Distracting from the Real

This comment came through Facebook:

Mike Ruppert “says those who yell about HAARP and Chemtrails just don't get it. That we still believe in a world where man is in charge. Why then, does he still yell about Fukushima, tar sands, climate change and oil tanker spills? I just don't see the difference. Could someone please explain it to me? They are all caused by the same destructive organism – HUMAN”

I feel an inner impulse to address this question once again.

More on HAARP and chemtrails

My response was (as it has been in recent times, that:

"The vast majority of people who are trying to say that all the extreme weather events are caused by HAARP and chemtrails deny that other human causes (ie CO2) have anything to do with it - ie they are climate change deniers. They also tend to think that humans are at at the centre of things ("environ-ment"). To say that airplanes can compete with 150 years of industrial emissions is just plain ludicrous. He DOES NOT say (and I do not say) that it is going on - only that it is a dead-end alley - like 9/11 truth. It is also saying it is all caused by some clique of evil doers who control the world. That is only a small part of the truth - it is a HUMAN problem and we are all in it together."

The response to this was - 

"I haven't heard that the vast majority of those who know of HAARP thought it was the sole source of all that is wrong with the world to the exclusion of all other human caused sources. And I watched the entire video twice and didn't pick up on that."

How odd! I didn't have to go anywhere else to find confirmation of my contention.

Some of the other posts on the thread were proof of my original point.

One article that was posted was :"The Cooling: Has the Next Ice Age Already Begun?"

And then there was this post from  -  Chemtrails: the Exotic Weapon.

Comments like the following directly indicate a disbelief in anthropogenic (greenhouse gas- caused) climate change - and the science that has been accumulating for the last quarter-century.

"NASA Documents reveal the mission of the military and federal agencies to modify the climate"

"It’s unacceptable that the UN/IPCC continue to push CO2 as the cause for climate change but refuse to acknowledge the military has been actively engaged in Climate Warming Weapons Technologies for more than 20 years. "

"Geoengineering Aerosols Are Warming the Atmosphere and Are a Source of Global Warming "

I do not deny that something like chemtrail spraying may be going on.

However:

• Aerosols and other pollutants are part of the problem, not the whole of it. There is no way that this could account for the melting of the Arctic and consequent climate chaos.  150 years of industrial output could (and has). 

• The other aspect that there still appears to be nothing more than anecdotal evidence for the phenomenon. Often one is asked to believe one set of claims that seem to lead logically to more and  more outlandish claims

"Proof " for the chemtrails argument

For instance, the above website (similar in its claims to many others) takes s set of documents from the 1960's to "prove" the other claims that have no direct evidence to back them up.

In this case the "smoking gun" is a document that proposes  a national weather modification program.

There is no indication that the proposals were ever adopted and formed into a government policy that was carried out.

It's a piece of evidence that clearly under performs.

The article then continues listing a whole set of proposals to carry out engineering throughout the last 150 years.

If I took every proposal or idea to do something as prima facae  evidence for something it would be a pretty easy argument to mount, especially if it is combined with other conclusions reached in a similar way.

When it comes down to it, it seems to be based on a particular view of the world - that we are controlled and ruled by a tiny clique of bankers who appear to be omnipotent.

Conspiracy theory vs conspiracy fact

Of course the world is full of conspiracy fact.  The whole official 9/11 story is clearly a fabrication, and all business and government in the era of energy decline, economic collapse and climate chaos has to put in the most gentle way, has lost its way - and is irredeemably corrupt.

I simply cannot, however accept the existence of a long-existing conspiracy of the Rothschilds, the freemasons, the Jews, the Bilderbergers, or whatever evildoers are construed to be behind the suffering of the majority.

These theories, put forward by the like of Alex Jones are designed, not to empower, but to disempower power - and therefore strengthen the very forces they purport to oppose.

They also support the very thing that has given rise to this descent towards oblivion - in short the myth of Infinite Growth, which in one way or another the vast majority is involved, either as the 1% elite, or as consumers, or (as Henry Kissinger put it), "useless eaters".

I have dabbled in some of these ideas because they are so pervasive and so enticing in their simplicity.

Two opposing paradigms

But, although a few of the ideas may be shared, the two views are exact polar opposites.

You have the point-of-view that as humans we are animals and as such part of, and subject to the laws of nature. The world is not simple, and causation is not linear but complex.

On the other, you have an ideology that violently opposes any systems thinking, is broadly supportive of man's position as 'master of the universe'. Any problems are not the result of natural systems such as population overshoot, or of human activity. Rather these are scams designed by an all-powerful elite to keep the masses weak.

That's why I will not entertain these ideas, and why Michael Ruppert is 110% correct when he says that these people 'don't get it'.

No one can explain this better than Mike himself, so I can do no more than to suggest you go back and listen carefully what he is saying.

We have reached a point in our evolution where we have to see things uncompromisingly and exactly how things are, without being distracted in by-ways.

Whether we are doomed or whether we are doomed if there's no change in consciousness, I think, is not a subject for debate, but something that lies in the realm of uncertainty. 

However, I think we would all gain if we lived as if this moment were the last (as well it might) - if we lived a life if excellence.

Talking of Al Gore - devil incarnate

Harking back to Al Gore, who among the deniers is the devil incarnate.

No doubt, as a member of the political elite, he has been part of a administration that criminally failed to do anything about climate change when it may still have been possible.  

He has also, doubtlessly, enriched himself through the ponzi cap-and-trade scheme.

For all that he wrote a 1992 book, Earth in the Balance, that was factually accurate and contained predictions of climate events.

I remember clearly his prediction, back then, of the super-storms.

Some idiot is bound to retort that this is because he knew it was going to happen because he was part of the conspiracy to make it happen.

Well, some things just can't be argued with, because they are beyond logic, facts and proof.

Corrupt and compromised he may be, but he cannot be made to serve as the basis for attacking the whole of climate science which carries the whole spectrum from UN-based IPCC concensus to a minority of scientists who acknowledge that we have passed trigger points for catastrophic, and unstoppable climate change.

In these times when we are looking down the barrel of catastrophe my patience has thinned and I have no time to listen to people who cannot even begin to deal with the true state of affairs, but seek to distract the rest of us with cries of 'LOOK OVER THERE!"

By all means, if you want to spend your life following conspiracy theories, be my guest - just don't bother me with it.