We need an" Evolution" not a "Revolution".
htttp://www.wearechange.org
htttp://www.infowars.com
2010/04/03
Luke Rudowski: 9/11 Truth is about an" Evolution" not a "Revolution".
We need an" Evolution" not a "Revolution".
htttp://www.wearechange.org
htttp://www.infowars.com
Forensics Expert with a 9/11 mission lands in court on charges of harassment
North Caldwell man with a 9/11 Truth mission lands in court on charges of harassment
http://www.nj.com/news/local/index.ssf/2010/02/north_caldwell_man_with_a_miss.html
By Nic Corbett/For The Star-Ledger - February 07, 2010
NORTH CALDWELL-An 82-year-old North Caldwell man who for 1 1/2 years has desperately tried to convince local officials to pass along “evidence” of treason on Sept. 11, 2001 to a New Jersey judge got his day in court last week.
But it was not exactly the forum Don Meserlian wanted. He was there on charges of harassing a borough police captain, filed after he relentlessly pestered the local police department to further his cause.
Meserlian was found guilty Thursday in Fairfield municipal court of telling the officer on a recorded phone line last October, at a point when his frustration boiled over, “I will kick your a**” and “I can beat you any time with one hand tied behind my back.”
“I asked him if that was a threat,” testified Capt. Mark Deuer, “He said, ‘No. That was a promise.’”
Judge Frank Pomaco, suspending the usual fine, ordered Meserlian to pay $39 in court costs and advised him to stop bothering local police since they don’t have jurisdiction to investigate the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center.
“I was trying to run a police department on a daily basis, and the constant phone calls are an annoyance,” said Deuer, who’s officer-in-charge until a new police chief is appointed. “It had no other purpose other than to harass me. Normally, he’s polite, but on this day he was not.”
Meserlian, a forensic engineer who’s lived in North Caldwell for 45 years, has appeared before the borough’s governing body several times since September 2008 demanding they pass a resolution that states there’s evidence there were bombs in the World Trade Center towers that went off seconds before the planes hit.
As an act of civil disobedience, Meserlian said he’s kept his property taxes for the past year in an escrow account until the council complies. Borough administrator Joseph Kunz said he owes more than $14,000.
“I’ll pay as soon as they obey the law,” Meserlian said in an interview. “Just remember, the American Revolution was held for the same thing, to overthrow tyranny. You’re about to witness the next American Revolution. Hopefully, it can be done peacefully.”
Acting as his own attorney at the trial, Meserlian was joined by several members of a movement to have a grand jury investigate 9/11, including a New York City freelance writer, Sander Hicks; a voice-over actor and organizer for a group in Wayne called Prosecute Them Now, Stuart
Hutchison; and a Westchester, N.Y., architect, Jeffrey Orling.
Hicks, who self-publishd a book on a 9/11 cover-up, said he admires Meserlian for coming up with a strategy for airing his cause. According to Meserlian’s interpretation of a federal law, any citizen can present evidence of treason in any jurisdiction. Local officials must then make the information available to a state judge, who will pass it along to the correct jurisdiction where a grand jury can be convened. If officials refuse, Meserlian said, they can face up to seven years in prison and a steep fine.
The judge was lenient in letting Meserlian build his case, allowing Hicks and Hutchison to testify over the objections of Fairfield prosecutor Marcella Wilson. But he asked them to keep their remarks limited to Meserlian’s character.
When Wilson asked what was relevant about bringing 9/11 into a case about harassment, Meserlian interrupted, “9/11 is the whole thing. The municipal court is the only place where you can get a fair hearing.”
Meserlian admitted he can be annoying, but that’s only because he’s trying to get the truth out, he said. The judge said he that respects Meserlian has a mission, but North Caldwell is not the right venue to pursue it.
The next day, Meserlian appeared to be pleased with the trial, in spite of losing. He was triumphant about getting to read his interpretation of the treason law.
“Any other judge would not have allowed me to get the testimony in,” he said.
Nic Corbett/For The Star-LedgerDon Meserlian, an 82-year-old forensic engineer, who is trying to get authorities to listen to his 9/11 conspiracy theory.
http://www.nj.com/news/local/index.ssf/2010/02/north_caldwell_man_with_a_miss.html
By Nic Corbett/For The Star-Ledger - February 07, 2010
But it was not exactly the forum Don Meserlian wanted. He was there on charges of harassing a borough police captain, filed after he relentlessly pestered the local police department to further his cause.
Meserlian was found guilty Thursday in Fairfield municipal court of telling the officer on a recorded phone line last October, at a point when his frustration boiled over, “I will kick your a**” and “I can beat you any time with one hand tied behind my back.”
“I asked him if that was a threat,” testified Capt. Mark Deuer, “He said, ‘No. That was a promise.’”
Judge Frank Pomaco, suspending the usual fine, ordered Meserlian to pay $39 in court costs and advised him to stop bothering local police since they don’t have jurisdiction to investigate the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center.
“I was trying to run a police department on a daily basis, and the constant phone calls are an annoyance,” said Deuer, who’s officer-in-charge until a new police chief is appointed. “It had no other purpose other than to harass me. Normally, he’s polite, but on this day he was not.”
Meserlian, a forensic engineer who’s lived in North Caldwell for 45 years, has appeared before the borough’s governing body several times since September 2008 demanding they pass a resolution that states there’s evidence there were bombs in the World Trade Center towers that went off seconds before the planes hit.
As an act of civil disobedience, Meserlian said he’s kept his property taxes for the past year in an escrow account until the council complies. Borough administrator Joseph Kunz said he owes more than $14,000.
“I’ll pay as soon as they obey the law,” Meserlian said in an interview. “Just remember, the American Revolution was held for the same thing, to overthrow tyranny. You’re about to witness the next American Revolution. Hopefully, it can be done peacefully.”
Acting as his own attorney at the trial, Meserlian was joined by several members of a movement to have a grand jury investigate 9/11, including a New York City freelance writer, Sander Hicks; a voice-over actor and organizer for a group in Wayne called Prosecute Them Now, Stuart
Hutchison; and a Westchester, N.Y., architect, Jeffrey Orling.
Hicks, who self-publishd a book on a 9/11 cover-up, said he admires Meserlian for coming up with a strategy for airing his cause. According to Meserlian’s interpretation of a federal law, any citizen can present evidence of treason in any jurisdiction. Local officials must then make the information available to a state judge, who will pass it along to the correct jurisdiction where a grand jury can be convened. If officials refuse, Meserlian said, they can face up to seven years in prison and a steep fine.
The judge was lenient in letting Meserlian build his case, allowing Hicks and Hutchison to testify over the objections of Fairfield prosecutor Marcella Wilson. But he asked them to keep their remarks limited to Meserlian’s character.
When Wilson asked what was relevant about bringing 9/11 into a case about harassment, Meserlian interrupted, “9/11 is the whole thing. The municipal court is the only place where you can get a fair hearing.”
Meserlian admitted he can be annoying, but that’s only because he’s trying to get the truth out, he said. The judge said he that respects Meserlian has a mission, but North Caldwell is not the right venue to pursue it.
The next day, Meserlian appeared to be pleased with the trial, in spite of losing. He was triumphant about getting to read his interpretation of the treason law.
“Any other judge would not have allowed me to get the testimony in,” he said.
Nic Corbett/For The Star-LedgerDon Meserlian, an 82-year-old forensic engineer, who is trying to get authorities to listen to his 9/11 conspiracy theory.
9/11 Truth Encounters Utah Attny Gen., Mark Shurtleff
Attorney General Displays Willful Ignorance of the Law
Note: Attorney General Shurtleff took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States. This makes the Attorney General liable under US Code 18 USC § 2382 or 18 USC § 4. Misprision of treason/ felony for taking no action on evidence that effects national security, Treason or fraud against the US government and the State of Utah. Additionally, elected federal officials (Congress and Senators) who represent the State of Utah voted for the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act on the basis of a possible False Flag event. Therefore, it is incumbent on the Attorney General to act in the public interest to protect the sovereign State of Utah against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
LINK to combined Misprision Statutes: http://dc911truth.org/flyers/2AddMisprision.pdf
CORNELL LAW LINK (Treason): http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2382.html
CORNELL LAW LINK (Felony): http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/4.html
On March 30th 2010 WeAreChange Utah members went to the Tea Party Express Tour at the Utah State Capitol. Luckily Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff was out roaming the crowd so we decided to confront him.
WeAreChangeUtah delivered copies of the peer reviewed scientific paper "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" to the representatives of the State of Utah on 1/11/10 including Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff.
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/000000
http://www.nationalexpositor.com/News/2413.html
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
Note: Attorney General Shurtleff took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States. This makes the Attorney General liable under US Code 18 USC § 2382 or 18 USC § 4. Misprision of treason/ felony for taking no action on evidence that effects national security, Treason or fraud against the US government and the State of Utah. Additionally, elected federal officials (Congress and Senators) who represent the State of Utah voted for the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act on the basis of a possible False Flag event. Therefore, it is incumbent on the Attorney General to act in the public interest to protect the sovereign State of Utah against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
LINK to combined Misprision Statutes: http://dc911truth.org/flyers/2AddMisprision.pdf
CORNELL LAW LINK (Treason): http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2382.html
CORNELL LAW LINK (Felony): http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/4.html
On March 30th 2010 WeAreChange Utah members went to the Tea Party Express Tour at the Utah State Capitol. Luckily Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff was out roaming the crowd so we decided to confront him.
WeAreChangeUtah delivered copies of the peer reviewed scientific paper "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" to the representatives of the State of Utah on 1/11/10 including Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff.
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/000000
http://www.nationalexpositor.com/News/2413.html
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
A Deal at Ground Zero?
A Deal at Ground Zero?
NYT EDITORIAL
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/03/opinion/03sat4.html?th&emc=th
April 2, 2010
Mayor Michael Bloomberg and other politicians are celebrating a deal to finally finish the major buildings at the World Trade Center site. Let’s hope they are right to break out the confetti. Larry Silverstein, who is developing office towers on the site, and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns the 16 acres, need to make sure that the agreement does not fall apart yet again, as they fill in the remaining details.
Times Topics: World Trade Center (NYC)No one should be surprised to hear that the latest stalemate — which has dragged on for more than a year — was about money. Mr. Silverstein has been insisting that the Port Authority use scarce public funds to help finance his three private office towers. The authority has rightly balked, citing more basic needs like tunnels and bridges and ports. Last week, both sides agreed in principle to go ahead with two skyscrapers, and Mr. Silverstein will pick up more of the bill than he wanted.
The Port Authority has pledged to provide $1.2 billion in financing to complete the first tower, which would cost an estimated $1.75 billion. For that tower and the second one, expected to cost almost $2 billion, Mr. Silverstein would commit to using what is left of the huge insurance payout he got after the attack and from tax-free Liberty Bonds. He has also committed to raising $300 million and finding renters for 400,000 square feet (16 percent) of the office space in the second tower before the city, state and authority provide $600 million more in financing.
Plans for the third tower will be wisely kept on hold, the area preferably turned into a park, until the downtown real estate market is ready for more offices.
The details still to be worked out include questions about development fees for Mr. Silverstein and the interest rate for the authority’s financing. The two sides need to settle those and get things moving. The 10-year anniversary of the attacks is 17 months away. With good faith and a serious effort, the memorial to the victims of Sept. 11, the site’s centerpiece, can be ready by then.
NYT EDITORIAL
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/03/opinion/03sat4.html?th&emc=th
April 2, 2010
Mayor Michael Bloomberg and other politicians are celebrating a deal to finally finish the major buildings at the World Trade Center site. Let’s hope they are right to break out the confetti. Larry Silverstein, who is developing office towers on the site, and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns the 16 acres, need to make sure that the agreement does not fall apart yet again, as they fill in the remaining details.
Times Topics: World Trade Center (NYC)No one should be surprised to hear that the latest stalemate — which has dragged on for more than a year — was about money. Mr. Silverstein has been insisting that the Port Authority use scarce public funds to help finance his three private office towers. The authority has rightly balked, citing more basic needs like tunnels and bridges and ports. Last week, both sides agreed in principle to go ahead with two skyscrapers, and Mr. Silverstein will pick up more of the bill than he wanted.
The Port Authority has pledged to provide $1.2 billion in financing to complete the first tower, which would cost an estimated $1.75 billion. For that tower and the second one, expected to cost almost $2 billion, Mr. Silverstein would commit to using what is left of the huge insurance payout he got after the attack and from tax-free Liberty Bonds. He has also committed to raising $300 million and finding renters for 400,000 square feet (16 percent) of the office space in the second tower before the city, state and authority provide $600 million more in financing.
Plans for the third tower will be wisely kept on hold, the area preferably turned into a park, until the downtown real estate market is ready for more offices.
The details still to be worked out include questions about development fees for Mr. Silverstein and the interest rate for the authority’s financing. The two sides need to settle those and get things moving. The 10-year anniversary of the attacks is 17 months away. With good faith and a serious effort, the memorial to the victims of Sept. 11, the site’s centerpiece, can be ready by then.
2010/04/02
100 million Americans question or find fault with the official 9/11 story
100 million Americans question or find fault with the official 9/11 story .
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/205933-100-million-Americans-question-or-find-fault-with-the-official-9-11-story
Joel S. Hirschhorn
Intelligence Daily
Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:22 EDT
The failure to rebuild the World Trade Center site in Manhattan has received endless attention. But public anger about this failed reconstruction should not been seen so negatively. After all, mental reconstruction has also still not been successful and is surely more needed, with too many Americans still accepting the official government story about 9/11. This, despite a huge amount of compelling evidence that elements of the US government played some role, despite a very large, active 9/11 truth movement, and despite an impressive number of highly credible people demanding a new investigation as documented at patriotsquestion911.com.
In the recent Angus Reid Public Opinion survey of a representative national sample of American adults, 62 per cent of respondents disagree with the view that the "Sept. 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging an invasion against Afghanistan." Far more Republicans disagree at 80 percent, compared to 66 percent of Independents and 55 percent of Democrats.
Consistent with this is that two-thirds of Americans (67 percent) agree with the government commission that investigated the events of Sept. 11, 2001, which concluded that an attack was carried out by 19 hijackers who were members of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization, led by Osama bin Laden. Though 12 per cent of respondents reject the commission's findings, one-in-five Americans (21 percent) are undecided. In particular, 35 percent of Independents and 34 percent of Democrats do not accept the official version, compared to just 20 percent of Republicans.
These figures translate to about 100 million Americans that question or find fault with the official 9/11 story, far from a trivial number and far too many to dismiss as conspiracy nuts and part of the lunatic fringe. This is the important message that merits public appreciation.
That the mainstream media refuses to acknowledge this kind of public sentiment reflects on their lack of courage to dig deep into the role of the government and face the truth. This behavior does nothing to improve American democracy and trust in government. True patriots must acknowledge that government through the terrible acts of some individuals can carry out hideous acts; there is a bipartisan history of this. Truth is the best way to stop such behavior.
Clearly, Republicans have blocked out the painful possibility that the Bush-Cheney administration played a role in 9/11. This may also explain why the large tea party movement that results from strong disillusionment with government does not embrace the 9/11 truth movement.
Here is my perspective: If far more Americans rejected or questioned the official government story and demanded a new investigation, we would get the mental reconstruction sorely needed to ensure that the government never again uses a false flag operation to advance a policy (wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) that would not otherwise receive public support, especially one that kills thousands of Americans, both civilians and soldiers.
That the reconstruction at ground zero in Manhattan has still not succeeded symbolizes that the wounds of 9/11 are not healed, which means that we still have some chance of demanding and discovering the full truth, regardless of how painful it is. The cost of a first-rate new investigation might be $50 million, far less than the billions of dollars to reconstruct the Manhattan site.
In the end, truth is more important than new buildings. Worse than a hole in the ground is a hole in our national soul. We need Congress to authorize and fund a new 9/11 investigation. The highly fragmented 9/11 truth movement must unite behind a political strategy to make this happen. The only reason to fear a new investigation is the likely unsettling finding that, indeed, the US government was a lot more than incompetent and negligent.
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/205933-100-million-Americans-question-or-find-fault-with-the-official-9-11-story
Joel S. Hirschhorn
Intelligence Daily
Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:22 EDT
In the recent Angus Reid Public Opinion survey of a representative national sample of American adults, 62 per cent of respondents disagree with the view that the "Sept. 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging an invasion against Afghanistan." Far more Republicans disagree at 80 percent, compared to 66 percent of Independents and 55 percent of Democrats.
Consistent with this is that two-thirds of Americans (67 percent) agree with the government commission that investigated the events of Sept. 11, 2001, which concluded that an attack was carried out by 19 hijackers who were members of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization, led by Osama bin Laden. Though 12 per cent of respondents reject the commission's findings, one-in-five Americans (21 percent) are undecided. In particular, 35 percent of Independents and 34 percent of Democrats do not accept the official version, compared to just 20 percent of Republicans.
That the mainstream media refuses to acknowledge this kind of public sentiment reflects on their lack of courage to dig deep into the role of the government and face the truth. This behavior does nothing to improve American democracy and trust in government. True patriots must acknowledge that government through the terrible acts of some individuals can carry out hideous acts; there is a bipartisan history of this. Truth is the best way to stop such behavior.
Clearly, Republicans have blocked out the painful possibility that the Bush-Cheney administration played a role in 9/11. This may also explain why the large tea party movement that results from strong disillusionment with government does not embrace the 9/11 truth movement.
Here is my perspective: If far more Americans rejected or questioned the official government story and demanded a new investigation, we would get the mental reconstruction sorely needed to ensure that the government never again uses a false flag operation to advance a policy (wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) that would not otherwise receive public support, especially one that kills thousands of Americans, both civilians and soldiers.
That the reconstruction at ground zero in Manhattan has still not succeeded symbolizes that the wounds of 9/11 are not healed, which means that we still have some chance of demanding and discovering the full truth, regardless of how painful it is. The cost of a first-rate new investigation might be $50 million, far less than the billions of dollars to reconstruct the Manhattan site.
In the end, truth is more important than new buildings. Worse than a hole in the ground is a hole in our national soul. We need Congress to authorize and fund a new 9/11 investigation. The highly fragmented 9/11 truth movement must unite behind a political strategy to make this happen. The only reason to fear a new investigation is the likely unsettling finding that, indeed, the US government was a lot more than incompetent and negligent.
9/11 victim families want civil trials for terror suspects
PRESS TV
9/11 victim families want civil trials for terror suspects
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=122254§ionid=3510203
Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:25:51 GMT
An aerial photo showing the collapse of the World Trade Center towers following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.
Family members of those killed in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks have urged US President Barack Obama to live up to earlier promises and try terror suspects in civilian court.
The September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows, a group of more than 200 family members of 9/11 victims, said they prefer the suspects currently held at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba to stand trial in US federal criminal courts rather than before military commissions.
In an emotional four-minute long video appeal, the group warned the US president against "buckling to political pressure" over the trial venue for the alleged 9/11 plotters.
The group argued that, while there have been hundreds of successfully completed terrorism-related trials in federal criminal courts, military commissions have only managed to wrap up three cases related to terrorism.
Donna Marsh O'Connor, a Peaceful Tomorrows member who lost her pregnant daughter on the attack against the World Trade Center, criticized the horse-trading politics surrounding terrorist trials in the US.
Reflecting disappointment with an alleged deal in which the White House would drop plans for civilian trials in exchange for Republican support for the closure of the detention camp at Guantanamo, O'Connor called on Obama to reject any such compromise.
"As 9/11 families, we have suffered greatly and waited almost nine years to see justice done with our own eyes," she said.
"We understand that you face political pressure to back down. We ask that you do not allow fear and prejudice to govern your decision -- as we are not afraid. We know our country is strong enough to hold on to our values in the face of terrorism," she added.
The September 11 attacks on the US resulted in the death of some 2,973 people, mostly those present in the twin towers of the World Trade Center.
9/11 victim families want civil trials for terror suspects
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=122254§ionid=3510203
Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:25:51 GMT
Family members of those killed in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks have urged US President Barack Obama to live up to earlier promises and try terror suspects in civilian court.
The September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows, a group of more than 200 family members of 9/11 victims, said they prefer the suspects currently held at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba to stand trial in US federal criminal courts rather than before military commissions.
In an emotional four-minute long video appeal, the group warned the US president against "buckling to political pressure" over the trial venue for the alleged 9/11 plotters.
The group argued that, while there have been hundreds of successfully completed terrorism-related trials in federal criminal courts, military commissions have only managed to wrap up three cases related to terrorism.
Donna Marsh O'Connor, a Peaceful Tomorrows member who lost her pregnant daughter on the attack against the World Trade Center, criticized the horse-trading politics surrounding terrorist trials in the US.
Reflecting disappointment with an alleged deal in which the White House would drop plans for civilian trials in exchange for Republican support for the closure of the detention camp at Guantanamo, O'Connor called on Obama to reject any such compromise.
"As 9/11 families, we have suffered greatly and waited almost nine years to see justice done with our own eyes," she said.
"We understand that you face political pressure to back down. We ask that you do not allow fear and prejudice to govern your decision -- as we are not afraid. We know our country is strong enough to hold on to our values in the face of terrorism," she added.
The September 11 attacks on the US resulted in the death of some 2,973 people, mostly those present in the twin towers of the World Trade Center.
EPA's Alan Carlin Asserts Global Warming Policy Based on Invalid Hypothesis
Making Global Policy on Bad Science is Not Sustainable
This post is based on Alan Carlin’s paper of 3/16/2009 challenging a technical support document (TSD) published just one week prior to this one.
Comments on Draft Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act - SOURCE : http://www.epa.gov/foia/docs/Endangerment_comments_v7b.pdf
By Alan Carlin - EPA Senior Operations Research Analyst challenges the TSD Draft of March 9, 2009
March 16, 2009
Current data on the GHG/CO2 hypothesis as to the cause of global warming, is currently an invalid hypothesis from a scientific viewpoint because it fails a number of critical comparisons with available observable data.
Any one of these failings should be enough to invalidate the hypothesis; the breadth of these failings leaves no other possible conclusion based on current data. As Richard Feynman has said failure to conform to real world data makes it necessary from a scientific viewpoint to revise the hypothesis or abandon it. Unfortunately this has not happened in the global warming debate, but needs to if an accurate finding concerning endangerment is to be made. The failings are listed below in decreasing order of importance:
1. Lack of observed upper tropospheric heating in the tropics.
2. Lack of observed constant humidity levels, a very important assumption of all the IPCC models, as CO2 levels have risen.
3. The most reliable sets of global temperature data we have, using satellite microwave sounding units, show no appreciable temperature increases during the critical period 1978-1997, just when the surface station data show a pronounced rise (see Section 2.4). Satellite data after 1998 is also inconsistent with the GHG/CO2/AGW hypothesis 2009.
4. The models used by the IPCC do not take into account or show the most important ocean oscillations which clearly do affect global temperatures, namely, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, and the ENSO (Section 2.4). Leaving out any major potential causes for global warming from the analysis results in the likely misattribution of the effects of these oscillations to the GHGs/CO2 and hence is likely to overstate their importance as a cause for climate change.
5. The models and the IPCC ignored the possibility of indirect solar variability (Section 2.5), which if important would again be likely to have the effect of overstating the importance of GHGs/CO2.
6. The models and the IPCC ignored the possibility that there may be other significant natural effects on global temperatures that we do not yet understand (Section 2.4). This possibility invalidates their statements that one must assume anthropogenic sources in order to duplicate the temperature record. The 1998 spike in global temperatures is very difficult to explain in any other way (see Section 2.4).
7. Surface global temperature data may have been hopelessly corrupted by the urban heat island effect and other problems which may explain some portion of the warming that would otherwise be attributed to GHGs/CO2. In fact, the Draft TSD refers almost exclusively in Section 5 to surface rather than satellite data.
There is no such thing as permanent or settled science. Only continuing research can insure that important relationships are taken into account. Richard Feynman expressed this as follows:
"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we guess it. Then we compute the consequences of the guess to see what would be implied if this law that we guessed is right. Then we compare the result of the computation to nature, with experiment or experience; compare it directly with observation to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. It’s that simple statement that is the key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is. It does not make any difference how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is---if it disagrees with the experiment (observation) it is wrong."
-- Feynman, Richard, 1965, The Character of Physical Law, MIT Press, Cambridge, Chap. 7, "Seeking New Laws."
Related: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-5117890-503544.html?tag=untagged
On the June 30 edition of "Fox and Friends," EPA Senior Operations Research Analyst Alan Carlin, told interviewer Steve Doocy that his 98-page study that questioned the science behind global warming and called for the EPA to stop depending on reports from the United Nations, was ignored by his supervisor who refused to forward the report on because Carlin’s “comments do not help the legal policy or case” for the EPA’s position on global warming.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/sam-theodosopoulos/2009/06/30/meet-alan-carlin-epa-s-inconvenient-voice#ixzz0jwAeDMFf
Highlights of recent Criminal Fraud in Science and Technology:
- Diebold Voting Machines intentionally programmed to give erroneous results.
- Promotion of Creationism with insufficient scientific methodology and assault on Darwinism.
- EPA's Christie Todd Whitman deadly 9/11 decision at ground zero to declare air safe to breathe.
- Science Fraud at NIST: Shyam Sunder and John Gross failure to use available evidence and scientific method in 9/11 report.
- Global Warming and IPCC hypothesis that seriously fails to meet the minimums of scientific methodology.
_____________________________________________________
Feynman, The Great Explainer - The Chess Game
_____________________________________________________
The Myth of Global Warming Concensus
_____________________________________________________
Alan Carlin on Glenn Beck
_____________________________________________________
This post is based on Alan Carlin’s paper of 3/16/2009 challenging a technical support document (TSD) published just one week prior to this one.
Comments on Draft Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act - SOURCE : http://www.epa.gov/foia/docs/Endangerment_comments_v7b.pdf
By Alan Carlin - EPA Senior Operations Research Analyst challenges the TSD Draft of March 9, 2009
March 16, 2009
Any one of these failings should be enough to invalidate the hypothesis; the breadth of these failings leaves no other possible conclusion based on current data. As Richard Feynman has said failure to conform to real world data makes it necessary from a scientific viewpoint to revise the hypothesis or abandon it. Unfortunately this has not happened in the global warming debate, but needs to if an accurate finding concerning endangerment is to be made. The failings are listed below in decreasing order of importance:
1. Lack of observed upper tropospheric heating in the tropics.
2. Lack of observed constant humidity levels, a very important assumption of all the IPCC models, as CO2 levels have risen.
3. The most reliable sets of global temperature data we have, using satellite microwave sounding units, show no appreciable temperature increases during the critical period 1978-1997, just when the surface station data show a pronounced rise (see Section 2.4). Satellite data after 1998 is also inconsistent with the GHG/CO2/AGW hypothesis 2009.
4. The models used by the IPCC do not take into account or show the most important ocean oscillations which clearly do affect global temperatures, namely, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, and the ENSO (Section 2.4). Leaving out any major potential causes for global warming from the analysis results in the likely misattribution of the effects of these oscillations to the GHGs/CO2 and hence is likely to overstate their importance as a cause for climate change.
5. The models and the IPCC ignored the possibility of indirect solar variability (Section 2.5), which if important would again be likely to have the effect of overstating the importance of GHGs/CO2.
6. The models and the IPCC ignored the possibility that there may be other significant natural effects on global temperatures that we do not yet understand (Section 2.4). This possibility invalidates their statements that one must assume anthropogenic sources in order to duplicate the temperature record. The 1998 spike in global temperatures is very difficult to explain in any other way (see Section 2.4).
7. Surface global temperature data may have been hopelessly corrupted by the urban heat island effect and other problems which may explain some portion of the warming that would otherwise be attributed to GHGs/CO2. In fact, the Draft TSD refers almost exclusively in Section 5 to surface rather than satellite data.
There is no such thing as permanent or settled science. Only continuing research can insure that important relationships are taken into account. Richard Feynman expressed this as follows:
"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we guess it. Then we compute the consequences of the guess to see what would be implied if this law that we guessed is right. Then we compare the result of the computation to nature, with experiment or experience; compare it directly with observation to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. It’s that simple statement that is the key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is. It does not make any difference how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is---if it disagrees with the experiment (observation) it is wrong."
-- Feynman, Richard, 1965, The Character of Physical Law, MIT Press, Cambridge, Chap. 7, "Seeking New Laws."
Related: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-5117890-503544.html?tag=untagged
On the June 30 edition of "Fox and Friends," EPA Senior Operations Research Analyst Alan Carlin, told interviewer Steve Doocy that his 98-page study that questioned the science behind global warming and called for the EPA to stop depending on reports from the United Nations, was ignored by his supervisor who refused to forward the report on because Carlin’s “comments do not help the legal policy or case” for the EPA’s position on global warming.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/sam-theodosopoulos/2009/06/30/meet-alan-carlin-epa-s-inconvenient-voice#ixzz0jwAeDMFf
Highlights of recent Criminal Fraud in Science and Technology:
- Diebold Voting Machines intentionally programmed to give erroneous results.
- Promotion of Creationism with insufficient scientific methodology and assault on Darwinism.
- EPA's Christie Todd Whitman deadly 9/11 decision at ground zero to declare air safe to breathe.
- Science Fraud at NIST: Shyam Sunder and John Gross failure to use available evidence and scientific method in 9/11 report.
- Global Warming and IPCC hypothesis that seriously fails to meet the minimums of scientific methodology.
_____________________________________________________
Feynman, The Great Explainer - The Chess Game
_____________________________________________________
The Myth of Global Warming Concensus
_____________________________________________________
Alan Carlin on Glenn Beck
_____________________________________________________
2010/04/01
Testimony From From Murdered Firefighters Silences 9/11 Skeptics
Dead Firefighters Testify They Were Murdered on 9/11.
These are the official tapes of the final moments from the daring rescue efforts of the New York City Fire Department operating in the South Tower of the World Trade Center moments before it suddenly exploded into dust and oblivion. This recording is filled with evidence that completely undermines the NIST conclusion that raging fires weakened the steel to cause a gravitational or pancake collapse.
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
These are the official tapes of the final moments from the daring rescue efforts of the New York City Fire Department operating in the South Tower of the World Trade Center moments before it suddenly exploded into dust and oblivion. This recording is filled with evidence that completely undermines the NIST conclusion that raging fires weakened the steel to cause a gravitational or pancake collapse.
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
MIT Demonstrates Magnetic Fields Destroy Moral Judgement
MEDICAL NEWS TODAY
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/184156.php
Magnets Can Alter Moral Judgement By Changing Brain Activity
Written by: Catharine Paddock, PhD
Article Date: 01 Apr 2010 - 2:00 PDT
US scientists have discovered that appyling a magnetic field to a particular place on the scalp can alter people's moral judgement by interfering with activity in the right temporo-parietal junction (TPJ) of the brain. They said their finding helps us better understand how the brain constructs morality.
You can read about the study, led by researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in the 29 March online issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, PNAS. The research was led by Dr Rebecca Saxe, assistant professor of brain and cognitive sciences at MIT.
Lead author Dr Liane Young, a postdoctoral associate in Saxe's department, told the media that because people are normally very confident and consistent in making moral judgements, it comes as surprise to learn that their ability to do so can altered like this.
"You think of morality as being a really high-level behavior. To be able to apply (a magnetic field) to a specific brain region and change people's moral judgments is really astonishing," said Young in a statement.
She said the study reveals "striking evidence" that the right TPJ, which sits on the surface of the brain, above and behind the right ear, plays a crucial role in making moral judgements.
When we make moral judgements about other people we often need to infer their intentions. For instance, when a hunter on a hunting trip shoots a fellow hunter, did he mistake his colleague for prey, or was he secretly jealous?
This ability has been termed "theory of mind", that is the ability to attribute mental states such as beliefs, intentions, and other qualities to oneself and others, and also to understand that other people's mental states can be different to one's own.
Ten years ago Saxe identified that the TPJ played a role in theory of mind and wrote about it in her PhD thesis in 2003. Since then she has been using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to show that the right TPJ is active when people are asked to make moral judgements that require them to think about the intentions of others.
Other studies have also shown that the TPJ is highly active when we think about other people's intentions, their beliefs and their thoughts.
For this study, Saxe, Young and colleagues wanted to investigate what might happen if they could actually disrupt activity in the right TPJ.
In this case, instead of the usual fMRI, they did two sets of experiments where they used a non-invasive method called transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to apply a magnetic field to a small area of the skull (on the scalp) to create weak electric currents that stop nearby brain cells from firing normally for a while.
They found that this was enough to impair subjects' ability to make moral judgments that involve an understanding of other people's intentions: as in for example, a failed murder attempt.
In the first set of "offline stimulation" experiments, they exposed volunteers to the TMS method for 25 minutes and then asked them to take a test where they read about several scenarios and then had to judge the actions of the characters portrayed on a scale of one to seven (from "absolutely forbidden" to "absolutely permissible").
For example, for one scenario they were asked to judge how permissible would it be for a man to allow his girlfriend to walk across a bridge he knew to be unsafe, even if she does eventually cross it safely. In such a scenario, judging the man solely on the outcome would hold him blameless, even though he apparently intended harm.
In the second set of "online stimulation" experiments, the volunteers underwent a 500-millisecond burst of TMS at the point when they were asked to make a moral judgement.
In both experiments, Saxe, Young and colleagues found that disrupting the right TPJ resulted in volunteers being more likely to judge failed attempts to harm as morally permissible.
They suggested this was because they were relying more on information about the outcome than inference on intention, since the process that normally helped them get information on intention was disrupted by the electrical current from the TMS.
"It doesn't completely reverse people's moral judgments, it just biases them," explained Saxe.
The researchers also found that when they applied TMS to a brain region near the right TPJ , the volunteers' judgments were nearly identical to those of volunteers who received no TMS at all.
They concluded that:
"Relative to TMS to a control site, TMS to the RTPJ caused participants to judge attempted harms as less morally forbidden and more morally permissible. Thus, interfering with activity in the RTPJ disrupts the capacity to use mental states in moral judgment, especially in the case of attempted harms."
When we judge other people, understanding their intentions is just one aspect of what we take into account. We also assess things like their previous record, what we understand about their desires, and what constraints they might be under. We are also guided by our own ideas about loyalty, fairness and integrity, said Saxe.
Moral judgement is not a single process, even though it might feel like it, explained Saxe, who described it as more a mixture of "competing and conflicting judgments, all of which get jumbled into what we call moral judgment".
Dr Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, professor of philosophy at Duke University, who was not involved in this research, said that by going beyond fMRI, the study marks a major step forward for the field of moral neuroscience:
"Recent fMRI studies of moral judgment find fascinating correlations, but Young et al usher in a new era by moving beyond correlation to causation," said Sinnott-Armstrong.
The National Center for Research Resources, the MIND Institute, the Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, the Simons Foundation and the David and Lucille Packard Foundation funded the study.
"Disruption of the right temporoparietal junction with transcranial magnetic stimulation reduces the role of beliefs in moral judgments."
Liane Young, Joan Albert Camprodon, Marc Hauser, Alvaro Pascual-Leone, and Rebecca Saxe
PNAS, published online ahead of print 29 March 2010
DOI:10.1073/pnas.0914826107
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/184156.php
Magnets Can Alter Moral Judgement By Changing Brain Activity
Written by: Catharine Paddock, PhD
Article Date: 01 Apr 2010 - 2:00 PDT
You can read about the study, led by researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in the 29 March online issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, PNAS. The research was led by Dr Rebecca Saxe, assistant professor of brain and cognitive sciences at MIT.
Lead author Dr Liane Young, a postdoctoral associate in Saxe's department, told the media that because people are normally very confident and consistent in making moral judgements, it comes as surprise to learn that their ability to do so can altered like this.
"You think of morality as being a really high-level behavior. To be able to apply (a magnetic field) to a specific brain region and change people's moral judgments is really astonishing," said Young in a statement.
She said the study reveals "striking evidence" that the right TPJ, which sits on the surface of the brain, above and behind the right ear, plays a crucial role in making moral judgements.
When we make moral judgements about other people we often need to infer their intentions. For instance, when a hunter on a hunting trip shoots a fellow hunter, did he mistake his colleague for prey, or was he secretly jealous?
This ability has been termed "theory of mind", that is the ability to attribute mental states such as beliefs, intentions, and other qualities to oneself and others, and also to understand that other people's mental states can be different to one's own.
Ten years ago Saxe identified that the TPJ played a role in theory of mind and wrote about it in her PhD thesis in 2003. Since then she has been using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to show that the right TPJ is active when people are asked to make moral judgements that require them to think about the intentions of others.
Other studies have also shown that the TPJ is highly active when we think about other people's intentions, their beliefs and their thoughts.
For this study, Saxe, Young and colleagues wanted to investigate what might happen if they could actually disrupt activity in the right TPJ.
In this case, instead of the usual fMRI, they did two sets of experiments where they used a non-invasive method called transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to apply a magnetic field to a small area of the skull (on the scalp) to create weak electric currents that stop nearby brain cells from firing normally for a while.
They found that this was enough to impair subjects' ability to make moral judgments that involve an understanding of other people's intentions: as in for example, a failed murder attempt.
In the first set of "offline stimulation" experiments, they exposed volunteers to the TMS method for 25 minutes and then asked them to take a test where they read about several scenarios and then had to judge the actions of the characters portrayed on a scale of one to seven (from "absolutely forbidden" to "absolutely permissible").
For example, for one scenario they were asked to judge how permissible would it be for a man to allow his girlfriend to walk across a bridge he knew to be unsafe, even if she does eventually cross it safely. In such a scenario, judging the man solely on the outcome would hold him blameless, even though he apparently intended harm.
In the second set of "online stimulation" experiments, the volunteers underwent a 500-millisecond burst of TMS at the point when they were asked to make a moral judgement.
In both experiments, Saxe, Young and colleagues found that disrupting the right TPJ resulted in volunteers being more likely to judge failed attempts to harm as morally permissible.
They suggested this was because they were relying more on information about the outcome than inference on intention, since the process that normally helped them get information on intention was disrupted by the electrical current from the TMS.
"It doesn't completely reverse people's moral judgments, it just biases them," explained Saxe.
The researchers also found that when they applied TMS to a brain region near the right TPJ , the volunteers' judgments were nearly identical to those of volunteers who received no TMS at all.
They concluded that:
"Relative to TMS to a control site, TMS to the RTPJ caused participants to judge attempted harms as less morally forbidden and more morally permissible. Thus, interfering with activity in the RTPJ disrupts the capacity to use mental states in moral judgment, especially in the case of attempted harms."
When we judge other people, understanding their intentions is just one aspect of what we take into account. We also assess things like their previous record, what we understand about their desires, and what constraints they might be under. We are also guided by our own ideas about loyalty, fairness and integrity, said Saxe.
Moral judgement is not a single process, even though it might feel like it, explained Saxe, who described it as more a mixture of "competing and conflicting judgments, all of which get jumbled into what we call moral judgment".
Dr Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, professor of philosophy at Duke University, who was not involved in this research, said that by going beyond fMRI, the study marks a major step forward for the field of moral neuroscience:
"Recent fMRI studies of moral judgment find fascinating correlations, but Young et al usher in a new era by moving beyond correlation to causation," said Sinnott-Armstrong.
The National Center for Research Resources, the MIND Institute, the Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, the Simons Foundation and the David and Lucille Packard Foundation funded the study.
"Disruption of the right temporoparietal junction with transcranial magnetic stimulation reduces the role of beliefs in moral judgments."
Liane Young, Joan Albert Camprodon, Marc Hauser, Alvaro Pascual-Leone, and Rebecca Saxe
PNAS, published online ahead of print 29 March 2010
DOI:10.1073/pnas.0914826107
9/11 Mother Demands Obama Try Terrorist Plotters In Civilian Court
9/11 Mother Demands Obama Try Terrorist Plotters In Civilian Court . Peacefultomorrows.org
Posted by Sam Stein - Huffington Post - March 31, 2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/31/911-mother-demands-obama_n_519727.html
http://peacefultomorrows.org/article.php?id=970
Note: Originally posted on Huffington Post but due to the history of censorship on 9/11 related topics we have re-posted this important message.
A group of more than 200 family members of 9/11 victims has released an emotional new web video imploring the Obama administration to remain true to its plans to try terrorist suspects in civilian court.
Anticipating a final announcement of the trial venue for the 9/11 plotters, the group September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows is warning the president against "buckling to political pressure," calling the use of military tribunals the "wrong thing to do."
In a nearly four-minute long video, Donna Marsh O'Connor -- a Peaceful Tomorrows member who lost her pregnant daughter when the Twin Towers collapsed -- speaks both to the broad notion that America has a "historic commitment to justice" and, more narrowly, to the horse-trading politics that now surrounds terrorist trials. Reflecting disappointment with recent signals from the White House, O'Connor calls for the president to reject a reported compromise proposal with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) in which the administration would drop plans for civilian trials in exchange for Republican support for the closure of Gitmo.
"As 9/11 families, we have suffered greatly and waited almost nine years to see justice done with our own eyes," O'Connor says. "We understand that you face political pressure to back down. We ask that you do not allow fear and prejudice to govern your decision -- as we are not afraid. We know our country is strong enough to hold on to our values in the face of terrorism."
The video follows other efforts by Peaceful Tomorrows to advocate for civilian trials for the 9/11 suspects -- which is just one of the policy topics the group tackles. But while having O'Connor in the role of narrator makes for a far more poignant and powerful argument, it still crashes up against certain political realities. The administration's commitment to holding civilian trials has ebbed, but it's far from disappeared. At this juncture, White House aides say, they are still looking for a venue to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others in the criminal system. They just haven't found local officials (see: New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg) who are willing to help.
Posted by Sam Stein - Huffington Post - March 31, 2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/31/911-mother-demands-obama_n_519727.html
http://peacefultomorrows.org/article.php?id=970
Note: Originally posted on Huffington Post but due to the history of censorship on 9/11 related topics we have re-posted this important message.
Anticipating a final announcement of the trial venue for the 9/11 plotters, the group September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows is warning the president against "buckling to political pressure," calling the use of military tribunals the "wrong thing to do."
In a nearly four-minute long video, Donna Marsh O'Connor -- a Peaceful Tomorrows member who lost her pregnant daughter when the Twin Towers collapsed -- speaks both to the broad notion that America has a "historic commitment to justice" and, more narrowly, to the horse-trading politics that now surrounds terrorist trials. Reflecting disappointment with recent signals from the White House, O'Connor calls for the president to reject a reported compromise proposal with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) in which the administration would drop plans for civilian trials in exchange for Republican support for the closure of Gitmo.
"As 9/11 families, we have suffered greatly and waited almost nine years to see justice done with our own eyes," O'Connor says. "We understand that you face political pressure to back down. We ask that you do not allow fear and prejudice to govern your decision -- as we are not afraid. We know our country is strong enough to hold on to our values in the face of terrorism."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)