Tag: #longreads

What Does A TRUE Leader Look Like?

What Does A TRUE Leader Look Like?

“The answer is, if you are utilizing your unique strengths and abilities to raise awareness in your community, family, whether by social media connections or in person, and if you are living by example the best you can within your means, not competing with anyone except yourself to continually learn and improve, if you are unafraid to speak out and take action for a better world and do what’s right, even in the face of adversity, then look no further than the mirror to see what a true leader looks like. We are ALL leaders and if we can put our differences and egos aside to unite, then standing side by side TOGETHER we CAN change the world!” ~Rebel Siren

(Please click the links and hyperlinks within this article to be routed to more information)

True Leader
Being TRUE to humanity is to be TRUE to oneself…

Do we “need” a leader, or should we BE a leader?

Many of those aware about issues that are adversely affecting our world, still think they need some “leader” to make a difference, when in fact, putting our faith in one person to get something done (for example, depending on the president for “hope and change”), is essentially giving away our individual power that collectively is the only thing that truly can and will make a difference. We are indoctrinated by the system from birth and every aspect of this existence, and must break free from it to think for ourselves. Disinformation is strong in the mainstream to prevent public outcry, meaning that only our voices together in unison can truly effect change.

We must each accept personal responsibility, changing our lifestyles to live by example (avoiding purchasing corporate products, make conscious choices about what we eat, buy, use, choosing natural health over harmful medications, eliminate our dependency on big oil, etc.), and not continue to place our lives and the care thereof, in the hands of corporations & medical-pharmaceutical industries and its lobbyists that DO NOT have our best interest in mind, yet “lead us” by dictating our lifestyles, putting their profits at the expense of our health and environment, to our peril.

The same goes for electing “leaders” (from politicians to activists) that serve themselves above all else, discounting other people’s feelings and input, who are unwilling to put aside differences and stand together for the greater good, only perpetuating division. Think about what equality means and how nothing in this world is anything close to it with all the world’s divisions, labels, racism, sexism, patriotism (implying people in other countries are inferior), capitalism (promoting greed, stinginess, wealth/resource disparity), discrimination on every level imaginable, “you can’t play in my sandbox, you’re the wrong (fill in the blank)”, etc., ALL that the global controlling powers benefit from, NOT HUMANITY.

We can only truly unify when people realize this and stand together, not “behind” someone else. THAT makes each of us leaders if we dare to stand strong on our own, and together for change, not giving ALL of your power away to “one single person”, instead, being a leader and standing side by side unified on common ground as the strongest team imaginable! United we stand…

Unify

It was an honor and a privilege to have been included as one of the six panel speakers on TLB-TV and Conscious Consumer Network, Wednesday September 30, 2015 hosted by Roger Landry of the American Freedom & Unity Project (and The Liberty Beacon), as well as being the first person appointed to the board of directors at its inception, (heartfelt gratitude to Roger for that and for ALL he does)

liberty-beacon-image

“The second biggest factor in our failure to unify our voices is our leadership, or those who head or lead the hundreds of thousands of groups, pages, websites or organizations. This the Alpha Dog Syndrome, or those who resist unity because it will dilute their power or influence. This is not a guess, it is a FACT! “You cant play in my sandbox, go play in your own”. Look to see how many of the like minded forums or organization that exist today are locked arm in arm in coalitions meant to facilitate strength, the answer VERY FEW… WHY?” – Roger Landry

Our goal is to share, educate, inform, UNIFY – Meet the panelists:

American Freedom and Unity Project Panelists Sept 30 2015

The SIX panelists of September 30, 2015 in the order of our segments –

(hover & click name for the speaker’s website):

       

Russ Tanner  Russ TannerGeoengineering (Sky Pollution-Climate Control, Weather Mod)

Rebel Siren  Rebel Siren GMOs – Bio/Agriculture/Warfare Environmental Toxins

Screenshot (783)  Susan PricePerpetual War

M. Steven Gronka  Steve GronkaPolitical Tyranny (Liberty, Freedom, Constitution etc…)

Randy Maugans  Randy MaugansEconomic Collapse (The Fed, Banksters, etc.)

Roger Landry  Roger LandryVaccines, Big Pharma, Fluoride

VIDEO (below):

Each and every speaker offered something amazing and helped tie together all the issues adversely affecting our health and planet. Please take the time to listen, even if you have to pause it and keep coming back. Research all the information given and visit all the speakers’ websites and show support for one and all, we are in this world TOGETHER, and remember, “united we stand, divided we fall”… this applies to ALL the world’s people, not just one country. One planet, one people, one biosphere, what affects one region, affect us ALL.

REBEL SIREN’S SEGMENT REFERENCES

SEEDS OF DEATH – UNVEILING THE LIES OF GMOS – FULL DOCUMENTARY (below):

THE DARK SHADOW OF AGENT ORANGE – NY TIMES – RETRO REPORT (video below):

Chemical Watch Stats
CLICK PHOTO FOR CHEMICAL WATCH FACTSHEET ON 2,4 D (main ingredient in Agent Orange) STILL being used TODAY in gardens and crops all over the United States!

SEEDS OF FREEDOM –  FULL DOCUMENTARY (below)

Monsanto’s Dirty Dozen: The 12 Most Awful Products Made By Monsanto (click orange link above for article)

1.  Saccharin (carcinogenic artificial sweetener)

2.  PCBs

3.  Polystyrene

4.  Atom bomb and nuclear weapons

5.  DDT (along with partner in crime Dow Chemical)

6.  Dioxin

7.  Agent Orange

8.  Petroleum Based FERTILIZER

9.  Round Up (glyphosate)

10. Aspartame (Nutri-Sweet, Equal) Click HERE for the story of how Aspartame became legal after being disapproved by the FDA TWICE.

11. Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) click HERE

12. GMOs! (and #13 “baker’s dozen” Terminator Seeds), High Fructose Corn Syrup, click HERE for Monsanto’s revolving door in the Government.

Pesticide Action Network North America (click photo for website)
PANNA – Pesticide Action Network North America (click photo for website)

I also mentioned “Silent Spring” by Rachel Carson in my segment. The following video and link are about her book that changed the world, before our time. Carson’s book helped get DDT banned. We have equally dangerous toxins being sprayed today, including 2,4 D (Dow’s creation), glyphosate (“Round Up”), another Monsanto monstrosity in nearly every home in America and used on our crops along with 24,D (active ingredient in Agent Orange), that if we do not follow Rachel Carson’s example and stand together to end this madness, the suffering and ill health of our country will continue to escalate unabated! We are getting it from all angles, air, water, food, come on, let’s learn from history and SPEAK UP.

Screenshot (742)
CLICK PHOTO FOR MORE INFO ABOUT HOW THE BOOK “SILENT SPRING” HELPED TO RAISE AWARENESS ABOUT THE SERIOUS HAZARDS OF DDT AND CHANGED THE WORLD

Watch the 10 minute video below for a glimpse into history, the truth and the propaganda that attempted to conceal it…

DOCUMENTARY ON THE KAMEHAMEHA SCHOOL LAND OF HAWAII AND THE DEVASTATION OF ITS LAND AND PEOPLE BY BIG BIOTECH (below):

Click link for original article dated January 29, 2013 -> Hawaii, Pristine Paradise or Monsanto’s Playground – Rebel SIren

ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

Bill Gates Funding Geoengineering Research since 2007 – Science Insider Magazine

Edmond de Rothschild – Life Sciences Venture Capital

Bill Gates – Monsanto, Vaccines, Geoengineering Critical Tie Points by The Liberty Beacon

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Vaccine Empire On Trial In India by Health Impact News

GMO Labeling Laws Ditched – The Passing Of THE DARK ACT by National Health Federation

2,4D Previously Used As A Defoliant In Vietnam Being Used On Our Corn Crops? Rebel Siren 2012

Federal Register Dow Agroscience LLC Availability of Petition Plant Pest Risk Assessment & Environmental Assessment

Voo Doo Vaccines – The LIE of “safe” Vaccines has continued for far too long by Scott Tips – National Health Federation

High Bypass Turbo Fans Do NOT Produce Contrails by Russ Tanner – Global Skywatch

Aerosol and Electromagnetic Weapons In The Age Of Nuclear War by Amy Worthington 2004

Aluminum and its Profound Health Effects – Global Skywatch

Alzheimer’s Association Forgets – History Doomed To Repeat Itself by Rebel Siren

Smart Grid Exposed – an interview with Take Back Your Power filmmaker Josh del Sol by Rebel Siren

In 1967 The CIA Created The Label “Conspiracy Theorist” To Attack Anyone Who Challenges The Official Narrative – Zero Hedge

Project Popeye Weather Modification In Vietnam – Denial Before Admission by Top Secret Writers

Monsanto, GMOs, Big Pharma and The Government – They’re Killing Us by The Liberty Beacon

America deceived by operation and the political whitewash that followed – “High Strangeness” In Afghan Ambush by Douglas J. Hagmann (excerpt below):

“Furthermore, investigation by this author and Susan Price, mother of the fallen Aaron Kenefick, notes that intelligence reports from August paint an entirely different picture about the sentiments of villagers at Dam Dara and surrounding areas. “The intelligence reports submitted by my son, copies that I have obtained from his personal effects, are not consistent with the intelligence reports responsible for undertaking this mission.” No one has asked any questions about these discrepancies. The question again remains: why not?” (click colored/underlined links & hyperlinks for more info)

Left To Die
Susan Price’s son, Aaron Kenefick (middle – red border)

“As President Obama awarded the Medal of Honor to Dakota Meyer on Thursday 15 SEP 2011 in the White House, a special ceremony was held at Acacia Park Cemetery in Pendleton, NY to remember one of the Marines whose bodies were recovered by the corporal. Meyer charged into gunfire repeatedly to try to save fellow Marines, including Gunnery Sgt. Aaron M. Kenefick, a onetime Williamsville resident who was killed in the September 2009 ambush in the Ganjgal Valley of Afghanistan’s Kunar province. “Dakota Meyer doesn’t really feel he should be honored. He wants to honor the men who died because they made the sacrifice that day,” said Kathy Weppner, who is organizing the local ceremony for Kenefick’s mother, Susan Price, who lives out of town.”

Aaron Kenefick
Gunnery Sgt. Aaron M. Kenefick in Afghanistan

THE GREAT CULLING by Paul Wittenberger FULL DOCUMENTARY (below) outlining the dangers of FLUORIDE in our drinking water. “The Great Culling of the human race already has begun. It is being done through chemicals added to our drinking water, food, medicines, and the air we breathe — chemicals that have the known effect of reducing fertility and shortening lifespan. This message can no longer be dismissed as conspiracy theory. The facts are in plain view.”

The Age Of Imperialist Wars by Dr. James Petras

Let’s hear exactly who our real enemies are from a veteran who was on the front lines in Iraq and has the courage to speak out against these wars of imperialism. Below is 4 minutes of Michael Prysner’s heartfelt, moving speech:

This amazing speech (below) from the vintage movie The Great Dictator made by Charlie Chaplin, far ahead of its time and in only 3 minutes, encompasses what a TRUE leader is:

FINAL WORDS – to the divisive ones out there, whether conscious of your actions or unwittingly going in the wrong direction…

What a true leader is NOT… someone that puts others down to make themselves feel superior… someone that insists others stand behind them, not beside them… someone that strategically manipulates others to go in only one direction and openly attacks (and elicits their followers to attack) everyone on social media with differing opinions… someone that doesn’t accept or appreciate others’ efforts, while publicly claiming “gratitude” with empty words for “appearance”… someone that feels entitled to claim “ownership” viewing information and others’ contributions on his/her website(s) as his/her “property”, who enforces “ownership” by aggressively going after anyone that shares something without his/her “permission”… someone that only directs traffic to one single website, dishonoring everyone else’s efforts & contributions that doesn’t fit into “their ideology”, and who only facebook “likes” their own page(s), rather than show support to anyone else, while “claiming to appreciate others”… someone that places more value on material objects than people, giving a gift yet refusing compensation for it, solely for control… someone that is charismatic (“sincere”), calculating, plays the “martyr”, yet ends up feeling more like being used by controlled opposition than having been in league with a true ally.

If people spent more time being supportive to others rather than constantly tearing down and disrespecting others, we might make progress towards standing together and co-creating a better world, can we all agree on that?…

If anyone is offended by this, it only means they fit that description and are part of OUR problem. This is OUR world and we must put aside our differences, step away from our egos, find common ground and UNITE, in order to truly affect change.

Unity does not mean to stick with those that step on, abuse and belittle you, it means to be available and ready to put aside differences and stand together when the time comes, with only positiveness, not judgement and criticism. Do not feel guilt for letting go of the disrespectful manipulative ones that disturb your peace of mind, for doing so rids negativity, frees you, and allows you to rise beyond and forgive… 

Forgiveness does not mean to go back to old patterns and let history repeat itself, it means to find peace in your heart, rise above anger, let go grudges, and stay steadfast on your own path of higher consciousness towards towards TRUTH~

~LOVE all life

Rebel Siren

Unity ALL Life

Advertisements
Love Canal Tragedy Remembered Decades Later As History Repeats Itself In Riverview Florida

Love Canal Tragedy Remembered Decades Later As History Repeats Itself In Riverview Florida

Love Canal Toxic Waste Seeps Up
Love Canal Toxic Waste Began Surfacing From Underground After Heavy Rainfall

Love Canal became the subject of national and international attention after it was revealed in the press that the site had formerly been used to bury 22,000 tons of toxic waste by Hooker Chemical Company (now Occidental Petroleum Corporation).

The city of Niagara Falls began using the land as a landfill for chemical waste disposal and later the U.S. Army began burying waste from chemical warfare experiments. The Hooker Chemical and Plastics Corporation acquired the use of the site for private use in 1947 and buried 21,000 tons of toxic waste there over the next five years. After the site was filled, Hooker sold the Love Canal for one dollar to the Niagara Falls School Board in 1953, and the land was approved for residential use.

Thirty-five years after Love Canal became a symbol of the dangers of toxic waste in residential neighborhoods, the legal and medical issues there are still playing out.” (as will happen with Riverview)…

Did the EPA learn NOTHING from The Love Canal tragedy? Did they “forget”? Or, are they just sellouts of humanity that don’t care as long as it doesn’t affect their families, while being paid off to turn a blind eye until the point where it can no longer be ignored with a subsequent bigger payoff in the form of a monetary “fine”, a mere slap on the wrist to the repeat offender while ignoring their repetitive careless contamination? These are questions that should be PUBLICLY ASKED of the EPA regarding their complicity in allowing land developers, (consisting of attorneys who know how to skirt the law), to have built a residential community on a similar toxic waste site in Riverview, Florida, ignoring the deadly consequences (until it becomes profitable not to).

Love Canal School
Source: Environmental Research Foundation

To understand the ongoing battle in Riverview, it is important to fully comprehend the tragedy at the Love Canal. This heartfelt and thorough assessment By Eckardt C. Beck, Administrator of EPA Region 2, 1977-1979, was found on the EPA’s own website. Yet, to this day, the Love Canal has subsequently been swept under the rug again, as history repeats itself in Riverview, Florida.

The Love Canal Tragedy

by Eckardt C. Beck
EPA Journal – January 1979

Quite simply, Love Canal is one of the most appalling environmental tragedies in American history.

But that’s not the most disturbing fact.

What is worse is that it cannot be regarded as an isolated event. It could happen again–anywhere in this country–unless we move expeditiously to prevent it.

It is a cruel irony that Love Canal was originally meant to be a dream community. That vision belonged to the man for whom the three-block tract of land on the eastern edge of Niagara Falls, New York, was named–William T. Love.

Love felt that by digging a short canal between the upper and lower Niagara Rivers, power could be generated cheaply to fuel the industry and homes of his would-be model city.

But despite considerable backing, Love’s project was unable to endure the one-two punch of fluctuations in the economy and Nikola Tesla’s discovery of how to economically transmit electricity over great distances by means of an alternating current.

By 1910, the dream was shattered. All that was left to commemorate Love’s hope was a partial ditch where construction of the canal had begun.

Screenshot (32)

In the 1920s the seeds of a genuine nightmare were planted. The canal was turned into a municipal and industrial chemical dump-site.

Landfills can of course be an environmentally acceptable method of hazardous waste disposal, assuming they are properly sited, managed, and regulated. Love Canal will always remain a perfect historical example of how not to run such an operation.

In 1953, the Hooker Chemical Company, then the owners and operators of the property, covered the canal with earth and sold it to the city for one dollar.

It was a bad buy.

In the late ’50s, about 100 homes and a school were built at the site. Perhaps it wasn’t William T. Love’s model city, but it was a solid, working-class community. For a while.

On the first day of August, 1978, the lead paragraph of a front-page story in the New York Times read:

NIAGARA FALLS, N.Y.–Twenty five years after the Hooker Chemical Company stopped using the Love Canal here as an industrial dump, 82 different compounds, 11 of them suspected carcinogens, have been percolating upward through the soil, their drum containers rotting and leaching their contents into the backyards and basements of 100 homes and a public school built on the banks of the canal.

In an article prepared for the February, 1978 EPA Journal, I wrote, regarding chemical dump-sites in general, that “even though some of these landfills have been closed down, they may stand like ticking time bombs.” Just months later, Love Canal exploded.

The explosion was triggered by a record amount of rainfall. Shortly thereafter, the leaching began.

I visited the canal area at that time. Corroding waste-disposal drums could be seen breaking up through the grounds of backyards. Trees and gardens were turning black and dying. One entire swimming pool had been had been popped up from its foundation, afloat now on a small sea of chemicals. Puddles of noxious substances were pointed out to me by the residents. Some of these puddles were in their yards, some were in their basements, others yet were on the school grounds. Everywhere the air had a faint, choking smell. Children returned from play with burns on their hands and faces…

Love Canal School Closure

And then there were the birth defects. The New York State Health Department is continuing an investigation into a disturbingly high rate of miscarriages, along with five birth-defect cases detected thus far in the area.

RIVERVIEW, FLORIDA – PRESENT DAY

Alzheimer’s Association Forgets – History Doomed To Repeat Itself

First Case Study to Show Direct Link Between Alzheimer’s and Aluminum Toxicity – Dr. Mercola

Alzheimers

Alzheimer’s Disease Now Fastest-Growing Threat To U.S. Health, Report Finds

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/06/alzheimers-health-united-states-america-threat_n_2820887.html

Can Aluminum Cause Alzheimer’s Disease? by Melvyn R. Werbach, M.D.

“Studies have discovered a direct association between the level of aluminum in municipal drinking water and the risk of Alzheimer’s dementia.” Source:  http://www.laleva.cc/environment/aluminium_alzheimer2.html

Scientific Studies Concluding The Connection Of Aluminum To Alzheimer’s

Functional and morphological changes in cultured neurons of rat cerebral cortex induced by long-term application of aluminum –

“Aluminum is an environmental neurotoxin and a suspected risk factor for Alzheimer’s disease. The neurotoxicity of aluminum on cultured neurons of rat cerebral cortex was investigated using an assay system for synapse formation and immunohistochemistry. The frequency of spontaneous oscillations of intracellular Ca2+, which is correlated to the number of synapses, was decreased after exposure to 100 μM of aluminum chloride for 22 days. Long-term application of aluminum (48 days) caused aggregation of cell bodies and fasciculation of processes. Processes and cell bodies were strongly stained by antibody to tau protein, which is one of the main components of Alzheimer’s neurofibrillary tangles. It is suggested that the characteristics of the degeneration of cultured neurons induced by aluminum show some similarities to the pathology observed in brains with Alzheimer’s disease.” Source:  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0006291X92902179

Elevated brain aluminium and early onset Alzheimer’s disease in an individual occupationally exposed to aluminium: a case report:

By Chris Exley, Biologist (University of Stirling) with a PhD in the ecotoxicology of aluminium

Chris Exley Professor
Click Photo for Dr. Exley’s Biography at Keele University, School of Life Sciences, Staffordshire, UK

Professor in Bioinorganic Chemistry
Honorary Professor, UHI Millennium Institute

“Introduction: Aluminium is a known neurotoxin and occupational exposure to aluminium has been implicated in neurological disease including Alzheimer’s disease. Here we present the first comprehensive and unequivocal data demonstrating significantly elevated brain aluminium content in an individual occupationally exposed to aluminium.” Source: http://www.jmedicalcasereports.com/content/pdf/1752-1947-8-41.pdf

Connecting The Dots

Below is a detailed and referenced article, Making Sense of Science – Aluminum, originally published July 2, 2014 by The Liberty Beacon, helping connect the dots, exposing corporate media lies (disinformation / propaganda) and its resulting status quo “denial” (via the bidding of corporate profiteers), that has gone on throughout history to this day, at the expense of our collective health and global environment.

liberty beacon logo

Making Sense of Science – Aluminum

 Published July 2, 2014, filed under HEALTH

Whats your Poison

By TLB Contributor: Anna Rodgers

On 10 May, a full page article was featured in the Sun Newspaper, on page 6 about my forthcoming book, Toxic World Toxic People – The Essential Guide To Health, Happiness, Parenting and Conscious Living. Journalist Helen Gilbert pulled facts from it to write her article.

Helen had written about 4 dangerous common toxins in her article titled ‘Whats Your Poision’. – She focused on lead, mercury, cadmium, aluminium (known as aluminum in the USA) that are all around us – not only in the environment but which are now found in some of the foods we eat, the medicines we take, the products we put on our skin and what we build our homes and other structures with. Even many infant formulas contain concerning levels of multiple toxic chemicals, including aluminum. I have written about these 4, fairly extensively in one of the chapters in my book. Helen pulled some facts from that chapter.

By Tuesday afternoon, I had discovered that one of the UK’s largest Science websites “Sense About Science” had completely discredited the article. They wrote a counter article called ‘Tackling Misconceptions About Toxins’

Judging by some pretty major events throughout history, mainstream Science doesn’t always seem to want the public knowing about certain dangerous chemicals because usually they were the organisations that said they were safe from the start, only to be proven otherwise years later.

Does anyone remember the huge lies we were told about smoking, DDT, Lead, Thalidomide, Vioxx to name just a small few? All of these were promoted as safe, healthy, and good for us by these sorts of ‘science’ organisations.

Now we all know the real truth.

smoking_01

These were not just a little lie but were in fact big big lies, with billions upon billions of pounds being made by many corporations. But more important than that, think about all the people that were harmed because of these lies, the lack of proper testing, and how they were marketed to the public. Deaths, disease and cancers were caused directly because of these lies. And it could actually be in the millions. In all of these cases, studies were falsified, people were paid off to keep quiet or paid to tell lies so that they could continue to sell their product. It wasn’t an easy task to get them to take responsibility for the harm they caused. And in each of these instances, Doctors and Scientists were speaking on behalf of these companies for their medicines, pesticides and cigarettes saying to the public ‘you can trust us we are experts’

Yet look at what we now know. They lied.

DDT-1946

Most of you reading this will know that we are now living in a world where our authorities are being bought more than ever before, to do what powerful companies want them to do. Congressmen are being bought to vote on things that interest companies, our Governments tell lies constantly and don’t ever seem to do what they promise and pharmaceutical companies are being sued for fraud and misconduct left right and center. This is pretty much a fact. And its not on a small scale – its rampant abuse.

lead-paint

To those who are aware of this, nowadays when mainstream science ridicule something, it usually is because they are trying to squash the truth from being brought to light to the majority of the public. They try desperately to pull the wool over the eyes of the people by using the same old routine ‘trust me, I’m a expert’

Vioxx

In these situations, I often remind myself of this very famous quote:

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 – 1860)

Yep. Damn straight. The concerns about DDT, Lead, Smoking, Vioxx and Thalidomide were all at first ridiculed, violently opposed, but now, are self evident.

Talidomida

Sence About Science pulled apart Helen’s article saying that every statement I had made, was not true and that I was alarming the public.

But little do they realise that how they wrote their article (see the very badly written PDF, see here) was an absolute joke and I can show you why. There are so many holes in what they have written that its almost laughable.

Its immediate to see, that they basically want the public to believe that natural chemicals are far more dangerous than manmade ones, and that no disease or cancer is ever caused to anyone by being exposed to chemicals! Whilst it’s true, some natural chemicals can harm in certain amounts or in those that are sensitive to them, but most of them do not as they don’t have the chemical compositions that synthetic chemicals do. And a good point to make about chemicals in general is, how do we know that some individuals won’t be sensitive to them or worse, seriously harmed by them? Something that is not harmful to one person may in fact be very harmful to someone else! If you have a system in your body that is already suffering from something else, for instance your endocrine system (hormones) aren’t perhaps working efficiently, then a chemical that is proven to harm the endocrine system may very likely make you worse!

It is therefore highly likely that synthetic chemicals are causing cancers (and in this case, causing Alzheimer’s) because we know in the studies that have been done on some of the concerning chemicals that this is where the evidence is pointing! Many man made chemicals are known carcinogens! That is a fact. Yet what is more worrying is that some of the chemicals these organisations support, and say are safe, have been put onto the market before being effectively tested for safety over the long term, or if they are safe when mixed with other chemicals!

So these science bodies are making statements that have not been proven at all to be true in the first place!

They do not know that their chemicals DO NOT CAUSE harm. The statements they make to the public are not based on real facts. They twist words around very cleverly and are relying on gullible people coming to their site who think that what they say is always 100% scientifically and ethically correct. Often these sorts of science websites mix truth in amongst their lies, so that the average person won’t be able to read into the real lies!

They said I am alarming the public with my information but that is GOOD, I want people to be alarmed, we are facing an epidemic with toxicity, like never before seen in the world.

Now, onto the topic of this blog post.

Does Aluminum exposure cause Alzheimer’s?

Well, what is Aluminum?

Aluminum is a natural metal that is found in the earth’s crust. Its now around us in ways we can’t quite even comprehend. Its basically everywhere. Now the science community like to say this that it is indeed everywhere too, but they forget that it wasn’t as prevalent as this 100 years ago! It was always in the soil and some was found in the air, but now its also found in our foods, cosmetics, medicines, and homes.

Many power plants and other industries put loads of aluminium particles into the air. And whilst we do ingest a lot of it through what we eat, we now are also having aluminum added to many everyday items! This is where the problem lies, that its not just found naturally its being added on purpose to cosmetics, food and medicines. Some are saying there’s now also huge levels of extra aluminum in the air, due to ‘GEOENGINEERING’.

Most of the public simply do not know this stuff!

When something is found around us so much, its only natural our bodies will also then contain these metals and chemicals. Whilst some levels of course is normal, increased levels is not always safe for an individual, and many studies are showing this to be very true. As you will soon discover, studies have been done on deceased Alzheimer brains and high levels of aluminum have been found in their tissues.

When you understand that aluminum is a proven neurotoxin (which even the scientists don’t deny) and that its found in so many aspects of our lives, then you can perhaps understand that there comes a point when a high level of aluminum becomes a problem (for some people) because the brain just can’t handle anymore of it. Its like slowly drinking alcohol, you might not feel the effects at first, but the more you have, the more likely you are going to behave strangely and eventually feel unwell.

Whilst our body can naturally detox things to a degree, we are not like bottomless garbage bins that can handle having chemicals piled into us. There comes a time when its too much. And many people now have bodies that are already struggling to cope with the amount of chemicals in their bodies.

Lets look at what Sense about Science said in relation to aluminium contributing to causing Alzheimer’s.

Alzheimer’s Society says:

“There is no evidence that aluminium causes Alzheimer’s disease. Aluminium is found in protein build-ups associated with Alzheimer’s disease, but that doesn’t mean that this is due to too much aluminium being present in the body – the same is true of other metals.”

I love how they made such a sweeping and ‘final’ statement to really throw people off the scent. ‘The same is true of other metals’. Oh really. Have you studied all the other metals in relation to Alzheimer’s then and have you studied the effects other chemicals have with several other ones, or what about the thousands of others we have in our environment and therefore in our bodies?

Lets now exam what the ‘other side of science’ is saying about whether or not Alzheimer’s is being contributed to by Aluminum.

A study published on the highly esteemed peer reviewed medical journal site, pub med stated in the abstract of a study by Professor Chris Exley (who by the way seems to be doing a lot of research into the effects aluminum and other metals are having in regards to causing Alzheimer’s and other health problems – so he’s one to pay attention to i’d say – click on his name to read his further studies!):

Aluminium is neurotoxic. Its free ion, Al3+ (aq), is highly biologically reactive and uniquely equipped to do damage to essential cellular (neuronal) biochemistry. This unequivocal fact must be the starting point in examining the risk posed by aluminium as a neurotoxin in humans. Aluminium is present in the human brain and it accumulates with age. The most recent research demonstrates that a significant proportion of individuals older than 70 years of age have a potentially pathological accumulation of aluminium somewhere in their brain. What are the symptoms of chronic aluminiumintoxication in humans? What if neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease are the manifestation of the risk of aluminium as a neurotoxin? How might such an (outrageous) hypothesis be tested? You can see the link for this study here:

And its also very interesting to note that when you type the following keywords Aluminum Alzheimer’s into pub med, 988 studies come up! Of course not all are going to support the hypothesis that Aluminum can cause Alzheimer’s but if you have the time, check out how many actually do! Looks like there’s a lot of concerned people (Scientists!) with some compelling proof, right? And, from what I have been reading their have been scientists that have been very concerned about Aluminium for the last 100 years!

Now it’s also worth saying, am I the only person in the world saying that aluminium could be causing alzheimer’s? No, of course not! Could it be that I have read books, and studies on the same subject matter, and that I also listened to Doctors and Scientists speak out about this very valid health concern in the world today? Yes! Am I lone horse, saying something that no one else knows? Of course not. The numbers on ‘this side’ are increasing every day. And its purely because of Science! The medical studies that have proven certain things in relation to chemicals to be true!

In an article appearing in the Townsend Letter for Doctors (November 1993), Dr. Michael A. Weiner, executive director of the Alzheimer’s Research Institute summarized our present understanding of the dangers of aluminum exposure when he stated:

“aluminum has been known as a neurotoxic substance for nearly a century.The scientific literature on its toxic effects has now grown to a critical mass. It is not necessary to conclude that aluminum causes Alzheimer’s disease to recommend that it be reduced or eliminated as a potential risk. It is the only element noted to accumulate in the tangle-bearing neurons characteristic of the disease and is also found in elevated amounts in four regions of the brain of Alzheimer’s patients.”

In the past, there hasn’t been many definitive studies that proved this link but last month, a study came out that was undertaken by Professor Exley from Keele University in the UK which showed that they had found ‘unequivocally’, high levels of aluminum in the brain of a deceased Alzheimer’s sufferer. The deceased had been exposed to aluminum at work. (1)

Another subject in the study, also a British woman, who had died of Alzheimer’s was also found to have high levels of aluminum in her tissues. Approximately 16 years before her death, there had been an industrial accident near where she lived where 20 metric tons of aluminum sulphate had gone into the local water supply. So its highly likely the lady literally drank herself to developing Alzheimer’s.

alzheimer_brain

Interesting to note in this image that the ‘alzheimer’ brain reduces greatly in size and looks like its been eaten by something. What could do this? Hmmm perhaps something that eats away at nerves and tissues? What has been shown to do this? Aluminium! It is a selective neurotoxin that attacks the nerves.

And in a story seen in the Daily Mail article titled Top Scientist Links Disabilities with mother’s exposure to mass poisoning in 1988 Professor Exley, (mentioned previously in this article) has been investigating other concerns associated to this massive spill of aluminum sulphate (in case you are wondering why its added to our water supplies it’s to make it appear clear) which happened in Camelford North Cornwall back in 1988. Instead of this chemical going into a storage tank, it was added directly into the water supply without the publics knowledge.

Many locals then went on to drinking this highly toxic water. One of them was Sarah Matta, now a mother to 7 children. After being unsure as to why so many of her children were seriously unwell, Sarah got in contact with Professor Exley (who is one of the UK’s top Scientists in relation to bioinorganic chemistry) to tell him what had happened to her and her family.

6 of her 7 children have disabilities which sound suspiciously to me, like problems that can occur from toxicity. Between them they have: possible autism, developmental problems, speech problems, and anxiety. Sarah herself had blood tests taken and was found to have aluminium levels 20 times higher than is normal.

Professor Exley is extremely concerned that others who were also in contact with the poisoned water supply may have harmed themselves, including their children through their exposure. He told the Daily Mail:

”Aluminium is toxic. Studies in animals show that if you feed mothers aluminium in the water supply, the offspring will exhibit developmental problems.”

I find it interesting we have Science bodies (with very dubious funding connections) talking about Aluminium as being ‘nothing to worry about’ yet a highly esteemed scientist who is an expert in his field has been studying this chemical for many years and is discovering many alarming connections. And it’s interesting to note that he is not gaining anything out of saying Aluminium is dangerous! Yet as you will read below, could it be that Pharmaceutical companies and chemical companies have a lot more to lose?

A Film maker also became so concerned about Aluminum and how it has invaded our lives, that he made the film The Age Of Aluminum – you can see the full movie below this post, I highly recommend you take a look. The film exposes environmental disasters that have happened in the UK, South Africa and Hungary due to the Aluminum Industry. The film features an interview with Christopher Shaw who is a well known neuroscientist. He shares his concerns about the effects Aluminum is having on human health:

“Many researchers are beginning to accept that aluminum has some sort of role to play in neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s. Whether it does in others is still an open question, but Alzheimer’s is really coming into focus and it’s fairly clear that the body burden of aluminum from all the sources to which humans are exposed may be contributing to Alzheimer’s disease.”

And Dr Joseph Mercola stated in his article First Case Study To Show Direct Link Between Alzheimer’s and Aluminum Toxicity that Aluminum heads straight to your brain:

Aluminum is to your central nervous system as cigarette smoke is to your lungs. Scientists are clear that toxic metals damage brain tissue and lead to degenerative disease by producing oxidative stress—and aluminum is one of the worst offenders. With Alzheimer’s rates skyrocketing, today’s multiple avenues of aluminum exposure are of great concern. Just as with particles in the environment, once aluminum is in your tissues, your body has a difficult time releasing it. This toxic metal serves absolutely no biological purpose, so the less of it you ingest, the better.

Once in your body, it travels around easily, unimpeded, piggybacking on your iron transport system. It crosses biological barriers that normally keep other types of toxins out, such as your blood-brain barrier. Over time, aluminum can accumulate in your brain and do serious damage your neurological health—regardless of your age. Aluminum toxicity may be doing as much damage to our children as to our seniors.

I could continue on and on about this subject. I could link to the studies proving the concerns. I spent about an hour writing this, I don’t have time to go into it more, but oh boy, I easily could. All that I would urge you to do is, do your own research, look for non government, non pharmaceutical, non chemical company funded studies. That’s where the truth lies. I’ve written a fair bit more about this subject in my book.

Many Alzheimer’s organisations are often funded by the drug companies who make the medications for the treatment of this awful disease. And many of these drug companies also add aluminum to their medicines.

People like myself are simply trying to educate people about decreasing their exposure to Aluminum, and to encourage them to detox their body with proven metal chelators. If the public started doing this on a huge scale, then perhaps its worth considering, would the Alzheimer’s drug industry fall apart? Is this why there is such a huge denial amongst the mainstream Science industry? Whilst some say Aluminium accumulation is not the only cause of this brain disease, it is quite possibly a huge factor.

Another area where a lot of aluminium is also found, is in the vaccine industry as its used as an adjuvant. When you take a look at the chart below, and see how much money is tied up with vaccinations, you can quickly understand that the purchase of Aluminium for just these medicines alone, is actually quite hard to fathom, and therefore, if someone is threatening that industry for fears around its safety, there’s going to be people fighting very hard to keep it all quiet.

Chart

Chart 2

And, Alzheimer’s is not the only neurological problem Aluminium can cause. It is now also being linked to causing Autism and other neurological problems. Christina England, investigative journalist for Vactruth writes:

A recent study conducted by Canadian scientists Professor Christopher Shaw and Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic revealed that the more vaccines that children receive containing the adjuvant aluminum, the greater their chance is of developing autism, autoimmune diseases and neurological problems in the future.

In 2013, in their paper, published by Springer Science+Business Media, titled Aluminum in the Central Nervous System: Toxicity in Humans and Animals, Vaccine Adjuvants, and Autoimmunity, they revealed that during a 17-year period, the rates of autism had increased significantly in countries that had the most vaccinations containing the adjuvant aluminum. [2]

And in another study titled Aluminum Vaccine Adjuvants: Are They Safe? also by Canadian scientists Professor Christopher Shaw and Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic their abstract states:

Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant. Despite almost 90 years of widespread use of aluminum adjuvants, medical science’s understanding about their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor. There is also a concerning scarcity of data on toxicology and pharmacokinetics of these compounds. In spite of this, the notion that aluminum in vaccines is safe appears to be widely accepted. Experimental research, however, clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. In particular, aluminum in adjuvant form carries a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and associated neurological complications and may thus have profound and widespread adverse health consequences.

So it seems that Aluminum exposure and harm, can come from many different ways, and is very much something to seriously have concerns about. And its alarming if you look a bit deeper at other medicines such as common antacids, taken by millions of people around the world for indigestion, calls for even more concern. Talcid, which is made by Bayer which contains an aluminum derivative clearly states on the insert that:

‘long-term use of high dosage may lead to aluminum deposits in bone and nerve tissue. This may lead to brain damage (dementia) and anaemia. In the case of renal insufficiency and long term use of Talcid necessitates regular check of patient’s aluminum levels’

WOW, right from the horses mouth. The drug company is clearly stating that aluminum can cause dementia! Yep, now you know that they know.

It’s a little bit sinister isn’t it, that these ‘Science’ websites are trying to discredit little old me – who receives no funding from anyone I want to ad, yet they don’t even know what they are talking about. Have they read the package insert of antacids and other medications containing Aluminium derivatives I wonder?

And if anyone wants to dispute that Vaccines aren’t proven to cause autism and mentions Dr Wakefield being a fraud, then why are these 28 studies published in highly esteemed medical journals showing the same findings as his? Sense About Science are the type of organisation that say there’s no link, yet LOOK right here, there’s proof that it is true.

Here is a list of 28 studies from around the world that support Dr. Wakefield’s research:

  1. The Journal of Pediatrics November 1999; 135(5):559-63
  2. The Journal of Pediatrics 2000; 138(3): 366-372
  3. Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003; 23(6): 504-517
  4. Journal of Neuroimmunology 2005
  5. Brain, Behavior and Immunity 1993; 7: 97-103
  6. Pediatric Neurology 2003; 28(4): 1-3
  7. Neuropsychobiology 2005; 51:77-85
  8. The Journal of Pediatrics May 2005;146(5):605-10
  9. Autism Insights 2009; 1: 1-11
  10. Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology February 2009; 23(2): 95-98
  11. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry 2009:21(3): 148-161
  12. Journal of Child Neurology June 29, 2009; 000:1-6
  13. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders March 2009;39(3):405-13
  14. Medical Hypotheses August 1998;51:133-144.
  15. Journal of Child Neurology July 2000; ;15(7):429-35
  16. Lancet. 1972;2:883–884.
  17. Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia January-March 1971;1:48-62
  18. Journal of Pediatrics March 2001;138:366-372.
  19. Molecular Psychiatry 2002;7:375-382.
  20. American Journal of Gastroenterolgy April 2004;598-605
  21. Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003;23:504-517.
  22. Neuroimmunology April 2006;173(1-2):126-34.
  23. Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol Biol. Psychiatry December 30 2006;30:1472-1477
  24. Clinical Infectious Diseases September 1 2002;35(Suppl 1):S6-S16
  25. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2004;70(11):6459-6465
  26. Journal of Medical Microbiology October 2005;54:987-991
  27. Archivos venezolanos de puericultura y pediatría 2006; Vol 69 (1): 19-25.
  28. Gastroenterology. 2005:128 (Suppl 2);Abstract-303

This where I found writing this article so much fun! For those that are interested in Sense About Science; they say they are a charity and pretty much rely on outside funding and guess where most of it looks like it comes from? Pharmaceutical and chemical companies. And, yes, I’m being a bit lazy here, as I’m just cutting and pasting this next section from wikipedia and it is a bit out of date, but I think you will see what I found is enough to prove my point!

Funding for the trust has been increasing. Some is derived from industrial organizations engaged in scientific dispute, clinical trials and research for which SAS is supportive (e.g. genetically modified crops) as well as major publishing houses. For example for the fiscal year ending 5 April 2008, the trust received £145,902 in donations. Disclosed corporate donations comprised £88,000 with pharmaceutical company Astra Zeneca donating £35,000. Previous donations included other pharmaceutical industries such as Pfizer. This dependency has now been diminished since for the fiscal year ending April 2010, the trust received £183,971 in donations of which only £17,500 was derived from the pharmaceutical industry (Unilever and G E Healthcare), in 2011 the amount diminished further to less than 6% funding derived from industry sources (the trust received £268,184 in donations with £15,000 from industry) with the rest derived from Science Bodies and individuals.

And, I’ve also now found the direct link to Sense about Science’s funding, please check out their huge list…” — (END QUOTE) Source: http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2014/07/02/making-sense-of-science-aluminum/

Who Can We Trust?

The corporations and irresponsible scientists that profit at the expense of our health and environment? Who can forget hearing about the historical ad, “DDT Is Good For Me-e-e!”? disinformation shills (a.k.a. trolls) that attacked it in defense of DDT. Look at their outrageous comments, and the fact that the video in the article was “removed” on youtube. Those are classic , obvious once you learn their strategy and recognize their “cookie cutter” format. “Forum Posters” are hired by PR Companies contracted by corporate profiteers, to infiltrate social media, gang-stalk/remove or discredit information in an attempt to sway public opinion.  The truth about DDT, its marketing spin/public acceptance, mass spraying from planes, then subsequent BAN, are outlined in the video below.

 

Despite what corporate profiteers would like us to believe, why would we trust them after their continual duplicitous marketing “spins”? Why would we think that present day aluminum being put into vaccines and our global atmosphere via geoengineering research projects (mass aerial spraying of aluminum, barium, strontium & sulphuric acid nanoparticles), is any different? Let’s keep connecting the dots until the pattern is clear for all to see, trust your own eyes.

Link between Aluminum and the Pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s Disease: The Integration of the Aluminum and Amyloid Cascade Hypotheses: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3056430/

Alzheimer’s Association is associated with biotech/vaccines/Gates/Monsanto etc., and as we know, Gates is simultaneously funding GEOENGINEERING RESEARCH. If we look closely, the conflict of interest is glaring –  http://www.biotech-now.org/health/2014/06/alzheimers-association-offers-part-the-cloud-translational-research-grant-program#

Following the money always leads to where the truth lies. Gates plays Bridge for Alzheimer’s Research 6/2014, and has a vested interest in Geoengineering Research, a.k.a. ALUMINUM (with sulfate, barium, strontium) NANOPARTICLES AERIALLY SPRAYED INTO THE ATMOSPHERE. Given the scientific research concluding aluminum and Alzheimer’s, isn’t that a conflict of interest” AND perhaps the reason Alzheimer’s Association suddenly denies an aluminum connection?

Source: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140606005865/en/Bridge-Players-Nationwide-Unite-Raise-Money-Alzheimer%E2%80%99s#.VEgvrleCCnU

Establishing the connection of BIOTECH to Alzheimer’s research: http://dhmri.org/assets/NCRCSolutionstoGlobalChallenges.pdf

International Science Leaders

National Science Foundation

National Institutes of Health

American Cancer Society

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation ** GATES FUNDS GEOENGINEERING (and ALZHEIMER’S RESEARCH) http://news.sciencemag.org/2010/01/bill-gates-funding-geoengineering-research )

United States Agency for International Development (USAID)

Alzheimer’s Association; advance Alzheimer’s research

 Full list: https://lsn.osu.edu/funding

Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice. Institutional Conflicts of Interest an ongoing problem.

http://www.academyhealth.org/files/ethics/report.pdf

Intentional obfuscation in the mainstream at will of its funders, furthering the agenda of the controlling powers, and conflict of interest in medical research, and all facets of our world, is evident if we simply dare to pay attention and think outside the box. ~Rebel Siren – Exposing Corruption and Crimes Against Humanity

Additional References

For more information on aluminum hydroxide in vaccines: 

Aluminum Hydroxide Adjuvants In Vaccines – Is It Safe?

Dr. Shaw holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Biology, a Master of Science degree in Medical Physiology, and a PhD in Neurobiology - click photo to go to his biography.
Dr. Shaw holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Biology, a Master of Science degree in Medical Physiology, and a PhD in Neurobiology – click photo to go to his biography.

In the video below, Dr. Christopher Shaw discusses the toxic effects of aluminum in vaccines and the severe rise in neurological disorders among the population such as Autism, Alzheimer’s, ALS & more. His extensive research concludes that Aluminum, which is present in most of our vaccines, (as well as our global atmosphere via geoengineering), is the main culprit causing ALS and Alzheimer’s symptoms in laboratory mice. Dr. Shaw’s professional profile; education, experience, qualifications: http://www.neuraldynamicsubc.ca/profiles/shaw.html

More Information On Aluminum Toxicity

http://www.med.nyu.edu/patientcare/library/article.html?ChunkIID=164929

Krisha McCoy MSc
Krisha McCoy, MSc

Krisha McCoy holds a Master of Science degree in Nutrition Communication from Tufts University’s Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy. She completed her undergraduate degree in Nutritional Sciences at the University of Texas at Austin.

Krisha has worked as a nutrition researcher, and is an accomplished health and medical writer, with her work appearing in a variety of print and online publicaitons, including the Tufts Health & Nutrition Letter, HealthDay News, and Livestrong.com, and is a member of the American Medical Writer’s Association.

Aluminum Toxicity (Aluminum Poisoning)
by Krisha McCoy, MSc

Aluminum toxicity occurs when a person breathes in high levels of aluminum from the air, or stores high levels of aluminum in the body.

Eat foods containing high levels of aluminum
Breath aluminum dust in workplace air (INCLUDING OUTDOORS IN THE FORM OF NANOPARTICLES IN OUR GLOBAL ATMOSPHERE AERIALLY SPRAYED FROM PLANES)
Live in dusty environments
Live where aluminum is mined or processed
Live near certain hazardous waste sites
Live where aluminum is naturally high
Receive vaccinations containing aluminum.”

Aluminum Nanoparticle Toxicity In Our Global Atmosphere May Also Cause Heart Attacks?

Alumina nanoparticles may cause coronary disease as well as being a contributing factor of dementia/Alzheimer’s

Nanotechnology is a rapidly growing industry that has elicited much concern because of the lack of available toxicity data. Exposure to ultrafine particles may be a risk for the development of vascular diseases due to dysfunction of the vascular endothelium.” Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18456438

Geoengineering Is Big Business

NOVIM – Climate Engineering (decade long SWCE short wave climate engineering research including field experiments beginning in 2009), pay special attention to their site photo entitled, “comtrails” (with an “m”) and notice how the streaks match what we often see in our global skies: http://www.novim.org/projects/climate-engineering

CLICK HERE to go to Integrated Assessment of Geoengineering Proposals UK, associated with UCSB (University of California Santa Barbara) Nanotech Department, and Novim.

NOAA – A Bibliometric Analysis of Climate Engineering Research: http://www.arl.noaa.gov/documents/JournalPDFs/Belter_Seidel.WIREsClimateChange2013.wcc229.pdf

Council On Foreign Relations – Workshop On Unilateral Planetary Scale Geoengineering 2008http://www.cfr.org/projects/world/geoengineering-workshop-on-unilateral-planetary-scale-geoengineering/pr1364 Briefing Notes – http://www.cfr.org/content/thinktank/GeoEng_041209.pdf

NASA – Von Karman Lecture with Riley Duren, Principal Engineer and Chief Systems Engineer for the Earth Science Directorate at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory discusses at length, the hazards of GEOENGINEERING:

For More Information On The Dangers Of Geoengineering And How To Get Involved

Global Skywatch

Agriculture Defense Coalition

Geo-Engineering | Thrive

Aluminum Oxide Particles – Chemtrails Spraying in California

UK SKY WATCH ~ BAN CLIMATE ENGINEERING!

Chemtrails Project UK – Campaign to Ban Chemtrails and Geoengineering


The Heartland Institute of Chicago EXPOSED by Yale University

The Heartland Institute of Chicago EXPOSED by Yale University

 

Yale Climate Connections

The Heartland Institute of Chicago EXPOSED (along with others).

“Strange Bedfellows? Climate Change Denial and Support for Geoengineering”

By David Appell

Original Article Published October 30, 2013

Yale Climate Science
click here for original article

Potential benefits of geoengineering, despite attendant risks, appeal to some interests showing little concern for the seriousness of the climate change issue generally. What goes here?

These days, an article headlined “Geo-Engineering Seen as a Practical, Cost-Effective Global Warming Strategy” would hardly be surprising.

But what is surprising is that the headline came from a group denying global warming exists: The Heartland Institute in Chicago.

Well-known for its aggressive contrarian position on manmade global warming, and widely lambasted for its “I still believe in Global Warming. Do you?” billboard featuring a picture of Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, the Heartland Institute might seem unlikely to propose a solution to a problem it doubts exists. So why did the group run an article on geoengineering in the December 2007 issue of its newsletter Environment & Climate News?

Written by David Schnare, at the time an EPA staff scientist and now a director at the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, in the Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C., the article is based on testimony Schnare gave to the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works earlier that same year. Schnare mentions the ease, speed, and relative low cost of geoengineering schemes like injecting sunlight-reflecting aerosols into the stratosphere, called solar radiation management (SRM). In particular, Schnare in that article cited research by scientist Ken Caldeira* of Stanford University (and now also the Carnegie Institute) and concludes “reducing greenhouse gases will cost around 2 percent of the gross domestic product, while geo-engineering (by putting reflective aerosols into the upper atmosphere) will cost about one-thousandth of that.” Nobel Laureate Paul Crutzen’s 2006 article helped pave way for more serious consideration of geoengineering options.

But Schnare’s article, written just a year after Nobel Laureate Paul Crutzen’s seminal and controversial 2006 article calling for serious active research into solar radiation management, ignores the many complications, side effects, and unintended consequences of SRM that worry many. Crutzen had specifically mentioned undesirable destruction of protective stratospheric ozone. And SRM does nothing to stop ocean acidification, instead creating a world never before seen, high in carbon dioxide while relatively low in temperature.

Only in the last sentence of his article did Schnare casually advocate a vigorous development away from carbon-based energy sources, writing “the most sensible approach would be a mixed strategy of geo-engineering…and vigorously developing a transition from carbon-based energy, to include research on scrubbing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.”

Despite this article and others, and at least one presentation at its annual conferences, “Heartland doesn’t have a position on geoengineering,” according to Joseph Bast, the Institute’s president and CEO.

‘The Lomborg Maneuver’

The Heartland Institute is hardly alone in considering geoengineering as a solution to a problem it basically doesn’t see as a problem in the first place. Bjorn Lomborg and ‘Lomborg Maneuver’ — opposition to ‘real-world’ actions, but support for more radical approaches?

In recent years, Bjorn Lomborg has often downplayed the threats from climate change while pushing geoengineering as a short-term solution. So too have Newt Gingrich, the former EPA staff economist Alan Carlin, and the American Enterprise Institute, which earlier this year posted a seminar calling solar radiation management “an evolving climate policy option” on its website…a site chock-full of climate contrarianism.

One environmental group has taken to calling this straddle the “Lomborg maneuver” — “switching from opposing real-world action on climate change to supporting the most extreme possible action on climate change.”

How might one reconcile such seemingly contradictory positions? and why do they often come from politically conservative individuals and organizations? In his recent book, Earthmasters: The Dawn of the Age of Climate Engineering, Clive Hamilton argues that this pair of positions maintains the dominant power structures of society, especially the roles of the energy mega-corporations that have a great deal to lose from any shift away from fossil fuels.

Hamilton, a professor of public ethics at Charles Sturt University in Canberra, Australia, writes “…these results are consistent with the more general argument that conservatives tend to take a more hierarchical view of society, as a natural order in which some groups are dominant and some subservient. Like a patient who will accept the doctor’s diagnosis only if the illness is treatable, a solution to global warming that does not destabilize a person’s worldview — but in fact validates it — makes recognizing the problem palatable. As the identity of conservative white males tends to be more strongly bound to the prevailing social structure, geoengineering is the kind of solution to climate change that is less threatening to their values and sense of self they are consistent with the ideas of control over the environment and the personal liberties associated with free market capitalism. Just as the need to defend a cultural worldview makes conservative white males prone to repudiate climate science, so that worldview will make them prone to support geoengineering solutions”.–

Hamilton cites research by Dan Kahan of the Yale Law School and others showing that facts must accommodate one’s cultural values if they are to be accepted. Kahan calls this the cultural cognition thesis — that cognitively, cultural values come before facts in assessing many public risk conflicts, and to be accepted, facts must accommodate those values. Kahan concludes “as a result of a complex of interrelated psychological mechanisms, groups of individuals will credit and dismiss evidence of risk in patterns that reflect and reinforce their distinctive understandings of how society should be organized.” Australian professor Clive Hamilton sees geoengineering as less threatening to conservatives’ ‘values and sense of self.’

This thesis helps explain many of the current sharp divisions over public policies, especially those with scientific origins such as climate change, vaccinations, and genetically modified foods. Those with values that place more emphasis on the individual would be expected to dismiss environmental and technological risks if solving them requires restricting industry and commerce. Those who more highly value egalitarianism and community are generally suspicious of capitalism’s disparities and its emphasis on individual initiative, and they therefore are more likely to advocate top-down regulation of commercial activity.

In the context of climate change and geoengineering, Kahan and his colleagues found that making their study participants aware of geoengineering’s potential to address climate change, while making them aware also of restrictions of carbon dioxide emissions, helped to overcome the cultural polarizations that dog the climate change issue. The researchers found too that their study subjects exposed to geoengineering ideas — in particular those who more highly value individualism were slightly more concerned about the risks of climate change than those who were not exposed.

All people are prone to the cultural cognition thesis, especially those at the more extreme ends of the spectrum. But not all realize that the thesis goes both ways. For instance, the conservative writer Jonah Goldberg — who often downplays the risks from climate change (he recently wrote in the Los Angeles Times, “OK, things have gotten a wee bit warmer outside”) while advocating a geoengineering approach — accused “global warming alarmists” of advancing solutions that appeal to their core cultural values. In an interview last year with RightWing News.com, Goldberg said, “One of the reasons why conservatives are right to be suspicious of global warming is that it confirms the exact same suite of policy approaches that these people were arguing for when they were worried about a population bomb. You know, managed scarcity, throw a wet blanket on capitalism, manage the economy.” But Goldberg did not acknowledge that his own beliefs and ideology might influence his attitude and approach to the climate problem no less than those he was criticizing.

Not Without Risks

The reality is that geoengineering itself carries risks, raises difficult ethical considerations, and poses the possibility of unintended consequences, so it is not the slam-dunk first choice solution to problems posed by a warming planet.

Ironically, some of those who say climate is too complex to be forecast, or who criticize models used in climate science as being incomplete or inaccurate, seem to have no trouble advocating geoengineering quick fixes which themselves carry climate and environmental complexities, or which would require extensive modeling to understand implementation and implications.

All geoengineering schemes have unwanted side effects, and some can be significant. Solar radiation management by aerosol injection into the upper atmosphere, for instance, mimics large volcanic explosions, like the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption that caused about one degree Celsius of global surface cooling for a year or two (returning to normal over the succeeding three years).

But that eruption also caused a 10 percent drop in worldwide precipitation, because it reduced evapotranspiration rates over land, and that situation didn’t return to normal for about three years.

There are concerns too that solar radiation management would reduce the essential Asian monsoon or cause drought in Africa. A recent modeling experiment by Simone Tilmes, of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, and colleagues found regional rainfall reductions of up to 7 percent when geoengineering reduced incoming solar energy so that climate forcings were at a pre-industrial level even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels quadrupled.

There is another large cost to geoengineering by solar radiation management: once undertaken to reduce temperatures, it must be kept up essentially forever or warming will resume in a very rapid and dangerous fashion (see figure on original post). Andrew Ross and H. Damon Matthews, in a study published in Environmental Research Letters, found that temperature would rise by up to 0.76°C in the first year after termination of a 40-year (2020 to 2059) SRM project, with up to another degree in the next two decades.

Climate engineering and the risk of rapid climate change. Andrew Ross and H Damon Matthews. 2009 Environ. Res. Lett. 4 045103. Permission: IOP Publishing Ltd, under a Creative Commons CC BY-NC-SA license.

Such abrupt climate change can shock ecosystems, especially affecting marine biodiversity by giving advantage to mobile or opportunistic species. It would be even more abrupt and dangerous if atmospheric carbon dioxide levels were to rise ever higher. Such threats would hang heavy over future generations, obligated to pay billions of dollars every year to continue to manage solar radiation for an increasingly out-of-kilter planet they did not create, having to carry the burdens of rapid and abrupt climate change were war, revolution, or economic distress to force a halt to the risk management effort.

And these are hardly the only reasons that geoengineering, though tempting, may not be the best solution to climate change, as scientist Alan Robock of Rutgers University wrote in his “20 reasons why geoengineering may be a bad idea.”

‘Laudably Honest’

Of course, not everyone sees a problem with favoring a certain solution because it aligns with their cultural values. “I think it’s laudably honest,” says Eli Lehrer, president and co-founder of the R Street Institute, a Washington-based thinktank that, in its words, “supports free markets; limited, effective government; and responsible environmental stewardship.”

“Many want to use climate change to talk about a pre-existing agenda,” says Lehrer, who accepts the scientific evidence of manmade climate change and favors a carbon tax. “They may well be right. I’d like to do it too.”

Lehrer sees geoengineering as a common sense approach deserving of research, but to be undertaken only if the problem proves severe enough. “It’s probably the best solution to an extreme situation,” he says, adding that a goal of zero carbon emissions is not achievable or “worthwhile.” He disagrees with actually doing geoengineering any time soon, calling the potential adverse impacts “extreme and potentially dangerous.”

Humans vs. Nature

Since Crutzen’s 2006 paper, geoengineering is no longer a taboo subject, feared even for polite discussion, because it can offer an alternative way out of a nagging carbon problem — bariatric surgery instead of strict dieting.

Many scientists now are seriously exploring solar radiation management and ways to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, philosophers are weighing the moral and ethical dimensions of geoengineering, and even a few environmental groups have opened their minds to concepts once considered anathema. The newly released IPCC Working Group I Fifth Assessment Report mentioned geoengineering for the first time ever.

Geoengineering solutions retain the idea of human’s technical mastery over nature. Instead of human societies changing to accommodate the natural world they rely on, climate engineering — consciously or not — is the view that nature can be fundamentally bent and manipulated to accommodate humanity. Wresting with nature is, in a very real way, the story of human development, and taming the wild world has brought some (but by no means all) wealth, relative comfort and ease, and freedom from basic wants. At the same time, that insistence on control now poses risks to the planet as the most fundamental stage on which that existence plays out.

“There is something increasingly desperate about placing more faith in technological cleverness when it is the unrelenting desire to command the natural world that has brought us to their point,” Hamilton writes in the last chapter of his book. “Unless we understand why a certain kind of rationality seems to have failed, appeals to more reason are quixotic. After all, the separation of natural and human history and the dominance of a certain form of calculative rationality were each products of the same Enlightenment process.” — end

SOURCE:  http://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2013/10/strange-bedfellows-climate-change-denial-and-support-for-geoengineering/

We can only speculate that The Heartland Institute of Chicago’s duplicitous actions are the direct result of funding by the fossil fuel industry, (big oil, coal, et al). They no longer disclose their funders to the public: “Regrettably, listing our donors in this way allowed people who disagree with our views to accuse us of being “paid” by specific donors to take positions in public policy debates, something we never do. After much deliberation and with some regret, we now keep confidential the identities of all our donors. This is standard practice by nonprofit advocacy organizations regardless of their philosophies.” http://heartland.org/funding

However, according to other sources, there is a definite monetary connection to big oil, coal, tobacco, and the pharmaceutical industry, (among others):

“The Heartland Institute does not disclose its funding sources. According to its brochures, Heartland receives money from approximately 1,600 individuals and organizations, and no single corporate entity donates more than 5% of the operating budget, although the figure for individual donors can be much higher, with a single anonymous donor providing $4.6 million in 2008, and $979,000 in 2011, accounting for 20% of Heartland’s overall budget, according to reports of a leaked fundraising plan. Heartland states that it does not accept government funds and does not conduct contract research for special-interest groups.

MediaTransparency reported that Heartland received funding from politically conservative foundations such as the Castle Rock Foundation, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, and the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.] In 2011, the Institute received $25,000 from the Charles G. Koch Foundation. The Charles Koch Foundation states that the contribution was “$25,000 to the Heartland Institute in 2011 for research in healthcare, not climate change, and this was the first and only donation the Foundation made to the institute in more than a decade”.

Oil and gas companies have contributed to the Heartland Institute, including over $600,000 from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005. Greenpeace reported that Heartland received almost $800,000 from ExxonMobil. In 2008, ExxonMobil said that they would stop funding to groups skeptical of climate warming, including Heartland. Joseph Bast, president of the Heartland Institute, argued that ExxonMobil was simply distancing itself from Heartland out of concern for its public image.

The Heartland Institute has also received funding and support from tobacco companies Philip Morris, Altria and Reynolds American, and pharmaceutical industry firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly. State Farm Insurance, USAA and Diageo are former supporters. The Independent reported that Heartland’s receipt of donations from Exxon and Philip Morris indicates a “direct link between anti-global warming skeptics funded by the oil industry and the opponents of the scientific evidence showing that passive smoking can damage people’s health”.

As of 2006, the Walton Family Foundation (run by the family of the founder of Wal-Mart) had contributed approximately $300,000 to Heartland. The Heartland Institute published an op-ed in the Louisville Courier-Journal defending Wal-Mart against criticism over its treatment of workers. The Walton Family Foundation donations were not disclosed in the op-ed, and the editor of the Courier-Journal stated that he was unaware of the connection and would probably not have published the op-ed had he known of it. The St. Petersburg Times described the Heartland Institute as “particularly energetic defending Wal-Mart.” Heartland has stated that its authors were not “paid to defend Wal-Mart” and did not receive funding from the corporation; it did not disclose the $300,000+ received from the Walton Family Foundation.

In 2012, following the February 2012 document leak and a controversial advertising campaign, the institute lost substantial funding as corporate donors sought to dissociate themselves from the institute. According to the advocacy group Forecast the Facts, Heartland lost more than $825,000, or one third of planned corporate fundraising for the year. The shortfall led to the Illinois COAL lobby sponsoring the institute’s May 2012 climate conference – the “first publicly acknowledged donations from the coal industry.” — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heartland_Institute

There is prevalent double-dipping in the crude world. For example: “BP – Deceiving The Public About Geoengineering”: https://rebelsiren.wordpress.com/2014/06/15/bp-deceiving-the-public-about-geoengineering/

ICCC3 June 2009 VIDEO: “The conference’s key message, global warming is not a crisis was delivered directly to the nation’s capitol and elected officials”.

ICCC4 July 2013 VIDEO: “Reconsidering the science and economics”.

If The Heartland Institute and BIG OIL have their way, the planet will be rendered an uninhabitable wasteland, and all life, including the human species, will be EXTINCT. Shouldn’t we take better care of our home? HOME, the documentary: http://youtu.be/jqxENMKaeCU

More about The Heartland Institute: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/heartland-institute/

The Heartland Institute of ChicagoPERPETUATING PROPAGANDA FOR MONETARY GAIN
One South Wacker Drive #2740, Chicago, IL 60606

PHONE (312) 377-4000, EMAIL think@heartland.org

PROPAGANDA formal definition:
prop•a•gan•da, präpəˈgandə/noun
1. derogatory information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view; “he was charged with distributing enemy propaganda”. Synonyms: information, promotion, advertising, spin, publicity; disinformation, counter-information; historical agitprop; informal info, hype, plugging; puff piece; the big lie “the prophetic novel is about a government that controls the masses by spreading propaganda”; the dissemination of propaganda as a political strategy: “the party’s leaders believed that a long period of education and propaganda would be necessary”.

 

%d bloggers like this: