"Terms of Reference": Why The IPCC Can't See The Sun And Why It Matters

"Maurice Strong was a Rockefeller-connected millionaire from the Alberta oil patch who divided his time between environmental campaigning and running major oil companies" - Why Big Oil Conquered The World, Corbett Report


The Intro

It was Maurice Strong, guided by the Rockefellers, who set forth the Terms of Reference for the IPCC, creating a rigid, "analytical framework" that would only investigate human effects on the climate. The IPCC, since its very inception, has been an agenda-driven body, operating in an echo chamber of its own design. Its blinkered, predetermined conclusion that humans are the major cause of climate change is the direct result of the IPCC's Terms of Reference, focusing research solely on "man-made climate change"! But the IPCC don't tell you that, do they.

There's a study with two rats in a cage who sporadically receive electric shocks. Because the rats cannot see any other causes, each assumes the other rat is the culprit. The rats have an excuse; the IPCC has Terms of Reference, drawn up by enthusiastic energy interests with a desire for control (see smart grids), not an interest in "saving the planet"; a planet mind, that might well decide to "shake us off like a bad case of fleas ... a surface nuisance" (as George Carlin put it).

So what fraction of climate change is human induced? Well, we cannot know this from IPCC-funded research since the denominator should include all the climate inputs, but the IPCC's Terms of Reference blocks their study, so we have a context free, meaningless answer to a serious question with profound policy ramifications.

Dr Tim Ball explains:


Re-Make Re-Model

Climate models that do not include (in any meaningful way) the sun are as useful and accurate as economic models that don't include banks, money and debt (like those used by mainstream economists who failed to predict the 2008 financial crisis).

Well, the high priests of CO2 who are responsible for constructing these climate models, upon which most climate reporting and research is founded (and funded), have just realised they'd made a mistake and a large one at that (note: I didn't find the word sorry in their report, I'm guessing apologies aren't within their Terms of Reference):

They've over-estimated CO2 forcing by 50%.

Ben Davidson (of Suspicious 0bservers) sums it all up nicely in these two shorts pieces:


The report authors uncommonly felt the need to provide clarification to the media:


For those who prefer a good read, this article sums it up well.


Why is this so important?

Controller is in complete agreement with Ben Davidson, that the real problem is pollution (which we can do a great deal about); it is NOT climate change which, outside the IPCC's straight-jacketed and thus absurdly unscientific realm, is largely understood to be driven predominantly by the sun; something we can't, or at least shouldn't (see below) do anything about.

"It is generally accepted that the climate warms during periods of strong solar activity (e.g., the Medieval Warm Period) and cools during periods of low solar activity (e.g., the Little Ice Age). - Lyu et al., 2016

 

Solar Radiation Management (SRM)

Well I'm sure this is just a normal flight path ...

What is this plane doing?An unusual flight pattern (source: geoengineeringwatch.org)


This is what such flights are doing (hint: these are not normal condensation trails):

Examples of SRM in California and WalesExamples of Solar Radiation Management in California (left) and Wales (centre and right)

 

"Another laborious term for this official program of spraying is Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-engineering (S.A.G) - an officially recognised initiative by the UK Government via the Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative (S.R.M.G.I) which was launched in March 2010 in response to a 2009 Royal Society report called Geoengineering the climate: science, governance and uncertainty" - Stratospheric Aerosol Injection, Sovereign Wales

On a personal note, I've come around from being very skeptical about this whole topic. After plenty of online research, it was a long trek through Wales that did it for me. I'd watch a steady agglomeration of discrete geometrical criss-cross patterns appearing in the early morning and by afternoon they'd dissipate into a featureless thick haze. It would get incredibly and uncommonly (or rather unnaturally) humid, and though saturated, it would never rain.

Recently, the weather modifiers have stepped out of the shadows and are saying that we need to discuss whether we should do this. They've BEEN doing it for years !!! The discussion should instead be whether those who spray toxic metals into the sky should in fact be prosecuted. No consent has been given by the world's population to be treated like lab rats in an insane and absolutely unjustifiable experiment: putting tons of toxic metals in the upper atmosphere, which later fall to earth and poison water, soil and vegetation, all in the name of a CO2 mythology promoted, behind the scenes, by energy interests diametrically opposed to those with a genuine concern for the environment.

In "About Controller" we said: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions (and increasingly constructed in a lab)". Whether or not their intentions are good (I have my doubts) what is clear is that we're involved in their grand experiment.
 

Solar Cycles

We've just come out of an unusually strong solar maximum (global warming), but now the sun is becoming "quiet" (heading into a solar minimum) earth will enter a cooling period. So, the real menace, if these geoengineers get their way and undertake a program of mass SRM spraying, is that they'll take credit for the cooling (a completely natural phenomenon) and herald their man-made disaster as a great success, leaving us with the toxic consequences of their "mandated" pollution and unaware of their deception.

Correlation between solar activity and temperatureSource: WoodForTrees.org

 

"In their groundbreaking New Astronomy paper, Norwegian professors Harald Yndestad and Jan-Erik Solheim indicate that the modern (1940-2015) Grand Maximum of very high solar activity — the highest solar activity levels in 4,000 years — has just ended.   Within 10 years, or by 2025, these scientists project the next solar minimum period (which will be similar in character to the late 18th Century’s Dalton Minimum) will exert its cooling effect on the Earth’s climate." - Global Cooling Starting Due To Low Solar Activity, Principia Scientific

 

1940-2015 Grand Maximum Of Solar Activity, Highest In 4,000 Years, Just Ended

“Studies that employ cosmogenic isotope data and sunspot data indicate that we are currently leaving a grand activity maximum, which began in approximately 1940 and is now declining (Usoskin et al., 2003; Solanki et al., 2004; Abreu et al., 2008). Because grand maxima  and minima occur on centennial or millennial timescales, they can only be investigated using proxy data, i.e., solar activity reconstructed from 10Be and 14C time-calibrated data. The conclusion is that the activity level of the Modern Maximum (1940–2000) is a relatively rare event, with the previous similarly high levels of solar activity observed 4 and 8 millennia ago (Usoskin et al., 2003). Nineteen grand maxima have been identified by Usoskin et al. (2007) in an 11,000-yr series.”
 

Solar Activity Minimum/Maximum Periods Linked To Colder/Warmer Climates

“Twenty-seven grand minima are identified with a total duration of 1900 years, or approximately 17% of the time during the past 11,500 years (Usoskin et al., 2007). An adjustment-free reconstruction of the solar activity over the last three millennia confirms four grand minima since the year 1000: Maunder (1640–1720), Spörer (1390–1550), Wolf (1270–1340) and Oort (1010–1070) (Usoskin et al., 2007). The Dalton minimum (1790–1820) does not fit the definition of a grand minimum; it is more likely a regular deep minimum that is observed once per century or an immediate state between the grand minimum and normal activity (Usoskin, 2013).  Temperature reconstructions for the last millennium for the Northern Hemisphere (Ljungquist, 2010) show a medieval maximum temperature at approximately the year 1000 [Medieval Warm Period] and a cooling period starting at approximately 1350 [Little Ice Age], immediately after the Wolf minimum and lasting nearly 500 years, with the coldest period in what is referred to as the Little Ice Age (LIA) at the time of the Maunder minimum. A cold period was also observed during the time of the Dalton minimum. The Maunder and the Dalton minima are associated with less solar activity and colder climate periods. In this investigation, minimum solar activity periods may serve as a reference for the identified minimum irradiations in the TSI oscillations.”

Sources: Abstract and full report


The Outro

So with that in mind, perhaps we should think twice before poisoning the planet. Instead we might be better served undertaking a massive clean-up to remediate decades of toxic pollution and focus our attention on the industries that continue to poison our food and water (Big Ag) and who, in so doing, create a market for that other toxic industry, Big Pharma. It's probably time to add to this list, the poisoners of the sky: the Geo-Engineers who, if left to their own devices (vices?) will inscribe on humanity's headstone the words: "aegrescit medendo".

We'll leave it to Truthstream Media to wrap things up: