: Sounds like: "Invoking Jesus, the official policy for Canada's Green Party commits to pushing for "reduced fertility" worldwide.
....How could any party concerned with global issues and survival not take an interest in population pressures?" she said in a phone interview from Toronto. "Is global survival an end that is somehow controversial? We need to have a stabilization of global population.'"
That's the party's leader talking. Why is she invoking Jesus and globalization at the same time, while she's supposed to be concerned about Canada? Why is she trying to make Canada join the global trend? She's not alone; all the politicians are moving in that direction, just as though there is a power in the world demanding population control, even for wide-open, water-abounding, tree-laden Canada. Every nation is being coerced into walking the same line. "May, who has led the Greens since 2006 and has served as Member of Parliament for the riding of Saanich-Gulf Islands since 2011, already drew criticism in July for signing a petition calling for Western countries to adopt an official two-child policy."
https://news.vice.com/article/canadas-green-party-wants-to-stunt-the-worlds-populationIt is coming, the unbelievable, when no brother or sister will have more than one brother or one sister. What does she mean by, "policy." Isn't that a law? I told you that we are dealing with lunatics, and I meant it. The spirit of Hitler is back, where all obscene things must be done away with, especially people. People are so disgusting for environmentalists. Here are the freaks:
May is largely leaning on a report from the United Nations that projected the world's population could hit 11 billion by the end of the century, and theorized that nine billion is the maximum capacity that the earth could handle.Wait a minute. Who is the UN trying to kid? If the population today is roughly 7.5 billion, does it mean to say that a mere nine-percent increase will take up all the remaining water? This sounds like an Al-Gore delusion. The globalists are up to something. They want to reduce the size of the family for a reason other than over-population. Why are they turning everyone into worry warts? The answer is easy. They create a crisis so that they can solve it, and thereby fulfill a hidden agenda posing as another agenda. "The Canadian population is growing rapidly compared to the rest of the industrialized world." It's worry-wart time.
They're not really worried about running out of water or food; they just want less people in THEIR world. Everywhere they go, these lousy people are everywhere, crawling the planet, spoiling the business trips and recreational outings of the upper crust. It's just too much. People need to go. Besides, the masses are their potential enemies. There are 30 or 40 of these unsightly things for every one rich globalist. They just can't stand to see raunchy liberals living it up and fornicating in THEIR hotel beds. It sounds like globalists don't want to see another reckless-in-wild-abandonment baby-boom generation. The very liberals that took on the globalist call to reject God became the unsightly things in the globalist's daily routine. Perfect recompense. It's not population control that's needed; it's people believing in Jesus, and living decently in Him, all in one-ness under a Father who disallows rotten governments and their godless "experts."
If only the first 300 miles of the Canadian border were considered land appropriate for human life, there are over one million square miles, which works out to less than 30 people / six households per square mile. And the Canadian experts are already talking about population control??? Clearly, these are not experts, nor can their arguments and numbers be trusted. They are globalist goons attempting to bring the dark globalist cloud over a peoples they don't have any business with. Until now, Canada has been a very good globalist stooge. This is the problem hovering over all of the West, and seeking entry into every nation, toppling them if necessary. I fear this imperial goon squad. I don't want their world ruling over me, making laws over me, forcing me by their brand of education to listen to their fear-mongering, freakish dialogue. On top of it all, they are God-despising rebels trying to ever sell a view of humanity in which we are utterly alone in the universe, aside from the many planets they have discovered, all nonsense to make their dim view of the universe seem more exciting. They have thrown truth to the ground, and are trampling upon their own Father. What possible hope can their be for a world like this; yet Canadians are largely excellent globalist idiots.
There is a collision in the making between globalism and Christianity. However, Canadian Christians are, by and large, softies. They tend not to complain either. Darkness has crept over their land, but, aside from a few in the anti-abortion movement, they have yet to protest on behalf of their Father. By not speaking out, they risk melting in with the dark world. Why can't the churches agree to get together to speak out against organized sin? What a great opportunity for Christians to speak for the Father, showing their faith. Imagine how pleased God would be to see this. Imagine how God would start to move through the dark cloud to pain its engineers, if only his people would sacrifice some time to speak out. This has been my gripe with the churches since my first year or two of conversion. For them, it's just same old same old church morning, while the world shatters the laws of God on every side. For a while, I was so proud of televangelists for speaking out, until they shamed God. Are there no televangelists that can speak out who don't simultaneously visit prostitutes or live in absolute luxury? Where are the Christian soldiers?
Perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps God doesn't want us to cause waves. What do you think? It could be that getting feisty as a group makes us less powerful to curb globalism. If we were to go up against globalism as a group, people would tend to embrace globalism faster just because it's the thing that Christians don't want. People are now very capable of ridiculing God openly, no fear whatsoever, and they have their dry comics making sport of Christians. But I think Christians should get feisty anyway, and speak up as an organized voice, allow God to act on their behalf, and give us something exciting to live for -- something to be proud of -- while the dismal world entertains sin. It's a great opportunity to teach the light and truth of God, and to show the youth that we are really here, that they have the choice of joining us rather than the doped-up world around them.
It could be that God refuses to allow the end to arrive until his people first start speaking out, bringing persecution upon themselves, making life a little difficult for everyone by the waves they cause. I don't have the answer with certainty, but perhaps that is it.
One of the things that I could not understand, as a new Christian, is why the churches remained so invisible in the media. They had the opportunity to use the letters-to-the-editor section. Small towns have their local papers. My home town published some 15 or more of my letters. Imagine if only 15 other Christians did the same. It would start to appear that Christianity is popular, and that the ways of Jesus are worth fighting for. Nor could I understand why they didn't put out paid "advertisements" for the purpose of communicating their messages on the issues of the day, attracting people with built-in morality. There are such people who understand morality. A person can actually grasp why porn is a destructive instrument in the community, but no one was communicating their disgust for porn. And that's why porn is now liberally available online to the youngest of children. I am very disappointed in the churches. I almost feel like they should be abandoned. Never mind how I feel. How does God feel?
Fighting against our enemies. Is that allowed? There are different ways to fight. The best way is to tell the truth, and force the enemy to lie. At every lie, you can come back and hit them with the truth. If such disagreements were taking place in letters to the editor, all the better. People would start to respect Christianity as something filled with backbone, as people who really believed. But no one respects a softie very much. The main Christian message is: it's important for a society to respect God. If that message were ever-present before society since the 1950s, the world would be much different today.
The Christian message is: shame on a husband who subscribes to porn. Great shame. Shame on husbands who visit prostitutes. Great shame. Shame on mothers who kill their own children, great shame. Shame on the government and schools for tolerating / promoting liberal sex styles for the youth, great shame. Shame on advertisers who make false claims for their products. Shame on salespeople who lie to make a sale, great shame. Shame on wealthy corporations for continued, maximized pricing, great shame. Shame on the news media for... Eventually, people would be drawn to a movement like that, but who wants to be part of a softy club too stunned to get in gear? Eventually, people would start to become more honest, less shameful, if only the message were loud and clear, and on-going. The idiots would speak out against us, a perfect opportunity to portray them as idiots. There is nothing anyone can argue against in the things set out in this paragraph. Great shame on a man entering the anus of another man. Great shame on a woman who marries a woman. Get it right, world, or get off our
planet. Yes, Christians have the right to call this "our planet." We will inherit the earth, and our Father owns it right now.
The purpose of Christian movements speaking out is not to defeat the enemy to the point that it goes away. It will not go away. It will fight back. But this is what we need to be geared for, a fight. They will lose points in every fight, so long as we stick to the truth. God is the owner of the planet. Godless globalists are spiritual idiots, liars, greedy and power-hungry. Speak the truth, you can't go wrong. They can only persecute us as they did Jesus, by charging him falsely with a crime he did not commit. Shake the world of your local globalist today. He will think you're nuts, and you can smile proud that you have entered his scene like a policeman directing traffic. Yes, Christians are the world's policemen, with the laws of God under our belts. We are the sons of the King. We can't force people to abide by God's laws, but we can tell them to do so, or else. Jesus said that if you don't do God's will, you will die in your sins. Ouch, that sounds like it comes with some nasty things after death. This Way, this Way, the Way of Truth, get on it, or else.
We don't speak as though we are trying to convert our enemies; we speak in order to give others the opportunity to know that we exist, and that we care about society's condition from a different perspective than that of globalists. They are the ones having an appearance of godliness but denying His powers, which can only mean that their angelic appearance is phony.
They say that the United States has about 1 billion acres of farmland, and 2.2 billion acres of total land mass. But the farmland figure (about three acres per U.S. citizen) could be exaggerated to make it appear as dire as possible for creating any further farmland. Globalism in America has been a concept since about the 1950s, and by the 1970's it was already in flight with the Universal Product Code. All information fed to the world by global bodies is expected to be filled with deliberate inaccuracies from as early as 50 years ago. It took the globalists until the year 2,000 to create the EU because there was resistance until then. And even when the EU formed, many were opposed. Globalists worked to convince the Europeans, with lies, that this was good for them. Finally, they saw in the polls that they had the votes, and they went for it. The progenitors of EU globalism can be largely pegged within the UK's Illuminati circles, yet that country is now itself having second thoughts on whether EU membership is a good thing. The EU is promising to be a disaster, and the time is therefore ripe for stabbing the phoenix in the gut, hoping it will never rise again. The best thing ever that can happen to Europa, after her rape, is her death. On the day that the Zeus bull is slaughtered, Europa will be set aflame, and the corporations will fall with her. There will be less to celebrate at her fall if we have not been involved with fighting her off. If the churches want glory at her fall, they need to make sacrifices now, before her fall.
If two churches in a single community take on the fight together, there will be a chance that three will turn to five, and five to ten. It will be a whoopie moment for God. He might actually get up from his sleep, and come on over to take a look at what's happening. Finally, some excitement. Hey, Son, get up, come on over and take a look at this. You won't believe it; they're actually sticking up for You.
Can we be up-front with the world in our opposition to the EU? I can tell you this, I don't recall one sermon where the pastor spoke out against the EU, nor globalists. In fact, I don't recall one sermon where porn was the target. I keep hearing that we are to love queers and hate their sin. But I have a problem with this mentality. When Jesus said to love the enemy, he said it as a method of teaching not to retaliate, or fight, in the way that the world fights. He didn't mean that we need to express a heart-felt love for enemies. He said that, if your enemy is taking advantage of you, give in all the more so that God can crack his skull open, so to speak. God has no heart-felt love for your enemies. Their place is reserved with the worms. It's the globalist wave that's taken the position that all sinners, including queers, should be loved and appreciated, treated with respect. Are we going to help them out?
Yes, queers can be forgiven, and, yes, queers are welcome in the churches if they are willing to become normal. And, yes, it's not appropriate to call them queers if they are repenting. But as long as they want to get into our faces with their sin, queer and disgusting is what they are. I have no problem speaking the truth to remind them. I have no problem speaking the truth that, unless they repent, they will wish they had never been born. As a person forgiven of my sins, I have no problem forgiving the queer, or any sinner, so long as he/she repents. I feel joy whenever such a person repents and finds the love of God. It's the victory of Jesus over the dark stupids. Mercy triumphs over satan, and removes the sting of death. The Son of God is the destruction of the globalists. Yes, pure destruction, as in the loss of their lives. That doesn't look like heart-felt love to me. I will even say that I desire their destruction so that goodness can grow unopposed. By goodness, I mean people in opposition to evil. Goodness is the absence of truth-twisters. Goodness is the straight road, not the twisted one. Goodness agrees with God.
To be sure, prophecy predicts a food shortage in the third Seal of Revelation 6. But I don't think there is a way to know the geography of this shortage, whether it's global or only local to Israel. Globalists are alarmists. They know that fossil fuels have a limited time left on earth, not just because the supply is bound to run out, but because many of them wish to impose alternative energy. Therefore, their quest to combat greenhouse gases due to the burning of fossil fuels is a sham. What they really want is money for their global projects. They know that greenhouse gases will not have any immediate effect, and so they lie, trying to convince us that global-warming destruction is immediate. Their sham will work only if the law makers of the nations can be convinced that terrible effects of greenhouse gases are set to take place before fossil fuels are phased out. To put it another way, their sham will work only if the idiots amongst law makers allow themselves to be manipulated. But rather than viewing themselves as manipulated, they will view themselves as valiant warriors against global warming. Yes, and they will do this with your money. They won't lift a finger in the combat except to pass a vote for having your money slide to wherever the globalists funnel it. How valiant is that?
Aren't global warmers partly in the oil business? Probably. Why would someone in the oil business want to join global warmers? "For years, European regulators have been trying to fight global warming through a variety of schemes targeting people's energy consumption. From cap-and-trade, to high energy taxes, to green energy mandates, little has actually worked to drastically decrease carbon dioxide emissions." Ahh, high energy taxes, and no one is using less gasoline of any significance to speak about. In the meantime, high gasoline costs were part of this obscene agenda, more than making up for (for the oil people) the small decline in usage. It's a win-win-win for governments, oil people, and globalists, and a lose-lose-lose for the rest. "...Germany, Japan, United Kingdom -- who have consistently claimed to be in climate policy and claim to have done a whole lot to reduce their emissions," Tol said. "It's just not visible in the data." What does become visible is a sham.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/16/profound-lifestyle-changes-leaked-govt-docs-show-whats-really-behind-the-global-warming-agenda/The global-warming agenda is not having an easy time. It hopes to place itself at the charge of globalism, and, from fighting global warming, it wants to attack related, environmental issues, the whole of which is to despise humanity, punishing it by taking away their shower water, if it could. The future might just see mandated shower heads that turn the water off automatically every 15 seconds for 15 seconds. You get wet, then wash up, then wait for the water to return for a little rinse and more wet to wash the rest. Low-volume shower heads have already mandated, and this is after admitting that household water usage is a very small fraction of the available fresh-water system. What are they up to, therefore? I'm getting the impression that globalists are seeking to torment us. I'd say they are working to turn us into energy-mindful idiots until we all agree that going on a weekend trip into the country is a sin.
New laundry machines no longer cover the clothes with water. Some of them (I have one) offer a setting where there is no rinse cycle. My laundry machine is the closest thing left to the traditional types, and has a setting that still covers the clothes, but for a reason I can't yet pin on the globalists, it doesn't give the option of soaking the clothes for longer than about 20-30 minutes. If I try to soak the clothes, the machine pumps all the water out, and refuses to start up again. I'm not kidding. I then need to call the repairman to get the machine operating again, because the computer needs to be reset with a special code that Kenmore refuses to give to me. They tell me my only option is to call the local repairman. This is by Kenmore, but made by Whirlpool. Do not buy this brand; they are crooks.
From 2008 to 2015 Dr. Edenhofer was co-chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on "Mitigation of Climate Change." He is also deputy director and chief economist of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, one of the climate centers helping write climate policy for the EU, the UN, and the World Bank, and one of the most-cited sources on climate in the mainstream media. During an interview in 2010, Dr. Edenhofer candidly declared, "One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole."And, he added this shocking admission: "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy."
...But Dr. Edenhofer is far from being alone in the confessional. The UN's climate czarina, Christiana Figueres [Spanish surname], has also been quite vocal in explaining that the UN's imposing climate change agenda extends far beyond mere environmental concerns, such as stopping alleged global warming. She made an especially telling statement at the UN's 2012 Climate Summit in Doha, Qatar, where she said:
It must be understood that what is occurring here, not just in Doha, but in the whole climate change process is a complete transformation of the economic structure of the world. {Emphasis added.}
The article points out that mainstream media didn't even touch these statements. I would suggest that this newly-stated agenda is not being fully disclosed, and will come with the most-attractive package possible. The reality must be that they are stealing tax money from workers in the richer nations, and funnelling it into other globalist agendas, part of which is to enrich their own corporations in poorer countries until they have the muscle to control them politically unto their global vision. YOU are to pay for their global beast, a beast that cannot possibly remain alive without continual dollars. I cannot express enough what lunatics these are who are out and about seeking to achieve this thing, just as the West is bogged down in near-incurable debt.
Here is how population control evolved into global warming:
Overpopulation is the central concern of environmentalism and environmentalists. The concern obtained global and political attention in the 1960s through the Club of Rome and, in particular, the publication of Paul Ehrlich's book The Population Bomb. Overpopulation remained a central issue through the 1970s and 1980s but moved to the background after 1988 when James Hansen [U.S. Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs] appeared before the US Senate subcommittee and began the shift in the public arena to global warming. Publication of the first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report in 1990 shifted the focus to global warming in the scientific and political arena.No one likes the phrase, "population control." It sounds like someone playing God. On the other hand, global warming can be masked in science. But how would global warming incorporate population control? Well, first of all, population control had a secret backside. There is no immediate threat of overpopulation, and so we surmise that the globalists created a population crisis for a backside agenda, and global warming is what unveils their backside agenda. The immediate goal is to rob the tax dollars of all Western nations, and the ultimate goal is to prosper globalism by getting globalists disguised a planet lovers, and into our faces as fixers of a broken environment. I think it is safe to say that this is the gist of it all.
If you want a mind bender, the article above claims forthright that the Vatican is a supporter of the Democrat party in the United States:
...Critics of the U.N. population conference's draft proposal allege that it promotes abortion as a method of family planning and favors individual sexual health and liberty over the health of the family. For eight months, the draft had the unwavering support of the Clinton Administration; two weeks ago, shortly before the conference began in Cairo, however, the backpedaling began. After the Catholic hierarchy in this country threatened that Catholics would leave the Democratic Party, and after it became clear that several Islamic countries would ally themselves with the Vatican, Vice President Al Gore and Timothy Wirth of the State Department insisted that the United States was pursuing policies more or less the same as those of the Catholic Church. Could this possibly be true?If Hillary Clinton becomes the next American president, I suppose that the Vatican will be to thank. Like I said, a mind bender. We should be reminded that Obama is now the president thanks to American Catholics. They dislike the Republicans because Protestants vote Republican. This is sheer madness, for the Vatican to grant liberals the power to empower all of the Vatican's enemies, supposedly, just to keep the Protestants from having powers. I can't think of a better definition for a hypocrite and a whore all at once. In Canada, Catholics empower the Liberal Party of Canada. In Canada, Catholics outnumber Protestants by about two to one; it's the reverse in the U.S. As with the U.S., most liberals are in the major cities.
The following friendly name for the global-warming meet in Paris can be modified to "Global Future Under Climate Change":
Dear Fellow Chemtrail/Geoengineering Activists,I am writing to share what I have learned, as well as express my concerns, after attending the "Our Common Future Under Climate Change" in Paris, France last week. This meeting was the precursor to a global climate agreement and global government which, if allowed to form, will essentially become a carbon dictatorship whereby every aspect of our lives will be controlled by the corporate/governmental complex. The planned signing of this global climate agreement is scheduled to occur this coming December in Paris. Upon further reflection on this past meeting, it is now clear that there is a direct correlation between geoengineering and the climate change agendas. I now believe this to be the most important time and focus of our activism.
What is clear to many of us who attended this meeting is that we are now facing a planned agenda for the largest transfer of monetary and political power in the history of our civilization. As a matter of fact, many of us who attended the meeting as activists jokingly called the meeting "Our Communist Future Under Climate Change" due to the many profound political objectives discussed.
...What is also concerning about this agenda is the discussion as to how to bring this global corporate/government agenda to local governments...
...I was also informed during one of the implementation sessions that some foreign governments are now suing local municipalities who have refused to sign on to these burdensome global mandates.
If it is true that foreign nations are able to sue Western cities for not handing out the demanded money, then that tells all. The globalists would be expected to be behind the laws suits, supporting any nation that brings them on. There are the questions as to which court / jurisdiction such a suit would take place in, whether the federal government would support the globalists versus the cities, and what justification the globalists would use for allowing a foreign nation to sue in the first place. The latter would need the federal governments to sign on to an agreement in the first place that included the choice of court action. But practicing this thing would ruin the reputation of globalists, and bring massive focus onto their major players whom they hope to remain invisible. Yes, they are working as invisibly as possible because they know their agenda is in opposition to the people. That is their greatest problem, and they cannot maintain forever the facade of being a humanitarian element. The more they try to force us to comply, the more they expose themselves as the parasite that they are. I predict that they will not get away with this, yet the money is already flowing to them as we speak, meaning that Western governments have signed on or winked. This promises to pit people versus their own governments, and people versus globalist idiots. When federal governments permit an international agenda to control the choices of city governments, that's the beginning of a VISIBLE government. With whole cities fighting in court this global worm, the thing is going to be in the light for all to investigate and dissect. Worms naturally retreat into the dark for safety, but the birds are ever watching for them to come up for air.
Apparently, the United Nations leads this train of parasites: "Australia PM adviser says climate change is "UN-led ruse to establish new world order". He's been accused, by the parasites, of being a typical conspiracy theorist. It makes for a super battle when words like this are thrown around. The parasites will ever be on the defensive, and every slip will bring them further exposure, and, hopefully, pain. There is no level of pain that would be too much for this group. This is a nasty bunch. It's not just their global-warming hoax, but their obvious political clout, able to cause federal governments to comply with their wishes. This is their obvious stink bomb. This is their greatest liability. This is what exposes them as the invisible leaders of the world, the so-called Illuminati, or call it what you will. This is the group that conspiracy writers have been warning of. It cannot go forward unless it is also exposed. The bad news is, Australia's prime minister would not support he advisor above.
The overall agenda seems to be force peoples to accept government intrusion until the next generation sees it as a natural way of life not to be bothered about. After micro-managing our home's energy usage, and mandating certain appliances, etc., they can move on to "greater" things. Sooner or later, one would think, the next generation will realize that there is always a globalist voice behind it, and that they are looking like control boards. People naturally resist such things, which is probably the reason that globalists want homes without guns.
What is the future of an individual person who knowingly advances a global scam? How will that person come to respect himself/herself as time ticks on? What will they feel like on their dying days? The imbecile, such as Obama, doesn't ask such questions, but rather relishes in being part of an evil plot. There is such a thing as a human being without a conscience. There is such a thing as a human being given to evil spirits, with the business suit and tie doing nothing to remove them. Evil spirits are not solely in savages with bamboo through their noses.
There is a way to prove that the earth's geology is as old only as Noah's Flood. Scientists tell us that the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheet are, on average, 5,000 feet thick. At least, this was the figure once used, and while we can predict that the figure is not quite accurate, we get the gist. We then want to know how long it would take for that many feet to form, which involves grade three math: 5,000 / 1 = 5,000. That is, as there is an average of about one foot (a little less, they say) of annual precipitation on both Greenland and Antarctica, while it never melts (known facts for most of both continents), it would have taken not much more than about 5,000 years to accumulate the ice sheets. That gets us back to about 3000 BC. Noah's Flood can be timed from Biblical data to about 2350 BC. In a scenario like this, we could expect evolutionary-minded scientists to exaggerate the depth of ice, or to use the highest figure amongst several investigations.
Isn't it obvious that there's not nearly enough ice on Greenland if there really was an ice age, followed by more than 10,000 years of snow?
What happens to sea levels as precipitation falls on cold regions where it does not melt? Sea levels go down. That is, for about the past 4,350 years, sea levels have been declining, explaining why cities once built on the ocean shore are now as many as hundreds of feet from the shore. Scientists have already calculated how much sea level would rise if all ice sheets were melted, but one needs to be cautious about their figures if global-warming scammers have developed and disseminated them. Here is an example of a scientific "fact" from National Geographic: "Scientific research indicates sea levels worldwide have been rising at a rate of 0.14 inches (3.5 millimeters) per year since the early 1990s..." Is this true, or just part of the scam to make us believe that ice sheets have been melting unusually since the 1990s?
Wikipedia's article on sea-rise due to global warming has a lower rate of rise: "Sea level rise has been estimated to be on average between +2.6 millimetres (0.10 in) and 2.9 millimetres (0.11 in) per year ± 0.4 millimetres (0.016 in) since 1993." What I don't understand is Wikipedia's next claim: "For the period between 1870 and 2004, global average sea levels are estimated to have risen a total of 195 millimetres (7.7 in), and 1.7 millimetres (0.067 in) ± 0.3 millimetres (0.012 in) per year, with a significant acceleration of sea-level rise of 0.013 millimetres (0.00051 in) ± 0.006 millimetres (0.00024 in) per year per year." How can ocean water increase in volume if it's continually falling on perpetually-frozen areas? There are at least three explanations; 1) the polar regions have internal heat that melts more ice than the ice created by frozen precipitation; 2) there is no increase in ocean water volume, but rather the earth under the oceans is being filled with volcanic material, forcing the displaced water upward; 3) the atmosphere has been on an upward-temperature trend since at least 1870 so as to melt permanent ice sheets to greater distances toward the poles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_riseNo one on the outside tends to believe that the fledgling (small, tiny) industrial revolution of the late 1800s was a contributing factor to increased sea level, but the scammers would have you believe it. They write things like, "Global warming has raised global sea level about 8" since 1880, and the rate of rise is accelerating." What other way can you think of to increase the temperatures of oceans aside from heat within the atmosphere? There is only one other choice.
If the atmosphere was so "hot" in 1870 so as to melt more ice than the volume of newly-frozen precipitation of that year, one needs to look to something other than man-made greenhouse gases as the cause. Global warmers are trying to scare us: "...it has been estimated that we are already committed to a sea-level rise of approximately 2.3 metres (7.5 ft) for each degree Celsius of temperature rise..." The actual temperature rise claimed, even by global warmers, is so small that it begs the question on whether any significant ice melt should take place at all. Virtually all ocean floors are volcanic ranges. There is the possibility that the interior of the planet is heating up, with increased volcanic magma building on ocean floors. This material displaces water, having the effect of increased sea level. Greater volcanic activity assumes a greater internal temperature in the crust, and when this heat is passed upwards into the oceans, the waters expand and contribute to a rise in sea level. Think of how small the heat transfer needs to be to make an ocean, miles deep, expand by merely one inch.
Heat rises far more than it moves in a downward direction. One hundred percent of the heat from the sea floor enters the oceans, but only a small percentage of atmospheric heat does the same. Furthermore, all ocean heat with an origin in the air, be it thermal or from sunlight, tends to move upward, never getting far down, as any swimmer knows. Any child swimmer knows that the warm water in the first two or three feet of a lake is caused by sunlight upon shallow waters. When the child swims out to water five feet deep, the water is chilly down by the feet and legs. It's rather hard to imagine that any measurable amount of sea-level rise is due to water expansion from atmospheric heat.
How does a global warmer go about proving that sea-level rise is due to greenhouse gases? He can't, and he hasn't. If the earth's interior temperature has been constantly on the rise, this alone can explain an increase in atmospheric temperatures by a fraction of one degree. Therefore, even if global warmers are accurate in their assessment that the air has increased, recently, by a fraction of one degree, they need to prove that greenhouse gases are the culprit. They need to prove this before they take our money to combat it. But some are saying that the air is not increasing in temperature. All of these uncertainies explain why the scammers are being very quick to grab our taxes, because their scam is in danger of being revealed.
The Wikipedia article does not have the following words in the article: volcano, volcanic, sea bed, sea floor, crust, internal. What's wrong with an article on sea-level rise when it doesn't include internal temperatures in the earth's crust? Is it guilty of having a deliberate blind spot? Yeah.
Surprisingly, someone at the UK's Telegraph accuses the globalists of telling lies: "Rise of sea levels is 'the greatest lie ever told'"
:
But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Morner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm".
So, it depends on who you ask. If sea level were surely rising, this fellow would have agreed. Even if we argue that he's making a false statement on behalf of some oil people, we would need to conclude that he's willing to spoil his sea-level-related reputation on a lie (intended for a worldwide audience) for advancing someone else's profits. I don't think that's likely. He then says that the global-warmers had hired people to conduct sea-level research who were not experts in that field. That I can believe.
"The reason why Dr Morner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on 'going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world'." That makes sense, and, of course, one can see how a computer model can be easily manipulated to say what you want it to say. "One of his most shocking discoveries was why the IPCC has been able to show sea levels rising by 2.3mm a year. Until 2003, even its own satellite-based evidence showed no upward trend. But suddenly the graph tilted upwards because the IPCC's favoured experts had drawn on the finding of a single tide-gauge in Hong Kong harbour showing a 2.3mm rise. The entire global sea-level projection was then adjusted upwards by a 'corrective factor' of 2.3mm, because, as the IPCC scientists admitted, they 'needed to show a trend'. " That I can believe. What does IPCC stand for? InterGOVERNMENTAL Panel on Climate Change.
Evolutionists believe that land masses have been moving around -- up or down or sideways -- for millions of years. Sea beds have become mountain peaks, mountain peaks have become sea beds, and all sorts of related fantasies. How, therefore, do global warmers know whether sea level is rising versus land masses dropping? They had better have a reliable way, or they would be guilty in seizing our money without evidence of rising sea level. How would you go about finding whether a certain island were moving up or down, or not at all? It doesn't sound like someone could make a reliable measurement, perfect for those who need to fabricate numbers for their own cause. If the man on the street can't disprove the numbers, the scammer is safe and sound dishing out false numbers...except when other scientists take them to task. Safe to say, if there are sufficient scientists denying the global warmers their science, the latter is not reliable. Even if it is correct, it is not reliable. If they were truly humanitarians, they would wait before pillaging the nations, until the opposition agreed that something of a crisis were developing.
"In yet another instance of the media jumping on the climate alarmist bandwagon, The New York Times [NEVER to be trusted] this past February boldly headlined 'Seas Are Rising at Fastest Rate in Last 28 centuries.'...the worsening of tidal flooding in coastal communities is largely a consequence of greenhouse gases from human activity..." Can anyone really prove what sea levels were 28 centuries ago? Or are the scammers dreamers? The more the complexities are understood in measuring sea level changes, in combination with finding the causes behind the changes, the more the global warmers look like they have been running wild with ill-gotten conclusions. If they were not so fast to act so drastically, there wouldn't be a firestorm of opposition to them.
The greatest thing about this is the evidence they themselves are presenting of themselves, exposing that globalism really is a conspiracy.
On second thought, maybe there is something greater still. The intended subjects of globalism are calling out the globalists as lying fools. Perfect. Let the insults fly. Add fuel to the fire. Grow your teeth longer and sharper, bite harder. Have no mercy. Give to Babylon the pain and ruin she deserves. And with scientists claiming that scientists ate liars, it plays into the hands of Creationists (I just felt the world stop moving), whom have been claiming the same for generations now.
After the writer for Wikipedia's Greenland article shows his ignorance (typical of evolutionists) on the age of the ice sheet, he shares what can only be part of the lunacy under discussion: "Many scientists who study the ice melt in Greenland consider that a two or three degrees C temperature rise would result in a complete melting of Greenland's ice. Positioned in the Arctic, the Greenland ice sheet is especially vulnerable to climate change." I have no idea how anyone can say, with a straight face, that a temperature increase of two degrees in the Greenland summer, could melt all the ice.
Later in the article: "A paper on Greenland's temperature record shows that the warmest year on record was 1941 while the warmest decades were the 1930s and 1940s. The data used was from stations on the south and west coasts, most of which did not operate continuously the entire study period." How does this show Greenland's global-warming experience in the past 10 or 20 years? Why doesn't the writer tell the readers that this part of the article doesn't serve global-warming claims?
Same article: "The lowest mean annual temperatures, about -31 °C (-24 °F), occur on the north-central part of the north dome, and temperatures at the crest of the south dome are about -20 °C (-4 °F)." No summer-versus-winter temperatures are given. Why not? Doesn't he want us to know how all the ice can melt with an increase of three degrees? Someone else says: "The annual average temperature of Greenland is -16.8 degrees C, and even in the warmest month of July, the average temperature for the month is still below 0 degrees C." It doesn't sound as though a wee increase in temperature will melt all of Greenland.
Another article: "The average temperature of Greenland is -53 degrees in January. The average temperature of Greenland is -11 degrees in July." Hmm, these are not the same figures as above.
When global warmers speak on Greenland ice melt, you get the impression that it's all disappearing. Some of them are using the great Greenland melt of 2012, but global warming is supposed to be defined as a tiny fraction of one degree increase every year, not a whopping one-year melt that is the result merely of a "warm" summer. Get with your own program, global warmers. Don't give us this smoke and mirrors. The global-warming prediction is that, eventually, Greenland will start to melt year after year, but starting as a mere drip. Yet this wouldn't start for many years, anyway, as Greenland is simply too cold right now. The entire continent is not going to disappear quickly, and any expert who says so is a liar.
I spent most of this week editing my story on the Elisa Lam murder mystery. If interested, it starts at:
http://www.tribwatch.com/elisaLam.htm