Button up, a mini ice age cometh 2019

This website is coded in 'old-skool' HTML4. It is and always will be, ad-free! It is best viewed on a computer screen with a resolution of at least 1920 by 1080 pixels. It also aids understanding if you have an open and enquiring mind.

For a limited period, my books are available for download free:

Button up, a mini ice age is just around the corner

13 February 2019

From where I sit and from some of the scientific and other data coming my way, it looks like the Earth is heading into a period of dramatic cooling i.e. a mini ice age. If that is so, we have to prepare for a prolonged period of record low temperatures, snow and ice. The drop in global temperature from this next cooling period could change everything, including the foods we are able to grow and the duration of the growing seasons. There are very few places on Earth that are equipped to deal with these sorts of environmental changes. For example, the insulation found in most homes was never designed for such low temperatures. Our current mix of fossil fuel, nuclear and wind turbine will be insufficient to satisfy demand. We need to look to the Nordic countries to see how they do it. The Nordic folks also have ‘gold-dust’ under their feet called geysers. Geysers are naturally-occurring hot water and steam channels that originate from deep geothermal vent holes. Once these channels are tapped, they can provide unlimited sources of hot water and steam to power electrical generators. These energy sources are free and almost non-polluting. There are other areas of the world, other seas, other landmasses in which geothermal vents could also be tapped to provide heat and electricity. We also need to be creative and take advantage of wave power as these sources of electrical generation are virtually untapped in most countries. Electrical generators can be placed on top of the sea so that the undulating motions of the waves provide power to turn a turbine, which in turn produces electricity. Any areas with a good tidal reach, such as inlets and coastal areas, are particularly good sites for these types of energy generators.

It’s time to really understand the politics of weather and climate

There are a few issues we need to address as early as possible and for obvious reasons: (a) the homelessness issue and (b) power utilities need to be re-nationalised because we cannot rely on corporations to supply the energy we need at a price we can afford in order to survive long unbroken periods of extreme cold weather. The other issue we need to get to grips with has to do with the politicians, suits and policy makers of the world. They wear the climate change blinkers and are unable to see beyond its agenda. Their probable response to any global drop in temperature would be to argue that the cold snap is temporary and a direct result of global warming!!

Consensus scientists

This article, however, has nothing to do with demonising the arguments of those who believe that carbon dioxide (CO2) is responsible for global warming /climate change. If you live in the northern hemisphere, simply look out the window: does it look like global warming? During the past two years, weather systems around the world have become wildly unstable. It is more than likely that instability in weather patterns could herald a sudden and downward shift in global temperature of 1 – 2 degree Celsius. That drop in global temperatures could equate to an average drop between 15 - 20 degrees centigrade in summer temperatures for European countries. Weather of course is changeable and it waxes and wanes, second by second. The UK, for example, sits in the middle of four weather systems and in one day, we can experience the four seasons, a perfect example of weather. Consecutive years of very cold weather, however, will stress ecological systems and, ourselves.

I focus solely on scientific data and evidence, not ‘scientific consensus' (see Figure 1). Science works by falsification of a working hypothesis. The term ‘scientific consensus’ is not mentioned anywhere in the scientific method. Scientific consensus is a term coined by the mainstream media. It is nothing more than a rallying cry by the people who control the media to convince the masses that global warming is real. Why would they do that? If they repeatedly say that the cause of climate change is proven with a 97% rate of consensus amongst ‘scientists’, they hope that everyone will believe them. They think we are simple, yet, thankfully, many people, including independent scientists, don’t believe the hype. If you want to understand how science works, look up the works of Descartes, Karl Popper and Francis Bacon. They were its originators and pioneers. Along its way, the scientific method underwent changes in perspective and philosophy i.e. deductive versus inductive methods of scientific inquiry. Finally, when you are satisfied with all that, dip into Thomas Kuhn’s seminal book called ‘The structure of scientific revolutions’. You will quickly see through the big con of consensus science. Consensus science is a debasement of the scientific method to provide a perspective that says, “the cause of global warming is CO2; we are to blame; the scientific consensus is 97% on that issue”. Consensus science was foisted on society, courtesy of the suits via their industry scientists, pressure groups, think tanks, blogger networks and of course, the megaphones of mainstream media. That is an 'inconvenient truth' for those who support policy over real science.

Figure 1: Consensus science is quack science

Ice core and other evidence strongly suggest that sunspot activities are the primary indicators of change behind the Earth’s weather. Carbon dioxide is in no way a mover and shaker of climate change. Significantly, we had much warmer periods in our past when the level of CO2 in the atmosphere was much lower – go figure. As sunspot numbers increase, so do temperatures on Earth. As sunspot numbers decrease, temperatures fall. This is all part of the variability of weather that we experience locally. Every 100 years or so, we experience a grand solar minimum, which is when solar activity measured via sunspot numbers dramatically declines. Today in 2019, it looks like we are in, or rapidly heading towards, a ‘grand solar minimum’. During the last grand solar minimum, or Dalton minimum in 1815, the River Thames in London froze over to such an extent that during one of its frost fairs, an elephant walked across it. Figure 2 illustrates sunspot activity up to the present day. Figure 3 illustrates other periods in our history when low sunspot numbers appear indicative of extreme cooling periods. The Maunder Minimum for example, was a particularly cold period in Europe and North America from the 1620s right up to the late 1680s. Cereal crops and vegetable were decimated, livestock died and of course, the people suffered.

Figure 2

Sunspot numbers

Figure 3

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) recently noted of the sun’s low sunspot numbers, ‘If current trends continue, it could soon set a Space Age record for cold.’ This is tacit admission that NASA does acknowledge that solar activity has a warming effect on our planet. NASA, however, is a cheerleader for the climate change believers and does not see any contradiction in the above statement and its policy decision to support any argument towards CO2 as the bad boy of climate change. NASA argues that a decreasing upper atmospheric temperature will counter-balance the increase in temperature from global warming effects. This is a blinkered and biased view on what is a very complex environmental situation. I however, interpret NASA’s upper atmospheric data very differently. If the upper atmosphere gets colder and colder, the dynamics between the atmosphere and the thin skin of the lower atmosphere where weather is created will also alter. It is likely that atmospheric circulation currents will change. If the lower atmosphere contains a lot of water concurrent with record cold upper atmospheric temperature, it could spell a very cool period at ground level. Water and water vapour are always present in the lower atmosphere because they form part of the water cycle. That natural cycle has been hacked by the chemtrail sprayers.

Figure 4

Chemtrails photographed from space

During the past 50 years or so at least, the lower atmosphere has been subject to chemtrail spraying (Figure 4). The concentration of chemicals sprayed into the atmosphere has massively increased during the past 5 years. One effect of chemical trail spraying is an increase in albedo rates. The albedo rate is the ability of a surface to reflect sunlight back into space. Where ever you are, look to the skies in the early morning, check back two hours later and you will see that blue slowly disappear. This is due to the almost 100% ‘chemtrail-grey’ cloud cover. Significantly, the chemtrail hack refers to the amount of artificially-induced rainfall from most chemtrail spraying operations. Very cold upper atmospheric temperatures with lots of water and water vapour in the lower atmosphere may catalyse mini ice age conditions at ground level. The suits hope we stay entrained to our smartphones, never looking up at the skies. We are, however, awakening and many more have woken up to what is going on. Chemtrail spraying is the pink elephant in the living room and the world demands answers to who carries them out and why. This programme of course, is carried out by the same group of people who simplistically say, “CO2 is the cause of global warming, humanity is to blame, but we have an answer to reduce the effects of global warming”. That is not a scientific theory; it is a policy towards the enslavement of the human race. The suits fail to understand that changes in weather and climate are perfectly natural and normal. Secondly, they fail to understand the inter-connectedness of Life, where everything is connected to everything else. To better understand what is going on, we need to shift perspective and take a holistic approach to some major, major environmental changes occurring both here on Earth and on other planets.

The magnetosphere high above our planet acts as a protective sheath against highly charged solar radiation and space particles. In recent years, this protective layer has thinned. How will a thinning magnetosphere affect environmental variables on Earth? Also, the magnetic north pole has shifted location from Canada and is racing towards Siberia. It has moved more in the past 10 years than it has in the last 100 years. This suggests the dynamics of the inner core of Earth have changed. NASA and other space agencies have observed through their sophisticated viewing and detector equipment that most of the planets in our solar system have changed physical properties. Some planets are becoming dimmer, some more luminous and some planets with no CO2 content are warming up! Other variables include increased seismic activities within the Pacific Ring of Fire, activities within and along the San Andreas Fault and major rumblings under Yellowstone Park. Lastly, I suspect the Sun itself is also going through major changes, yet NASA and other space scientists do not know or understand why. During the past five years or so, the jet stream (a parcel of warm air that streams through the lower atmosphere) has changed direction and the Gulf Stream which is a large body of warm water that snakes its way to the Arctic via Northern France, Ireland and the UK has also altered course. The Gulf Stream moderates the very cold seas and weather along the coastlines of these countries. If it changes direction, countries like northern France, Ireland and the UK would experience much lower land temperatures during the winter months. Since time out of mind, the Schumann Resonance was measured at a frequency of 7.83 Hz. This frequency has been termed the heartbeat of the planet. During the past 5 years it has fluctuated wildly, see: https://www.disclosurenews.it/en/schumann-resonance-today-update/. The fluctuations in this base frequency foretell changes in our atmosphere. All the above environmental changes within and upon planet Earth are telling us, something is up and its brewing strongly.

Major environmental earth changes are imminent. None of it is apocalyptic, it has all happened before and we are still here. A pragmatic response we can take now, based on what is piling up outside our front door, is to button up, buttress our houses against extreme cold conditions and take more notice of what is happening to the weather locally and globally. We cannot rely on governments, policy makers, suits and ‘consensus scientists’ to determine how we, as a people, respond to an environmental event that is outside the agenda of global warming.