Those of you outside of the UK where I live undoubtedly heard about last November’s ‘Climategate’, where 1,000 e-mails and 2,000 documents covering climate change research from 1996 until 2009 came to light after computers at the UK’s University of East Anglia were hacked into.
The controversy concerned a small batch of emails, suggesting that some of the scientists in question file-drawed material that doesn’t fit their hypotheses about global warming. This week, I’ve been a fascinated spectator as an independent inquiry attempts to make sense of the whole business — and indeed the whole science.
Don’t get me wrong. I believe that human beings, particularly those of us in the developed world, have to a great deal to learn about sharing more and consuming less on every front. Nevertheless, what is always missing from any debate on climate change is the effects of the planets and how they interrelate with us on earth.
Gravitational effects
Several years ago, a University of Toronto physicist named Jerry Mitrovica and Alessandro Forte, of the Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, published a paper in the prestigious scientific journal Nature showing, through mathematical calculations and simulations, a relationship between tiny changes in the earth’s shape and axial rotation, and the gravitational effects of other planets in our solar system, particularly Jupiter and Saturn.
The paper was fairly technical and the ideas a little obscure. Nevertheless, beneath all the science, they were making big claims.
“We’re showing for the first time that changes in the Earth’s shape, when coupled with the gravitational effects from other planets, can produce large changes in the Earth’s climate,” said Mitrovica, who is working on behalf of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) and Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (Earth Systems Evolution).
In his mathematical model, Mitrovica has shown that the earth’s orbit is affected by the gravitational pull of Saturn and Jupiter and, at some point during the last 20 million years, the earth encountered gravitational ‘resonance’ with the orbits of Jupiter and Saturn, which ultimately influenced the angle of tilt of the earth’s axis during that period.
Profound effect on climate change
Scientists realize that the slightest change in the earth’s axis has a profound effect on climate, because it changes the pattern of sunlight falling on the earth.
“To understand climate on Earth, it’s clear that we need to consider the Earth as this dynamic deforming system,” Mitrovica says. “But we also need to understand, more than we thought we did, the Earth’s place in the solar system.”
The gravitational pull of any particular planet is extraordinarily small, and many scientists don’t believe that, on its own, it would have much of an effect on the earth’s geomagnetic field.
However, some researchers including chronobiology expert Franz Halberg of the University of Minnesota believe that there are ‘tidal’ effects, in which the gravitational forces of the various planets also interact with the magnetic fields of the sun and moon as well as the solar wind.
This, then, has a cumulative effect on the magnetosphere — the geomagnetic field encasing the earth — which, ultimately, can have profound effects on climate and also biology.
Furthermore, as all the planets are exerting gravitational effects on each other, this would have, as one researcher pointed out, a ‘non-linear’, or ‘chaotic’, effect.
Resonance effects
In an article published in 1989 in the journal New Scientist, Carl Murray, a reader in astronomy at Queen Mary College, University of London, noted that the reason that the planets orbit in an elliptical shape or rotate on their axis in a particular degree of tilt has to do with various gravitational effects.
The resonance effect can also be established between two planets when the time periods of their rotations around each other lock into a regular mathematical relationship. For instance, the moon rotates around the earth at the same time period as it rotates on its own axis. Other planets may circle around each other at two to three times what it takes them to rotate on their own axis. These relationships can slow down or speed up a rotation slightly and have a profound effect upon weather or even biological life.
These kinds of gravitational effects are magnified when a variety of planets are in alignment, such as occurs during an eclipse.
A greater effect than gravity is the electromagnetic effect of the planets, as the fields created by each solar body interact and affect the sun, the moon and, of course, the earth. Indeed, some scientists believe that it is the influence of planetary fields from the earth and the other planets that trigger solar activity like sunspots, and not the reverse.
It is also known that the interplanetary magnetic field (the space between the earth and the sun) and the earth’s geomagnetic envelope interact more during the equinoxes, largely due to the earth’s spin on its axis.
Scientists have long known that when planets are at major angles to each other (at 90 or 180 degrees, for instance), they will affect reception of radio signals. It is also known that when the earth is positioned at a particular angle to one of the major planets, such as Saturn, Jupiter or Venus, this, too, will affect the formation of sunspots or bursts of solar plasma.
These subtle interrelationships of electromagnetic fields and increases in solar activity once again, could add up to large effects on earth.
Strange sun
At the moment, the sun is acting strangely. Several years ago, NASA and the Max Planck Institute in Germany, recorded a record-breaking number of sunspots and coronal mass ejections — a ‘unique solar maximum in history’, noted George Withbroe, director of NASA’s Sun-Earth Connection Office.
According to a number of scientists, such as Dr. Alexey Dmitriev, a geologist with Russia’s Academy of Science, this is likely to cause a ‘general reorganization of the electro-magnetosphere of our planet’. Dmitriev also notes that the earth’s magnetic poles are shifting, to a major inversion.
It may not be too farfetched to suggest that this massive change in geomagnetics could not only cause a change in our weather but also in ourselves after the peak of this cycle: 2012.
This all is a little humbling. The modern human conceit is to think of ourselves every way, as top dog — at the very apex of the chain of being and the most influential entity in the universe.
Some of this research suggests that our little planet is knocked about by the capriciousness of the heavens, most particularly that ball of hydrogen crossed with a layer of unstable magnetic fields — roughly the size of one hundred earths — that is responsible for our very existence.
Humble servant
What I’m suggesting is not to go out a buy a four-wheel drive, but rather to understand our our place in the universe — not as its master so much as its humble servant. We and all the other living things of the earth are simply be part of a vast, complex energy system, and we do well, as I noted in my Powering Up program, to time intention at certain strategic solar configurations.
We would do well to learn from ancient cultures, which had a far greater respect and appreciation and respect for planetary influences. They knew when the heavens were angry and when to lay low.
Perhaps it is time to step back from climate change and to understand that it may not be all man’s fault. We simply may not have the power.
Facebook Comments
Fascinating! Brings a bit more perspective into the energetic changes being talked about in the metaphysical community. Quantum Physics was the beginning and now our everyday science is finally giving us some substantiated clues that we are simply a link in a vast chain of relative relationships that we are only just beginning to glimpse. With all the scientific evidence piling up, are we finally at the point where we humans are humbled enough to start driving out the global thought process our spec of a race commands the universe? Are we?
Right on; the conclusion is not that polluting our planet's atmosphere is okay. (We and other life forms breathe the air, so the SUV decision matters.)
Thanks for presenting scientific findings in a manner detached from preset worldviews -- and pointing to new/rediscovered possibilities for working with the universe.
Great post Lynne! Thanks from someone in the U.S. who had heard not a word of this scandal.
There is SO much going on right now, it would be well for us all to remain as open-minded as possible; while hewing true to our own personal guidance re: our behaviours in the World.
Sincere thanks!
PS: You might like to check out the work of Raymon Grace, a healer of a kind, who's apparently been doing a lot of work over some time successfully cleaning bodies of water. Don't have his web address to hand, but Google him. This spelling of his name IS correct.
Lynne your post worries me. I am fine with the presentation of interesting information on planetary energies and influences - but I am not fine with climate change being misrepresented.
There is overwhelming peer reviewed scientific evidence that current global warming is at least 90% human caused, and there has been since the 1980s. Sadly the true figures and extent of the warming have been covered up by a big business backed 'denial machine'. Since oil underpins the whole of our economy, and oil profits are threatened by climate change action, masses of money is poured into the 'denial machine' - picking holes in solid science and creating doubt and confusion and some of those fuelling this have direct links to those who denied (and some still do) that smoking was linked to lung cancer. Indeed there is greater unananimity amongst scientists on climate change being human caused than on smoking being linked to lung cancer.
And the situation is now critical with the future of humanity and of all life on the planet resting in our hands. I wish I was exaggerating.
Watch:
http://wakeupfreakout.org/film/tipping.html
I'm not for panic, but I am for climate awareness and the action that from that can flow.
Love and peace
East Anglia scientists 'scandal' was not a scandal. The results of tree rings were left out of a graph - everything else was left in and that is multiple sourced layer upon layer of evidence that the planet is warming - arctic ice melting, Greenland ice melting, glaciers melting, larson A & B collapsing in the Antartic, Kilamanjara's snow cover disappearing, sea level rising to such a degree already that families in Bangladesh have to constantly move their villages. I know the scientists at East Anglia and they are hard working honest people. Yes it was wrong to leave the data out, but they did so in order that the skeptics did not jump on it and deny the rest of the evidence. Please do not be taken in by the oil backed denial machine. You know the power of the drug companies and their denial of alternatives. This is comparable - the true scandal is the denial of the rate and extent of current warming that is already killing tens of thousands.
Last comment I promise!!! 🙂
Great book on climate change that explains the human cause of the problem + offers an eco/socio/spiritual solution =
"The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight" Thom Hartman
I'm reading an interesting book, By ice, not by fire.
It has a lot to do with magnetic reversals and is well documented.
Pauline may want to keep an open mind and check out this point of view.
Actually, the East Anglia debacle definitely was a scandal --whether discovered by computer hacker or whistleblower-- the overwhelming evidence of foul play is evident upon reading them. In fact, they have also now admitted to destroying the 'raw data' from which their reports are based, so that none of it can be corroborated or replicated by outside, 3rd party scientists. It was clearly intended to persuade us of their particular orientation. Anyone can listen to the excellent interview conducted by Henrik Palmgren with Canadian climatologist Tim Ball:
http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2009/12dec/RIR-091201.php
If you are referring to our egos, Lynn, of which our intellects are a part then it is quite true that we as individuals and as scientists are helpless as pissants in affecting our world. However, if you are talking about the Spirit then miracles can be produced. How can you believe you can change the nature of water at a distance and believe that you have no influence on the earth or even the planets?
I think that whether one is a Climate Change sceptic or a believer, we should all - and especially our governments should - be cherishing the earth, and making the environment as healthy as possible. We should be making the most of our resources to improve life for everyone. And I don't mean by that overuse or waste our resources.
Marilyn, let's produce that spiritual miracle.
I agree that global warming is happening, and I agree there are forces at work way way beyond our ken. I believe everyone is partially correct. Cool if we could combine all points of view into a truer version of the truth.
However, your scientific views, Lynne, would read much more credibly if the basic science you quoted was more accurate. For instance, although the sun has a diameter 100 times the earth, around one MILLION earths would fit inside the sun.
Hi Lynne,
You mentioned as humans we always think we are at the top of the heap with regards to our experience on Earth. It is truly humbling when you step outside your own personality or belief system, and contemplate things like the movement of the planets or the effects of the evolving magnetosphere.
Everyday millions of people open the newspaper to read their horoscope. They may not be aware that astrology is rooted in the study of the causal effect of planetary movement. They read words like ‘Venus is retrograde Saturn’ or other seemingly innocuous expressions, without understanding them. But as individuals, we ARE affected by this stellar interaction. That’s what your horoscope is telling you.
Yes, humanity has pushed a lot of carbon into the atmosphere in the last 100 years. Yes, it took millions of years for that volume of carbon to be leached out of the atmosphere and turned into oil, gas and other fuels. But if you think humanity has the capability to ‘’kill the planet”, then you’ve fallen prey to your own hubris.
Humanity on Earth is more likened to fleas on a dog. Yes, the fleas make the dog uncomfortable and create itches to be scratched. But when the dog finally has had enough, it simply goes for a swim and the fleas flee.
Humanity, in all of our wonderful modernism, won’t bring about the end of the planet. We might render it unlivable for us, but eventually it will fix itself and another race of beings will evolve. The planet might be preparing for that swim.
You mention 2012 as an alignment bringing about potential change. I wrote a post about this on my blog...if you assume the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, then this alignment has occurred approximately 1740 times (using the 25, 960 years required for a complete rotation through the constellations - known as the ‘Great Year’ by both the Egyptians and Olmecs - as the basis for the calculation).
The only reason it’s special this time, is because we are here to experience it. If you research the history of the magnetic poles on Earth, you’ll discover that they’ve shifted in the past. These shifts would have caused dramatic changes in the ocean currents which drive our weather patterns. Those sudden changes would have caused massive upheavals for any creatures alive at that time.
The assumption of modern day science is that we are the only modern civilisation to have the ability to have an effect on our planet. So, using this assumption that humanity is destroying the planet with carbon, then if the poles have moved before, either there was a previous race of beings who contributed to that disruption, and whose remains have never been found, or those changes were caused by something much bigger than us.
I reckon it’s the latter….
Write On!
Regarding the Climate Change scandal it is by no means a single one. The Feb 5 Wall St. Journal had an editorial listing a bunch of similar stories. Also see books by Rupert Sheldrake telling of ethical misdeeds and outright fraud by scientists. Like medical doctors we hold scientists on a pedestal they frequently do not deserve.
Hi,
It seemed spooky from the very beginning that the western countries plundering the natural resources wanted to pressurise the developing countries indirectly penalising them to pay, for the wrongs they did not commit.
Copenhagen meet had to fail, irrespective of East Anglia Climategate episode.
Accidental exposure apart, vigilance is the only condition to be spared from the spill over!
Sharad Kapadia
Surat/India
Hi again.
If there is global warming, what would justify the recent snow storm all over!
Lynne, I believe you are absolutely right,we should see ourselves as humble servants rather than the all knowing masters of our lovely little planet. Once arrogance takes over a master's thinking, he'll refuse to see anything that doesn't fit his picture. I recently remembered a Cree proverb that should be written on the walls of every boardroom and parliament around this planet we share, here it is:
"Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money."
At the end of the day it is quite simple, look after the earth and the earth will look after you.
Native people have been telling us this for centuries, but we were too busy conquering and "improving" nature, we didn't hear it.
Hi Lyn, thanks for giving us all the opportunity to share our thoughts on your Blog.
The environmental debate is complicated, and yet it need not be.
You suggested that what is ‘always’ missing from the debate is the effects of the planets and how they interrelate with us on earth.
As with all discussions/arguments there are all many pieces that make up the puzzle. However the disturbing thing that many people don’t seem to get is that the whole climate issue isn’t about negating the complexities of the ‘naturally occurring cycles’ and effects that our planet continues to go through. It’s totally about what we humans have and continue to do to Mother Nature via our very sick behaviours.
The 6.5 billion of us, and growing, especially in this crazy cycle of industrial revolution and consumerism fueled by massive egos, greed, coruption and power is one of the root causes to the global degradation we are witnessing.
We humans don’t seem to ‘get it’ that we continue to cause massive destruction to our support systems...we could all do with forgetting about the term global warming for a moment and focus on the question, are we kidding ourselves to think that we can continue on as we are? And if so, lets do something positive about that, both in our 'minds' and our 'behaviours'.
Curtis Chappel 13th Feb in his Blog above, is an example of the kinds of arguments that create even more confusion to the Global Warming debate by suggesting that “But if you think humanity has the capability to ‘’kill the planet”, then you’ve fallen prey to your own hubris” Once again notice how this argument is off track with the current debate. What has this got to do with what we are currently facing? Most of us that are concerned are thinking about how we can do it better and survive whilst helping our children to survive. The debate isn’t about the planet surviving without us. Of course it will! That isn’t in question Curtis.
Curtis also says “eventually it will fix itself and another race of beings will evolve.” Curtis, what’s your point? The argument isn’t about how life will go on without us. It’s about us correcting our behaviours to enable our vital support systems keep functioning so that we can continue to live on this amazing planet.
This week I wrote an article for an organisation I’m aligned with.
I thought that this article was very timely considering the disturbing trends in people's attitudes which we are seeing in relation to Global Warming as well as the disturbing arguments that have little to do with the current realities. So I thought it was something worth sharing.
Here it is.
Hi everyone.
I wanted to share some ‘common sense’ with you today. How many times have you heard the phrase, “common sense isn’t too common”? What is common sense to someone isn’t always too common to others; it’s a matter of perspective, right?
When I have observed the media circus, our appointed leaders, our comedians, the nightly news, the internet noise and the babble on social networking sites these last few months, I’ve been noticing some disturbing trends. These trends have come about because there are those that are very clever in taking the focus off the real issues; it’s a bit like listening to a politician’s answer to a straight forward closed question. I also see millions of young people on social networking sites pouring energy into the most time wasting activities you could imagine. However, pose a serious issue to them and they run for miles. Are our young people oblivious to what is happening to their world or are they simply bombarded and turning to mindless activities to shut out the noise, conflict and confusion?
There are some people out there hell bent on taking the focus off the current realities - some because it makes them more money to divert the attention; some because they well-meaningly have other causes that feel more pressing to them; some because they just don’t have all the facts yet; some because they need more control and power in their lives; and some because they are not willing to undergo the dramatic change that is required to solve these pressing problems. The list goes on, so much so that for every argument I see about the issues we face with Mother Nature and our vital support systems the more I become aware of the lack of common sense in people.
As I personally observe my environment I pick up the obvious signs, for others it’s not obvious, or perhaps they just don’t want to acknowledge the evidence before their eyes.
My message to those people is to be mindful of the coercion, the hidden intentions and the brainwashing behind those that are intent on trying to debunk the obvious, be it on both sides of the debate on Global Warming. Look back in time for similar scenarios, ‘cigarettes won’t harm you’, ‘DDT is fine, stop worrying’, ‘Asbestos, no worries, it’s ok’ – in each case, many who allowed themselves to be lulled into a false sense of acceptance of these calming claims, later paid the price with their own lives or losing others close to them.
If you are someone who is confused by all the ‘knowledge-claims’ being thrown around, a simple way to decide what is the wisest position to believe is to call upon “Pascal’s Wager”. If we all believe the ‘prophets’ side of an argument (that our environment is teetering on the brink of overload and we must change our way of operating immediately) and support the necessary changes, and they were right, we may never know because we diverted the direction of the environmental disaster. However, if we support the ‘nay-sayers’ and continue doing exactly what we’re doing, and it turns out the prophets are right – we’re stuffed!
So what if common sense was simply using all your senses? Use your sight, hearing, smell, touch and taste to decide for yourself what makes sense. Look at the horizon above a city, listen to the noise of the industrial traffic, observe those in highly industrialised areas requiring face masks to save them inhaling the harsh chemicals in the air, feel the dry earth beneath your feet and taste the flavourlessness of our hormone-infused food. Imagine life where you can see blue sky, hear birds and frogs, smell flowers, feel grass between your toes and taste the flavours of a freshly picked tomato. Which one brings about a sense of common sense for you?
Cheers
Gary
I'm disappointed, Lynne, that you would stoop to astrology for an explanation of a phenomenon that science has already explained.
You confuse your terms, David. That wasn't astrology, but rather, astronomy. More precisely, astrophysics.
Lynne: One thinks of the flutter of a butterfly's wing ultimately causing a storm clear around the earth. Or of the finding that electrons are not energetically moved from orbit to orbit, but simply are suddenly in a new orbit without benefit of motive energy. The point being, of course, that very subtle systems are constantly operating in the cosmos. Large effects stem from very small ones., so the new paradigm tells us.
I'd like to make a correction.
The book by Robert w. Felix is "Not by Fire, but by Ice. In this book it is stated that it takes 282 million years for our galaxy to revolve around the milky way not 25,960, if that is what you mean by a great year.
How are you Lynn?
This is your interpreter in Kuwait, you've just corssed my mind.
I would like to wish you a ahppy Valantine for you and every one on the experments.
Nour
GDAY from Oz -WOW!!! This has certainly ignited a words explosion!! Everyone take a deep breath, the planet is reflecting back to us - ourselves - not to our detriment but merely to enable us to make decisions about where we are going and how we are going to achieve that movement forward. Bring on that change I say!!!! Happy Valentines Day to all - I am off to have a lovely lunch with a great husband.
Before I retired I was a statistician and have worked on my PhD in that area. I recently did a regression analysis on the one hundred year data that every one has been studding. The variables were global temperature, CO2 emission and sun irradiance over a period from the early 1900's to 2000. The regression shows that only sun irradiance had a major effect on global temperature. CO2 had no effect. I decided well maybe I should try multiple regression thinking that CO2 might come in as a factor after the sun irradiance is accounted for. Well it didn't. Though it again was not significant CO2 actually had a negative coefficient meaning as CO2 emissions went up global temperature went down. So much for the "Man made global warming" theory.
Gene
It's really very remarkable that the so called primitive Mayan culture came up with a calendar some 2 thousand years ago and stated that the previous occurrence of this event that Lynne is speaking of in this article occurred approximately 3,000 years BC and has a cycle of approximately 5,000 years and their calendar is based on this cycle. The Mayan calendar states that this approximate 5,000 year cosmic cycle is expected to happen again in December of 2012. This agrees with what today's scientist are saying and yet they worked that out some 2000 years ago with ancient tools!! Amazing.
I guess many of you have already read the book by Ian Plimer, "Heaven and Earth - Global Warming: the Missing Science", 2009.
'... a damning critique of the 'evidence' underpinning man-made global warming.'—Wall Street Journal.
The massive press push on the global warming involves such elite as are capable of public speaking and image (like the Brit Royals and ex presidents), The signs all point to it being another way to tax the public and private sector. IMHO it is neither a pharma nor an oil issue. It is all about getting the first GLOBAL tax in place.
This tax will be imposed at government level AS WELL as taking money from businesses and individuals. The amount of money represented is massive and is to go to BE SPENT by a single entity who will spend a lot of it on an elite army of enforcement officers!
This new corporation will probably be started in Europe where the EC has already the precedent of unelected faceless officials who act behind closed doors. (MEPs (Members of European Parliament) have NO power and are unable to influence their decisions).
Global currency is high on the list because various presidents have started to wake up and smell the coffee. Sub-contracting money distribution to the World bank, the Bank of England and the Federal reserve is expensive and usuriously running communities into massive debt, inflation and 'crunches' from which the banks emerge as the only winners.
Global warming? mini ice age? It matters not. The point Lynne makes is that soon enough we will see that Man (and Woman) are more or less free of blame in the matter. Nor will having a new global tax and government and army help with any problem other than the powers that be always needing more money to run a non sustainable 'economy' that is fatally eroded by usury.
What's more pretty well every government is clearly incompetent at doing anything but run elections and going to war (another quick source of money). Here again they always blame we-the-people. Thanks to people like Lynne and Bruce Lipton we ARE waking up to the fact that we are pretty amazing creatures. We DO care for animals (and they care for us if we let them), we live off and tend to our environments be they deserts of sand or snow. We ARE creative and gentle - above all we KNOW what love is.
Jackie
Gene writes that in her regressionanalysis: " as mCO2 emissions went up global temperature went down". Not emissions, but CO2 consentration in the atmosphere has probably an effect on temperature. Did Gene plug in those data?
Hi Marc,
The data set that I had to work with used the term CO2 Emissions and not CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. By the way CO2 atmospheric concentration is infinitesimally small when compared to Nitrogen and Oxygen. It's measured in parts per billion. This is another reason why people shun the notion that CO2 emission is the cause for global warming. It's like a grain of sand on the beach. Please note that in my study the variable CO2 emissions was not statistically significant in neither the simple regression model nor in the multiple regression model. I just found it curious that though it was not significant in the multiple regression model it's coefficient actually had a negative value which implies that as CO2 emissions into the atmosphere increased earth temperature became colder. I wouldn't draw much from that because the effect was not statistically significant in either case. I just thought that it was humorous. I guess you might call it statistical humor as I use to say to my graduate students.
Gene
Hi Marc,
I should also add that if the atmospheric volume is a constant then the variable CO2 emission would be perfectly correlated with CO2 concentration, in which case the statistical conclusions of my analysis would be the same had I used the variable CO2 concentration instead of CO2 emission in the models. Since I am not a climatologist, I am only assuming that the atmospheric volume does not change appreciably and I think that is a safe assumption.
Gene
The claim that global warming was seriously affecting the planet came from concerned scientists - not governments. It has taken many years of lobbying for it to appear on governments and corporations agendas. The fact that they now corrupt and twist evidence to their own ends does not negate the science.
Gene I admire you for carrying out your own investigation. Nevertheless, an overwhelming body of solid statistical evidence exists that firmly establishes the link between CO2 emissions and climate change and the data has come from unrelated scientists from all over the world who have carried out wide-ranging and replicable investigations. Check out the 'Union of Concerned Scientists' for just one non-profit group who have been studying this for more than 3 decades:
http://www.ucsusa.org/
The recent wave of claims that a) warming is not taking place b) ok maybe it is but it has nothing to do with humans - are like claiming that train or plane travel is not safe because there have been one or two accidents. Maybe not a great anology but proportionately correct in terms of the number of scientists who support the theory and the body of evidence compared to the few that don't who tend to have little solid science and very little of it peer reviewed.
I have always an open mind - were climate change not happening it would save me a lot of work (I've been educating voluntarily on it for 21 years) - I am very happy in my life and could fill it with being with friends, meditating, dancing +++ and I do do those things but I also keep talking about climate change and changing the things I can in my life because no solid evidence has emerged to disprove the warming seas (ssts - sea ssurface temperatures), the melting ice-caps, the melting glaciers, the rising sea levels, the stronger and more frequent hurricanes +++ and the CO2 explanation (along with positive feedback effects such as methane being released from geo strata) correlate and are consistent with all the existing data. Of course sun plays apart but changes in sun energies are not consistent with the nature and rate of warming - for example sun spots would create warming throughout the atmosphere wheareas the warming is in the lower levels whilst the upper levels remain cooler, consistent with greenhouse gases being the cause.
Current snow was mentioned (totally understand why). Here's an explanation - 1) the snow is not worldwide - there is warming in most of the globe 2) the term global warming was replaced with climate change because warming can lead to cooling as wind patterns, ocean currents and the jet stream change as a consequence of that warming.
Please please please check out the solid science because so much is at stake. I know that most people involved with intention are deeply loving people who care greatly about all life on the planet. Since warming is most accentuated at the poles - such exquisite forms of life as penguins, polar bears, sea birds are being affected now! We can make a difference. I now emit within the recommended range for 'dangerous' climate change to be avoided - and even that I think is too high. We have taken carbon from the carboniferous period 300 million years ago that was safely stored beneath the earth in the form of oil, coal and gas and we are burning it up like there is not tomorrow releasing all the stored carbon into the atmosphere. 300 million years worth in just a few centuries - Gary spoke of common sense - common sense tells you that has to have an effect.
And we are fast approaching peak oil where we will no longer be able to easily access these resources so making the changes that will reduce emissions are good on all scores.
Check out
breathingearth.net
Here's some recent notes on recent 'scandals' from the union of concerned scientists
Attacks on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Obscure Real Science
Over the last few months, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been attacked for minor errors in its sprawling 2007 report on climate change. To set the record straight and provide appropriate scientific context, the Union of Concerned Scientists has assembled a series of explanatory backgrounders on specific allegations about the report.
Overall, the IPCC's conclusions remain indisputable: Climate change is happening now and human activity is causing it. Nations around the world will have to adapt to at least some climate change, including sea level rise, changes in precipitation, disruptions to agriculture, and species extinctions. But if we dramatically reduce our emissions, we can prevent the worst effects of climate change.
The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading U.S. science-based nonprofit organization working for a healthy environment and a safer world. Founded in 1969, UCS is headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and also has offices in Berkeley, Chicago and Washington, D.C.
xx Pauline
A 'better than I can' explanation of the human fingerprint on current warming versus sun activity
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/global-warming-human.html
Cheers
x pauline
Lysarbejder the talk you directed to is linked to Friends of Science that is run by Norm Kalmanovitch who worked for Canadian Oil and Gas before retiring.
They use graphs that only plot 2 satellite readings. Climate scientists have found that satellite readings can be corrupted so they use many sources for their data - ssts (sea temperatures) urban temperatures, rural temperatures, ice melt - a great mass of data.
The there are big big oil bucks that will be lost by action on climate change. I am not saying anybody is lying but they are seeing what they want to see by selecting and reinterpreting solid and established bodies of data.
Please go to the scientific sites that have no links to such enormous vested interests.
And so the global warming controversy goes on. Either way, it looks like we may well be facing some potentially devastating events in 2012. Can we focus some energy (intention) on helping deal with the anxieties of facing potential pole reversal and solar flares in 2012? Chaos is likely to take over as the time draws near if we do not find a way now to calm the minds of society. I, for one, already expend some energy fearing 2012.
I agree with Brenda. We are wasting too much energy on the" what if's". Let's put our intentions on the here and now.
Thanks, Lynne - for a wonderful article! Some things that were in the back of my mind (having a hard time learning astrology, lol) but you've put them in perspective for me.
I do believe we have a long way to go, as you said, and a short time to get there, but I also believe that whenever there is cash to be made, both sides tend to weigh their evidence against the potential profit. The truth is nearly always somewhere closer to the middle, lol.
From blaming cow farts (mainly due to DIET in modern livestock ag, not numbers), to recycling styrofoam (until recently nearly impossible), we each have a responsibility to clean up our own messes before complaining about our neighbor. Yet, we are not completely responsible for the entire planetary mess in which we find ourselves.
Irresponsible behavior coupled with what could be termed "bad timing" has brought us to the point where we either evolve or perish. I think its one HECK of an opportunity - rather than a disaster waiting to happen!
It is good to see reports such as this, and to have someone to weigh in on the side of sane personal responsibility rather than condemnation and hellfire or complete hedonism!
Sue
I am of the inclination that much of the context or'massage' of our perception on global warming can be found in the book 'Iron Mountain'. A document Published in 1966 by the Kennedy government on what would occur in the event the world moved from an era of war to a an era of peace.http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8wdqd_iron-mountain-the-blue-print-for-ty_news
I agree with Brenda's point. We need to work together. To help alleviate some of her concerns about 2012, I've done some research work on the Mayan calendar that might relieve some of her fears about 2012. The Mayans, as I said earlier, believed that this cosmic cycle occurred every 5,000 years. Which seems to agree with what the scientist's are saying in Lynne's article. The Mayans believed that the previous such cycle was approximately 3000 years BC. Their calendar therefore was built around this approximate 5,000 year cycle. This just means that their 5,000 year calendar will start all over again after December of 2012. Since the Homo Sapiens, or the human being, has been around for about 200,000 years, mankind has survived at least 40 of these cycles and guess what we are still here. So I wouldn't loose too much sleep over it.
Gene
Michael - were you aware that Ian Plimer is a director of 3 mining companies. Once again someone whose purse would be affected by action on CO2. When I first came across Lynne it was through What Doctors Don't Tell You and I was very pleased that the link between medicine and drug company profits was being recognised and exposed. A parallel is happening here. 2 climate skeptic scientists mentioned by people in this blog both have direct financial links to fossil fuel production (that produce masses of CO2). You've got to have no sense of smell not to smell a rat! Hope I'm not too late for people to still be reading this blog. x
Pauline and all - I've come back to catch up on the lastest comments - really appreciate the civil discussion here on such a knotty issue. It's really hard to find this - thanks, Lynne!
I still have an open mind on the science, but my biggest problem is that I don't trust the current "powers that be" to come up with an honest solution. (E.g. Jackie's comment above.) They have a hidden agenda, as they have for years, and of course this issue is being manipulated to suit that agenda.
In other words, the choices seem to be:
1. Let fascist powers enslave (via microchips) all humans on Earth under the guise of tracking our carbon quotas
2. Let the Earth continue its course and it takes down these fascist powers in the process - humans can start over without them and maybe rebuild a better world
At this point, I am more inclined to bear witness to cataclysmic climate change, perhaps not even survive it personally, than to support granting vast powers to people who are clearly NOT looking out for humanity's best interests.
There is a 3rd choice Zora - we take action. On our estate we are starting to grow food. There are many transitional towns in the UK, and the world. The act of communities finding solutions together has great socio/political/spiritual effect too.
I am part of a salsa dancing group - we get hot and happy from dancing, not CO2.
In our education work we use creativity and games.
I have greatly reduced travel (saving CO2) and it's not a problem cos I'm happy. I have family in Spain and get the train when I go to see them - it's thrilling and a great adventure. I know longer fly (see thinkbeforeyoufly.com).
I rarely buy consumer goods a) because I am on a low wage b) because they don't make me happy c) to save carbon.
Action isn't painful, it's often very much a part of personal and spiritual growth. And if we act to reduce our own emissions, the 'fascists' , the fat cats, those who govern with ego, etc have less power.
Here's a link to lots more info on the prob written in a simple & 'common sense' way & the site has info on action too. Those running this are concerned artists - so even if you are suspicious of scientists - give the artists a chance!
http://www.apeuk.org/climate-change/what-are-we-facing
And I know 2 of the people involved in the site and they are hardworking, they walk the walk and don't just talk the talk - and are really lovely caring people too.
Dear Lynne,
This is great! Thoughts have power! These intention experiments are so important.
Early global meditations organized by Peace the 21st and the Academy for Peace Research repeatedly found that massed thoughts influenced the Sun. Every thought we think influences ions in our brains and nerves. I found over 45 times that remote healers can make a measurable difference in the amplitude of what I called the Biofield, detected by a simple, inexpensive, and easily constructed apparatus. Maybe water is the medium which is being
influenced people in these experiments. V The intention experiments will support what Edgar Cayce recommended (mass meditations) to mitigate the possibly dire effects coming up in 2012. (click here for more information http://buryl.com/overview.htm )
Regards,
Buryl
Niksbups 6 What words... super, an excellent idea
_____________
ciallis
buy online Canada
8