The Science of ‘Global Warming’ – Oops We Missed Something

The information I present in this article will shock you. I am about to blow the doors off of this perception machine controlling how information is passed down to people like us. The problem is that we get misinformation represented as facts. But we are being lied to. Why would people lie about something as important as global climate change? Most don’t even know they are doing it. It can be simply repeating other’s conclusions without giving your own thought into how those conclusions were made. Or perhaps we need to dig even deeper into the process.

Within the scientific community, great effort goes into eliminating as many biases as possible. Unfortunately, nothing is ever 100%, and systematic biases may exist in this case. I will identify three types of bias I have observed in this social experiment involving all of us. The 3 ‘b’s of bias are as follows:

Bandwagon – this is basically humans operating in the herd mentality. Everyone wants to be on the bandwagon. Even among scientists, standing alone can result in isolation and even worse. But I don’t mind this because what I’m going to say simply must be said!

Bullying – unfortunately this happens among scientists and in the media. If you’re not on the bandwagon you could be bullied by others. This usually sounds like being called stupid for your findings that aren’t in line with the rest. There are those that would try to discredit research as well, although this also creates a beneficial use for weeding out ‘bad science.’ But that means we also need to take a look at this process because not all retracted papers are bad,

Budget – This is the big one. Everybody needs funding. Where does this come from? It can be private funding or government funding. Who pays you presents a bias because everybody wants good results. This can mean that unfavorable results get less attention in the media. It can also mean that you’re being paid to produce a certain outcome. I think this constrains our current understanding of climate change, even though most of the research is government funded. This becomes a systematic bias because the governments are controlled by the largest worldwide industries, including fuel production and transportation. There is a level of bias here so deep that most are unaware of it – and it’s global!

Given the massive amounts of data supporting climate change with statistical accuracy, I am not a so-called ‘denier.’ But I do know that the rabbit hole goes much deeper than current representations of the data. The problem is actually worse than thought. Due to blatant misrepresentation of statistical facts, we are being lead to believe that ‘global warming’ is caused by greenhouse gases, mainly carbon dioxide. Recent work has shown a statistical correlation between rising carbon dioxide levels and temperature increases since before the industrial age, when we started burning fuels. But the first rule of statistics is this: correlation is not causation. Friends, CO2 is not the culprit. It does however, present secondary hazards in terms of greenhouse effects, climatic swings, and changing weather patterns.

The unfortunate truth is that by making carbon dioxide the culprit, we are led to believe that limiting emission will solve the problem. It won’t. It’s just a global misinformation campaign making us feel like we’re doing the planet good by buying ‘eco-friendly’ automobiles. The problem is that this is prolonging the problem – that we are causing global climate change by burning fuels. As long as we have combustion, we generate heat. And that’s the ugly truth. As long as humans are burning fuels, either mined or ‘eco-friendly’ biofuels, we are warming up the planet.

The explanation for this is very simple. I don’t even need massive amounts of data to say this with confidence, because the answer is in every single chemistry book. In basic chemistry, combustion is a class of reactions. It always involves fuel and oxygen on one side, producing carbon dioxide and water on the other. It is a chain reaction. The trick is that for each part of the chain reaction, as fuel is consumed, heat is given off. Want to do a comprehensive study to find this? Find the total amount of fuels we have mined since the 1850s and calculate how many units of heat are given off if all of it underwent combustion (because it did – our planet is running out of fuel since we past the 50% point several years ago, but that’s another big lie we can talk about later).

So what’s the take-away? You can drive an eco-friendly car, but try to drive less. Consume less. Overcome the desire to have more. This is an important lesson in humanity’s path to ascension – our evolution of consciousness. 

Thanks for reading!!! Special thanks to those bold enough to share this mind-shattering truth!!!



Leave a Reply