Aftermath News

Says masses should be indoctrinated to stop having children in order that the human race can die out and save the planet

Infowars | May 12, 2008

By Steve Watson

An environmental group says it’s sole purpose is to recruit volunteers and educate enough people to eventually realize that the human race needs to completely die out in order that the planet can survive.

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT) says humans need to stop breeding and voluntarily progress our own slow demise in order that plants, animals and fragile ecosystems can survive.

The group’s motto is “May we live long and die out”. Their website explains their commitment to a long term goal of convincing the population of Earth that it has no future…

Full Story

“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that the threat of global warming and the like would fit the bill…. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”

- “The First Global Revolution”, (1991) published by the Club of Rome

AFP | Mar 28, 2008

by Madeleine Coorey

SYDNEY (AFP) - Twenty-six major cities around the world are expected to turn off the lights on major landmarks, plunging millions of people into darkness to raise awareness about global warming, organisers said.

Cities officially signed on include Chicago and San Francisco, Dublin, Manila, Bangkok, Copenhagen and Toronto, all of which will switch off lights on major landmarks and encourage businesses and homeowners to follow suit.

Ridley said it was also likely that other major European cities such as Rome and London, and the South Korean capital Seoul, although not officially taking part, would turn off lights on some attractions or landmarks.

The initiative began in Sydney last year and has become a global event, sweeping across 35 countries this year.

From 8:00 pm local time in Sydney, the energy-saving campaign will see harbourside icons such as the Sydney Harbour Bridge and the Opera House bathed only in moonlight, restaurant diners eat by candlelight and city skyscrapers turn off their neon signs.

Organisers hope the initiative will encourage people to be more aware of their energy usage, knowing that producing electricity pollutes the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels which are contributing to global warming.

But they are also aware that it will be just a small step in solving the problem of rising temperatures around the globe.

“Switching the lights off for an hour is not going to make a dent in global emissions,” organiser Charles Stevens, of the environmental group WWF, told AFP.

“But what it does do is it is a great catalyst for much bigger changes. It engages people in the processes of becoming more energy efficient.”

Stevens said the initiative encouraged businesses to be more careful with their electricity use while at the same time sending “a fairly powerful message to governments that people are demanding action.”

Some 2.2 million people participated in last year’s ‘Earth Hour’ in Sydney, cutting the central business district’s energy usage by more than 10 percent.

While no cities from China or India are involved this year, Stevens said it was hoped that the movement would expand in 2009, which he said would be a particularly significant year given that it is the deadline for United Nations talks to determine future action on climate change after the Kyoto Protocol.

Ridley, who began ‘Earth Hour’ last year while working with WWF Australia, said the initiative was about individuals and global companies joining together to own a shared problem — climate change.

“Governments and businesses are joining individuals, religious groups, schools and communities in this terrific movement that’s all about making a change for the better,” he said.

“It’s staggering to see so much support from across the globe in just our second year and we’re hoping that this will continue to grow year after year.”

Cities officially involved in ‘Earth Hour’ include Aalborg, Aarhus, Adelaide, Atlanta, Bangkok, Brisbane, Canberra, Chicago, Christchurch, Copenhagen, Darwin, Dublin, Hobart, Manila, Melbourne, Montreal, Odense, Ottawa, Perth, Phoenix, San Francisco, Suva, Sydney, Tel Aviv, Toronto and Vancouver.

AP | Mar 16, 2008

By MARTHA MENDOZA

Test it, study it, figure out how to clean it — but still drink it. That’s the range of reactions raining down from community leaders, utilities, environmental groups and policy makers in reaction to an Associated Press investigation that documented the presence of pharmaceuticals in major portions of the nation’s drinking water supplies.

“There is no wisdom in avoidance. There is wisdom in addressing this problem. I’m not suggesting that people be hysterical and overreact. There’s a responsible way to deal with this — and collectively we can do it,” said Washington-based environmental lawyer George Mannina.

A five-month-long inquiry by the AP National Investigative Team found that many communities do not test for the presence of drugs in drinking water, and those that do often fail to tell customers that they have found trace amounts of medications, including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones. The stories also detailed the growing concerns among scientists that such pollution is adversely affecting wildlife and may be threatening human health.

As a result, Senate hearings have been scheduled, and there have been calls for federal solutions. But officials in many cities say they aren’t going to wait for guidance from Washington to begin testing.

Pharmaceutical industry officials said they would launch a new initiative Monday with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service focused on telling Americans how to safely dispose of unused medicines.

The subject of pharmaceuticals in drinking water also will be discussed this week when 7,000 scientists and regulators from 45 countries gather in Seattle for the annual meeting of the Society of Toxicology. “The public has a right to know the answers to these questions,” said Dr. George Corcoran, the organization’s president.

“The AP story has really put the spotlight on it, and it is going to lead to a pickup in the pace,” he said. “People are going to start putting money into studying this now, instead of a few years from now, and we’ll get the answers sooner than we would have otherwise.”

Environmental leaders said some answers are easy.

“It’s basic. We need to test, tell and protect health,” said Richard Wiles, executive director of the Washington-based Environmental Working Group.

Wiles said the Environmental Protection Agency needs to widely expand the list of contaminants that utilities are required to test for. That list currently contains no pharmaceuticals. He also said government agencies and water providers that don’t disclose test results “are taking away people’s right to know, hiding the fact that there are contaminants in the water. We don’t think they have that right. It’s hubris, it’s arrogance and it’s self-serving,” said Wiles.

As part of its effort, the AP surveyed 62 metropolitan areas and 52 smaller cities, reporting on positive test results in 24 major cities, serving 41 million Americans. Since release of the AP investigation, other communities and researchers have been disclosing previously unreleased local results, positive or negative.

In Yuma, Ariz., for example, city spokesman Dave Nash said four pharmaceuticals — an antibiotic, an anti-convulsant, an anti-bacterial and caffeine — have been detected in that city’s drinking water. In Denver, where the AP had reported undisclosed antibiotics had been detected, a Colorado State University professor involved in water screening there e-mailed the names of 12 specific drugs that had been detected.

Officials at many utilities said that without federal regulations, they didn’t see a need to screen their water for trace amounts of pharmaceuticals. But others have now decided to test, including Scottsdale and Phoenix in Arizona, Palm Beach County in Florida, Chicago and Springfield, Ill., Bozeman, Mont., Fargo, N.D.; Danville, Va.; and a group of four sewer partners in the Olympia, Wash., region.

“We read the AP story and made a determination that we should test our water and be transparent, just let the people know what we find. I’m confident we have safe and clean drinking water,” said Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon.

Officials in Freeport, Ill., one of the smaller cities surveyed, said they plan to work with the state EPA to test the area’s drinking water for pharmaceuticals. Mayor George Gaulrapp said he is looking to the state agency for standards, regulations and testing procedures for that city’s water, which comes from a deep well.

In some places, residents learned that the rivers and lakes that feed their drinking water treatment plants have already been tested, or that tests are under way.

In Marin County, California, officials said repeated tests in their watershed for pharmaceuticals have come back clean. In Massachusetts, the state Department of Environmental Protection announced a program to screen rivers, streams and reservoirs for pharmaceuticals.

Dozens of newspaper editorials called for testing in communities where water is not being screened and the release of any test results.

“The first, and least expensive, step is to let the sunshine in: Water utilities that currently test for pharmaceuticals should make that information freely available to their customers, along with more information on the potential impacts of drugs in the water supply,” read an editorial in the Daytona Beach News-Journal.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram has filed an open records request for a copy of a study conducted on the city’s water after the mayor refused to give the AP and the newspaper the name of a pharmaceutical detected in the drinking water. City officials say publishing that information could jeopardize public safety, citing post-Sept. 11 security concerns. A Texas attorney general’s opinion is being sought on possible release of the information.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel urged readers to take responsibility as well.

“It’s a problem in which the average person has both a stake and a role in the solution,” read a Journal Sentinel editorial. “He or she can do something as simple as not flushing unused medications down the toilet or into the drain.”

And the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette observed that “given the national scope of the problem, a strong leadership role for the federal government suggests itself in areas such as testing and upgrading water treatment plants. So it is discouraging to note that the Bush administration in its 2009 budget proposal cut $10 million from the water monitoring and research program.”

While the local responses are encouraging, Lisa Rainwater, policy director of Riverkeeper, a New York-based environmental group, said the EPA should step aside and let the National Academy of Sciences or the General Accounting Office study the impacts on humans and wildlife.

“Frankly, the EPA has failed the American public for doing far too little for far too long,” she said.

At least one local water official is putting part of his faith in another quarter. Wayne Livingston of the Oxford Water Works in Alabama said he has confidence in the existing treatment system. But he said his agency probably will test for pharmaceuticals now, although he doubts anything will turn up because the water is pumped from underground.

“The good Lord filters it,” he said. “But this is something we should keep an eye on.”

Russian Journal: HAARP Could Capsize Planet

Wired | Jan 8, 2008

By Sharon Weinberger

Just when you think you’ve heard all the possible far-out theories behind the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) in Alaska, leave it to the Russians to come up with one better. Forget mind control, the Russians think HAARP is a “geophysical weapon” that’s gonna capsize the planet. HAARP, just by way of a reminder for those who don’t obssessively follow its progress, is a military project that’s supposed to study the ionosphere and “use it to enhance communications and surveillance systems for both civilian and defense purposes.” In more recent years, the Pentagon has also expressed interest in using HAARP to mitigate the effects of high-altitude nuclear explosions. However, HAARP’s use of an antenna array operating in the High Frequency (HF) range has also prompted tons and tons of other theories about its uses, ranging from weather control to altering human behavior.

According to this article published in a Russian military journal (and helpfully translated by the CIA-funded Open Source Center), HAARP is the ultimate superweapon…

Full Story

“It would seem that men and women need a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in the vacuum such as motivation seemed to have ceased to exist or have yet to be found. The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor…Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one INVENTED for the purpose…

Democracy will be made to seem responsible for the lagging economy, the scarcity and uncertainties. The very concept of democracy could then be brought into question and allow for the seizure of power.

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. The real enemy [of the elites and their minions] then is humanity itself.”

- “The First Global Revolution” (1991) published by the Club of Rome. Members of the Club of Rome include: Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, Bill Gates, George Soros, Power Corp’s drafter of UN Earth Charter and author of the Kyoto Protocols Maurice Strong, David Rockefeller (behind 9/11 and other crimes of treason), Communist Party leader Mikhail Gorbachev (proclaimed the Earth Charter housed in the “Ark of Hope” as the “new Ten Commandments”), Prince Philippe of Belgium, former President of Germany Richard von Weizsäcker, Ernesto Zedillo Director of The Yale Center for the Study of Globalization, former President of Georgia Eduard Shevardnadze, Queen Beatrix of The Netherlands, H.M. Juan Carlos I King of Spain, founder of the Soka Gakkai cult Daisaku Ikeda, Coordinator of the Global Marshall Plan Initiative Frithjof Finkbeiner, and President of The Club of Rome Prince El Hassan bin Talal of Jordan.

Earth has passed the peak of its warmer period, and a fairly cold spell will set in quite soon, by 2012. Real cold will come when solar activity reaches its minimum, by 2041, and will last for 50-60 years or even longer.

RIA Novosti | Jan 3, 2008
by Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin, of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences

MOSCOW. (Oleg Sorokhtin for RIA Novosti) – Stock up on fur coats and felt boots! This is my paradoxical advice to the warm world.

Earth is now at the peak of one of its passing warm spells. It started in the 17th century when there was no industrial influence on the climate to speak of and no such thing as the hothouse effect. The current warming is evidently a natural process and utterly independent of hothouse gases.

The real reasons for climate changes are uneven solar radiation, terrestrial precession (that is, axis gyration), instability of oceanic currents, regular salinity fluctuations of the Arctic Ocean surface waters, etc. There is another, principal reason—solar activity and luminosity. The greater they are the warmer is our climate.

Astrophysics knows two solar activity cycles, of 11 and 200 years. Both are caused by changes in the radius and area of the irradiating solar surface. The latest data, obtained by Habibullah Abdusamatov, head of the Pulkovo Observatory space research laboratory, say that Earth has passed the peak of its warmer period, and a fairly cold spell will set in quite soon, by 2012. Real cold will come when solar activity reaches its minimum, by 2041, and will last for 50-60 years or even longer.

This is my point, which environmentalists hotly dispute as they cling to the hothouse theory. As we know, hothouse gases, in particular, nitrogen peroxide, warm up the atmosphere by keeping heat close to the ground. Advanced in the late 19th century by Svante A. Arrhenius, a Swedish physical chemist and Nobel Prize winner, this theory is taken for granted to this day and has not undergone any serious check.

It determines decisions and instruments of major international organizations—in particular, the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Signed by 150 countries, it exemplifies the impact of scientific delusion on big politics and economics. The authors and enthusiasts of the Kyoto Protocol based their assumptions on an erroneous idea. As a result, developed countries waste huge amounts of money to fight industrial pollution of the atmosphere. What if it is a Don Quixote’s duel with the windmill?

Hothouse gases may not be to blame for global warming. At any rate, there is no scientific evidence to their guilt. The classic hothouse effect scenario is too simple to be true. As things really are, much more sophisticated processes are on in the atmosphere, especially in its dense layer. For instance, heat is not so much radiated in space as carried by air currents—an entirely different mechanism, which cannot cause global warming.

The temperature of the troposphere, the lowest and densest portion of the atmosphere, does not depend on the concentration of greenhouse gas emissions—a point proved theoretically and empirically. True, probes of Antarctic ice shield, taken with bore specimens in the vicinity of the Russian research station Vostok, show that there are close links between atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide and temperature changes. Here, however, we cannot be quite sure which is the cause and which the effect.

Temperature fluctuations always run somewhat ahead of carbon dioxide concentration changes. This means that warming is primary. The ocean is the greatest carbon dioxide depository, with concentrations 60-90 times larger than in the atmosphere. When the ocean’s surface warms up, it produces the “champagne effect.” Compare a foamy spurt out of a warm bottle with wine pouring smoothly when served properly cold.

Likewise, warm ocean water exudes greater amounts of carbonic acid, which evaporates to add to industrial pollution—a factor we cannot deny. However, man-caused pollution is negligible here. If industrial pollution with carbon dioxide keeps at its present-day 5-7 billion metric tons a year, it will not change global temperatures up to the year 2100. The change will be too small for humans to feel even if the concentration of greenhouse gas emissions doubles.

Carbon dioxide cannot be bad for the climate. On the contrary, it is food for plants, and so is beneficial to life on Earth. Bearing out this point was the Green Revolution—the phenomenal global increase in farm yields in the mid-20th century. Numerous experiments also prove a direct proportion between harvest and carbon dioxide concentration in the air.

Carbon dioxide has quite a different pernicious influence—not on the climate but on synoptic activity. It absorbs infrared radiation. When tropospheric air is warm enough for complete absorption, radiation energy passes into gas fluctuations. Gas expands and dissolves to send warm air up to the stratosphere, where it clashes with cold currents coming down. With no noticeable temperature changes, synoptic activity skyrockets to whip up cyclones and anticyclones. Hence we get hurricanes, storms, tornados and other natural disasters, whose intensity largely depends on carbon dioxide concentration. In this sense, reducing its concentration in the air will have a positive effect.

Carbon dioxide is not to blame for global climate change. Solar activity is many times more powerful than the energy produced by the whole of humankind. Man’s influence on nature is a drop in the ocean.

Earth is unlikely to ever face a temperature disaster. Of all the planets in the solar system, only Earth has an atmosphere beneficial to life. There are many factors that account for development of life on Earth: Sun is a calm star, Earth is located an optimum distance from it, it has the Moon as a massive satellite, and many others. Earth owes its friendly climate also to dynamic feedback between biotic and atmospheric evolution.

The principal among those diverse links is Earth’s reflective power, which regulates its temperature. A warm period, as the present, increases oceanic evaporation to produce a great amount of clouds, which filter solar radiation and so bring heat down. Things take the contrary turn in a cold period.

What can’t be cured must be endured. It is wise to accept the natural course of things. We have no reason to panic about allegations that ice in the Arctic Ocean is thawing rapidly and will soon vanish altogether. As it really is, scientists say the Arctic and Antarctic ice shields are growing. Physical and mathematical calculations predict a new Ice Age. It will come in 100,000 years, at the earliest, and will be much worse than the previous. Europe will be ice-bound, with glaciers reaching south of Moscow.

Meanwhile, Europeans can rest assured. The Gulf Stream will change its course only if some evil magic robs it of power to reach the north—but Mother Nature is unlikely to do that.

Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin, Merited Scientist of Russia and fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, is staff researcher of the Oceanology Institute.

. . .

Related

Natural causes may account for much of Arctic warming

Piles of rubbish in Naples are growning at a rate of 800 tons a day

Telegraph | Jan 8, 2008

By Malcolm Moore in Rome

The Italian army moved into Naples as tensions over the city’s mounting rubbish crisis erupted in violence.

Entire districts of the city are lying submerged under more than 5,000 tons of waste. The pile is growing at the rate of 800 tons a day.

No rubbish has been collected in Naples since Dec 21, when the city’s dumps reached their capacity.

While the residents are furious at the stink, and the risk of disease, there have also been protests at plans to create new dumps or reopen old ones.

Riots broke out at Pianura, the site of an enormous open-air dump that the locals say pollutes the area with deadly dioxins.

Four buses were set alight during the night and police were struck with a hail of stones as they tried to dismantle temporary roadblocks.

More than a thousand protesters laid metal railings, chunks of concrete and old tyres across the road to prevent workers and trucks from entering the dump. One group used a bulldozer to wreck the surface of the road and to bring down trees in front of the gate.

Anti-riot officers charged the crowd with batons, and at least three people were taken to hospital. One unnamed teenager was injured after his scooter skidded on a pile of rubbish. However, officials temporarily conceded defeat in reopening the dump.

Other protesters blocked the main A1 motorway at Caserta, the spine of Italy’s road network that connects Naples to Rome, Florence and Milan. In response, Romano Prodi, the Italian prime minister, sent in the army to restore calm and to start shifting the rubbish from the city.

“We are taking charge,” he said, “because the world is watching and I do not want them to have this negative image of Italy”.

Army engineers used bulldozers to clear waste from schools in the Caserta region.

The government called for the schools to be opened, but no students arrived.

Clemente Mastella, the justice minister, said the dead hand of the Camorra, or Neapolitan mafia, was behind the crisis.

“People who set fire to buses are not citizens, but usually people sent by the mafia,” he said.

It is in the Camorra’s interests for rubbish to build up in the city, since the clans own most of the rubbish recycling companies that would eventually win contracts to dispose of the waste.

In the past, corrupt firms have been found to be shipping waste to China, where it is buried, instead of recycling it.

Mafia families also profit from buying properties in the troubled areas, where prices have become depressed by the continuing rubbish crisis.

In addition, the Camorra is said by the police to bring lorry-loads of waste to Naples from factories in northern Italy for fees that undercut legal competitors, adding to the rubbish piles.

Sandro De Franciscis, the head of the council of Caserta, said: “We are on our knees, we are desperate and we do not have the power to do anything about it.”

Thomas Edison, inventor of mercury-free light bulb

Energy-saving devices called so dangerous everyone must leave for at least 15 minutes

WorldNetDaily.com | Jan 6, 2008

Less than a month after the U.S. Congress passed an energy bill banning the incandescent light bulb by 2014, the UK Environment Agency issued guidelines calling for evacuation of any room where an energy-saving compact fluorescent light bulb is broken, releasing toxic mercury.

The warning comes a month before the British government begins its phase-out of tungsten bulbs, scheduled to be completed in 2011. The switchover to CFL bulbs will save at least five million tons of carbon dioxide emissions every year, the government said.

Health experts warned this week that people with certain skin ailments will suffer from the new eco-friendly bulbs which cause conditions such as eczema to flare up. Additionally, the bulbs have been linked to migraine headaches in some people.

The Environment Agency’s latest advice focuses on the 6 to 8 milligrams of toxic mercury in each bulb.

Users who break a bulb should vacate the room for at least 15 minutes, the new guidelines say. The debris should not be removed with a vacuum cleaner, which could put toxic dust into the air, but with rubber gloves. The broken glass and all residue is to be placed into a sealed plastic bag and taken to a local official recycling site for proper disposal.

“Because these light bulbs contain small amounts of mercury, they could cause a problem if disposed of in a normal bin,” environmental scientist Dr David Spurgeon told the London Daily Mail.

“It is possible that the mercury could be released into the air or from land-fill when they are released into the wider environment. That is a concern, because mercury is a well-known toxic substance.”

The Environmental Agency noted that neither warnings about the bulbs’ toxicity nor directions for proper disposal is printed on any packaging.

Such warnings aren’t necessary, said one toxicologist who said a number of bulbs would have to be smashed simultaneously before there was a danger.

“Mercury accumulates in the body – especially the brain,” Dr. David Ray, from the University of Nottingham, told the BBC. “The biggest danger is repeated exposure – a one off exposure is not as potentially dangerous compared to working in a light bulb factory.

“If you smash one bulb then that is not too much of a hazard. However, if you broke five bulbs in a small unventilated room then you might be in short term danger.”

The most-immediate hazard from the CFL bulbs may be to Brits’ pocketbooks. It costs about $1,300 to properly dispose of one municipal recycling bin full of bulbs – a figure that is sure to increase residents’ tax bills.

. . .

Related

Why ‘green’ lightbulbs aren’t the answer to global warming

Daily Mail | Jan 5, 2008

By SEAN POULTER

A breed of Frankenfood is being introduced into human diet and cosmetics with potentially disastrous consequences, experts said last night.

Academics, consumer groups and Government officials are warning that the arrival of nanotechnology threatens dangerous changes to the body and the environment.

The particles it uses are so small - 80,000 times thinner than a human hair - that they can pass through membranes protecting the brain or babies in the womb.

Nano health supplements, such as antioxidants, are already on the market while the first of hundreds of new foods are expected to arrive in the next 12 months.

However, the products are being introdeduced without any regulation or independent assessment to ensure they are safe - mirroring the controversy over the launch of GM foods ten years ago.

Some critics have talked of the threat of the creation of a “grey goo” of tiny particles with hidden harmful properties.

Prince Charles has said it would be “surprising” if the technology did not “offer similar upsets” to thalidomide - the morning sickness drug that caused children to be born with deformed limbs.

Professor Vicki Stone, Professor of Toxicology at Napier University in Edinburgh, is concerned about unforeseen side effects.

“We know very little about the ability of nanoparticles to move around the body, to accumulate or to be excreted, or their potential to cause toxic effects in organs,” she said.

However, nanotech advocates have remarkable claims for the technology. For example, foods are in development that are said to stave off the aging process.

On a more trivial level, they suggest it would be possible to create a fizzy drink that changes flavour according to the number of times the can is shaken.

The consumer group Which? is about to launch a nanotech campaign arguing that consumers need to be consulted on the risks and benefits before it is too late.

The food and farming department Defra has published an independent report which admits there are serious gaps in safety data.

It warns: “There could be very significant implications for business and the wider community if potential risks are not identified and managed before any harm to the environment or human health may be done.”

The report - Characterising the Risks Posed by Engineered Nanoparticles - states there is a shortage of research money.

It says the resulting absence of basic information about the particles means “it will be difficult or impossible to develop any general understanding of nanoparticle toxicology”.

The report adds: “Transfer across biological barriers - e.g. to the brain or foetus - should be studied. Research into how long these tiny particles persist in the body is urgently needed.”

It warns that work assessing human toxicology is being hamstrung by “profound difficulties in accessing relevant funding for these longer term projects”.

Research by Which? found six out of ten people (61 per cent) have never heard of nanotechnology.

Sue Davies of Which? said: “The benefits that nanotechnologies can offer consumers are really exciting.

‘But before the market is flooded with products, it’s crucial the Government addresses the lack of scientific understanding about how some nanoparticles behave.”

The European Food Safety Authority last year held a conference on the future of food.

Dr Donald Bruce, an expert on food and ethics, told delegates that the arrival of nanotech foods has many similarities with GM products.

US corporations attempted to introduce GM before an effective safety regime could be established.

“One of the things to ask is do we need the benefits claimed by the producers?’ he said. ‘Also there is the underlying notion that we are tampering with nature.”

Environment minister Phil Woolas admitted there were gaps in knowledge, but denied the Government was failing to provide enough research cash.

Tiny particles that have generated great hopes and growing concerns

Nanotechnology involves using a substance in particles that are so small that the substance takes on new properties.

The name of the technology comes from the size of the particles - one nanometre in diameter - a millionth of a millimetre. Reduced to this size, materials can suddenly show very different and unexpected properties.

For example, an opaque substance such as copper becomes transparent, or an inert metal such as platinum becomes a catalyst and triggers chemical reactions.

Advocates argue that such particles can be organised to work together to deliver specific effects in a piece of equipment or in the human body.

They can be used to build miniature hard drives that have an immense memory, so allowing further miniaturisation and sophistication of products such as computers and mobile phones.

Washing machines have been developed that release silver nanoparticles that will kill bacteria in dirty washing.

Sun creams have been created so they become transparent rather than chalky white.

In medicine, it is claimed that nanotechnology will allow the creation of drugs that reach and treat a problem quickly.

Manufacturers are working on nanotech foods and supplements that are also designed to deliver specific health benefits.

Similarly, firms are working on developing anti-ageing foods, where nanotech particles associated with renewing the skin from the inside could be included in everyday products such as yoghurt, spreads or breakfast cereals.

The technology promises huge riches for firms which develop winning applications.

One of the first group of nanoparticles being utilised are fullerenes - tiny hollow carbon balls and tubes. They are very heat resistant, strong and conduct electricity.

The football-shaped C60 fullerene is being used in some anti-ageing products. The creams are said to reduce fine lines and firm the skin.

C60 has some antioxidant properties in that it kills the rogue chemicals which damage cells. However, a high dose can itself damage cells.

Some nano particles are known to mimic the harmful effects of asbestos on the lungs. Consequently, they have the potential to trigger lung cancer if inhaled.

Basing policy on carbon dioxide levels ‘potentially disastrous economic folly’

WorldNetDaily.com | Dec 21, 2007

By Bob Unruh

A new U.S. Senate report documents hundreds of prominent scientists – experts in dozens of fields of study worldwide – who say global warming and cooling is a cycle of nature and cannot legitimately be connected to man’s activities.

“Of course I believe in global warming, and in global cooling – all part of the natural climate changes that the Earth has experienced for billions of years, caused primarily by the cyclical variations in solar output,” said research physicist John W. Brosnahan, who develops remote-sensing instruments for atmospheric science for clients including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA.

However, he said, “I have not seen any sort of definitive, scientific link to man-made carbon dioxide as the root cause of the current global warming, only incomplete computer models that suggest that this might be the case.

“Even though these computer climate models do not properly handle a number of important factors, including the role of precipitation as a temperature regulator, they are being (mis-)used to force a political agenda upon the U.S.,” he continued. “While there are any number of reasons to reduce carbon dioxide generation, to base any major fiscal policy on the role of carbon dioxide in climate change would be inappropriate and imprudent at best and potentially disastrous economic folly at the worst.”

The report compiled observations from more than 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen nations who have voiced objections to claims of a “consensus” on “man-made global warming.”

Many of the scientists are current or former participants in the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, whose present officials, along with former Vice President Al Gore, have asserted a definite connection.

The new report, which comes from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s office of the GOP ranking member, cites the hundreds of opinions issued just this year asserting global warming and man’s activities are unrelated.

“Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists,” the introduction to the Senate report said. “In October, the Washington Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that climate skeptics ‘appear to be expanding rather than shrinking.’

“Many scientists from around the world have dubbed 2007 as the year man-made global warming fears ‘bite the dust,’” the introduction said.

And there probably would be many more scientists making such statements, were it not for the fear of retaliation from those aboard the global-warming-is-caused-by-SUVs bandwagon, the report said.

“Many of my colleagues with whom I spoke share these views and report on their inability to publish their skepticism in the scientific or public media,” noted Nathan Paldor, professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

The author of almost 70 peer-reviewed studies said, “First, temperature changes, as well as rates of temperature changes (both increase and decrease) of magnitudes similar to that reported by IPCC to have occurred since the Industrial revolution (about 0.8C in 150 years or even 0.4C in the last 35 years) have occurred in Earth’s climatic history. There’s nothing special about the recent rise!”

At an earlier hearing, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., confronted Stephen Johnson, administrator of the EPA, about a threatening e-mail from a group that includes the EPA. The e-mail from the American Council on Renewable Energy was addressed to Marlo Lewis of the Competitive Enterprise Institute and said, “It is my intention to destroy your career as a liar. If you produce one more editorial against climate change, I will launch a campaign against your professional integrity. I will call you a liar and charlatan to the Harvard community of which you and I are members. I will call you out as a man who has been bought by Corporate America. Go ahead, guy. Take me on.”

It was signed Michael T. Eckhart, president of ACORE.

The scientists cited in the new study hail from Germany, Brazil, the Netherlands, New Zealand, France, Russia and the United States. They defied the idea promoted by various political and environmental agendas that man’s activities are endangering the future of the Earth through contributions to a rise in temperatures.

Paleoclimatologist Tim Patterson, professor in the department of Earth sciences at Carleton University in Ottawa, recently converted from a believer in man-made climate change to a skeptic. Patterson noted that the notion of a “consensus” of scientists aligned with the U.N. IPCC or former Vice President Al Gore is false.

“I was at the Geological Society of America meeting in Philadelphia in the fall, and I would say that people with my opinion were probably in the majority,” he said.

The report was generated after U.N. IPCC chief Rajendra Pachauri implied there were only “about half a dozen” skeptical scientists left in the world.

Gore has likened skeptics of the global-warming philosophy to “flat Earth society members.”

But the Senate report noted the scientists who are expressing a dissatisfaction with such generalizations include experts in climatology, geology, oceanography, biology, glaciology, biogeography, meteorology, economics, chemistry, mathematics, environmental sciences, engineering, physics and paleoclimatology.

“Some of those profiled have won Nobel Prizes for their outstanding contribution to their field of expertise and many shared a portion of the UN IPCC Nobel Peace Price with Vice President Gore,” the report said.

Besides the Nobel Gore shared over the issue of global warming, he also won an Oscar for his work on “An Inconvenient Truth,” which proclaims the validity of man-made global warming and advocates urgent action.

However, Muriel Newman, director of the New Zealand Centre for Political Research, has told Academy President Sid Ganis and Executive Director Bruce Davis that the honor should be withdrawn.

That’s because British High Court judge Michael Burton has concluded Gore’s documentary should be shown in British schools only with guidance notes to prevent political indoctrination. The decision followed a lawsuit by a father, Stewart Dimmock, who claimed the film contained “serious scientific inaccuracies, political propaganda and sentimental mush.”

The Nobel panel honored Gore and the IPCC for their efforts to spread awareness of “man-made climate change.”

But the British court pointed to 11 inaccuracies in the production:

“The truth, as inconvenient as it is to Al Gore, is that his so-called documentary contained critical distortions that are quite contrary to the principles of good documentary journalism,” Newman said. “Good documentaries should be factually correct. Clearly this documentary is not.”

Full Story

Daily Mail | Dec 15, 2007

His detractors may argue that his green principles do not stand up to close examination.

But now Prince Charles is set to confound his critics by addressing an energy conference - as a hologram.

Determined to keep his environmental damage to a minimum, Charles will save the 15 tons of carbon that would have been generated by flying himself and his staff 7,000 miles to the World Future Energy Summit in Abu Dhabi.

Instead, a three-dimensional image of the Prince will be seen giving a five-minute talk.

Charles recorded the message at Highgrove last month. It will be transformed into a hologram-style image using technology based on a Victorian music-hall technique called “ghosting”.

A video projector will beam an image of the Prince on to the floor.

It is then reflected up on to a paper-thin sheet of foil to create an optical illusion that makes him appear as a 3-D image on stage.

Former US Vice-President Al Gore used similar technology to appear as a hologram at Wembley Stadium at the beginning of the Live Earth concerts earlier this year.

Charles was heavily criticised in January when he and the Duchess of Cornwall flew to Philadelphia with 12 staff to pick up an award from Mr Gore honouring him as an environmentalist.

That trip created 20 tons of carbon dioxide.

The idea of the virtual Prince came from the Abu Dhabi conference organisers, who asked British events firm Revolution to produce special events for the three-day summit which starts on January 21.

Revolution managing director

Matt Sims said: “He will appear as a three-dimensional holographic image. All credit to His Royal Highness who was very keen to do it.

“It’s all about zero carbon emissions.”

Ironically, the biggest hurdle to setting up the holographic speech was Royal protocol, Mr Sims said, as Prince Andrew - dubbed “Air Miles Andy” for his jet-set lifestyle - will also be there.

“Protocol forbids two Royals from being on the same stage, and so the whole thing was coming into question,” Mr Sims said.

“I was at a very eye-opening meeting at which they were asking ‘Do we allow two Royals on the same stage at the same time?’

“Because Prince Charles isn’t actually going to be there, it was decided that this did not breach protocol.

But they said they might have to rewrite protocol to take holograms into account in the future.”

The Prince wore a light-coloured suit to film the speech - if he had worn dark clothes, only his head would be visible.

He will be seen standing, making gestures and moving around the stage.

The video is not a true hologram as you cannot see different parts of the image by moving around.

The technology is only a little more expensive than shooting a standard high-definition video, Mr Sims added.

A Clarence House spokeswoman said: “His Royal Highness was happy to do it.

He often does video messages but this is his first hologram.”