The Magnificent Achievements of Eco-Propaganda 132

By James F. Tracy

Today a good deal of what qualifies as propaganda is much more subtle than overt. When an entire civilization or way of life is to be significantly altered the tried-and-true method of “repeating a lie until it becomes truth” needs to be done over a period of many years and in a multitude of varying ways to take hold and change the very assumptions and beliefs of a people.

This process is especially vital for reaching a given society’s more elite demographic—the opinion leaders who perceive themselves as “smarter than the average bear” and thus impervious to simple appeals and indoctrination.

A case in point is the agenda backed by powerful global elites and recognizable under names such as “climate change” and “sustainability.” The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fifth Assessment Report, released on September 27, 2013, came replete with an assemblage of legitimizing features along these lines (“scientific,” “scholarly,” “authoritative,” “peer reviewed,”). Also termed the “Climate Bible,” journalists and policymakers alike regard it as “authoritative” and “the gold standard” of climate science. The public is told that the official body’s findings are now clearer than ever: “human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.”[1]

Among the most vociferous agitators for the IPCC’s climate change orthodoxy are the foundation-funded, tax-exempt, progressive-left media that sit alongside the bevy of similarly tax-exempt, foundation-funded environmental organizations that together uphold and publicize the theory of CO2-based anthropogenic (human-caused) climate change (ACC).[2] Self-professed as “independent,” “investigative,” even “educational,” the so-called “alternative media” turn a blind eye to seriously scrutinizing the highly questionable IPCC’s “scientific” review of the climatological literature and its implications for the array of ambitious programs and policies stealthily introduced throughout the industrialized world, many of which are seldom subject to popular plebiscite. Think “smart grid” and “smart growth.”

Logical questions from such apparently independent organs might include, “How does the IPCC produce its findings?” and “Who benefits?” Instead, there is an almost knee-jerk response on behalf of progressive-left editors and readerships to trust and support the UN group’s purportedly objective and meticulous review of the peer-reviewed climatological literature.

Between August and December 2013 such progressive outlets published dozens of articles and commentaries whole-heartedly touting the IPCC report. For example, posted 25 articles, ran 40, circulated 38, and featured 11.

These were often presented with bleak headlines accenting the urgent appeals found in the IPCC publicity. For example, “International Scientists Warn Climate Deniers Are Enabling Earth’s Suicide” (Truthout, 9/13/13), “6 Scary Conclusions in the UN’s New Climate Report” (Mother Jones, 9/27/13), “Greenhouse Gas in Atmosphere Hits New Record: UN,” (Alternet, 11/1/13), and “’Africa is Being Pushed Closer to the Fire’: Africans Say Continent Can’t Wait for Climate Action” (Democracy Now! 11/22/13).

Uncritical advocacy of the IPCC’s anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming extended beyond headlines to media criticism. In December, for example, the progressive Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) observed that corporate controlled network newscasts routinely failed to link “extreme weather” to “global warming.” “In the first nine months of 2013,” FAIR observes,

there were 450 segments of 200 words or more that covered extreme weather: flooding, forest fires, tornadoes, blizzards, hurricanes and heat waves. But of that total, just a tiny fraction–16 segments, or 4 percent of the total–so much as mentioned the words “climate change,” “global warming” or “greenhouse gases.[3]

What is left unmentioned is that fact that all of these “extreme weather” incidents have one common denominator that FAIR and corporate and progressive media alike consistently overlook: the sun. As University of Winnipeg climatologist Dr. Tim Ball explains (here at 35:00), the IPCC’s “terms of reference” through which the body proceeds to generate its findings exclude the sun and its many demonstrable atmospheric effects as factors in the warming and cooling of the earth’s climate.[4] It is thus no wonder that at best fringe or nonexistent causes of “climate change”–such as minuscule alterations in atmospheric gases–are pointed to with great alarm by the IPCC and its proponents.

Despite far more unambiguous and compelling scientific explanations the notion that “carbon emissions” are the foremost cause of natural climactic events has become something of a religion, and this is especially the case on the progressive-left, where adherents mechanically accept the curious agenda and its ostensibly “scientific” basis while vehemently condemning non-believers as “climate deniers.”

As Canadian journalist Donna LaFramboise has documented in her important 2011 exposé, the IPCC’s scholarly personnel is in fact heavily weighted toward what are often third-or-fourth-rate scientific talent whose eco-political stances are strictly in accord with the IPCC’s “research” agenda pushing anthropogenic climate change. IPCC authors often include climatology graduate students and even environmental activists from organizations such as Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund—indeed, figures with little-if-any scientific training but with clear agendas to promote.

LaFramboise further found that one third of the literature reviewed and cited by the IPCC in its 2007 report was–contrary to IPCC chief publicist Ragendra Pachauri’s pronouncements–not even peer-reviewed, and in many cases included citations of promotional literature devised and distributed by environmental activist organizations.

These unethical and compromising relationships are not difficult to explain if one is to recognize the IPCC for what it in fact is—a powerful political organization with the overarching objective of manufacturing consent and achieving transnational policy harmonization around the largely discursive construct of anthropogenic carbon-centric climate change.

The fact that the IPCC is capable of forthrightly carrying out one of the greatest scientific frauds in human history, setting long range governmental policies while enlisting allegedly intellectual sophisticates and “progressive” news media as its most devoted foot soldiers, is no small-scale feat. It is, rather, an immense achievement in modern propaganda and thought control that only hints at the powerful forces behind a much more far-reaching agenda.


[1] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Human Influence on Climate Clear: IPCC Says,” Geneva Switzerland: World Meteorological Organization. The notion of “a 97% consensus” has itself become a common mantra for climate change fear mongering and grounds for labeling someone a “climate denier.” Yet there is limited evidence of any such consensus concerning ACC among climatologists. The oft-cited 2009 American Geophysical Union survey alleging a 98% consensus among scientists on ACC cannot sustain even modest scrutiny. See Larry Bell, “That Scientific Global Warming Consensus … Not!, July 7, 2012, and “Global Warming Consensus Looking More Like a Myth,” Investors Business Daily, February 15, 2013. Another study held up as “proof” of scientific consensus, “Expert Credibility in Climate Change,” asserts only carefully qualified claims along these lines. “A broad analysis of the climate scientist community itself,” the authors point out, “the distribution of credibility of dissenting researchers relative to agreeing researchers, and the level of agreement among top climate experts has not been conducted and would inform future ACC discussions.” The brief paper assesses “an extensive data set of 1,372 climate researchers” to conclude that the scientific expertise and prominence of those who accept the IPCC’s ACC tenets surpass those who remain “unconvinced.” This begs the question, To what degree are the requisites of foundation funding related to espousing IPCC/ACC opinion? William R. L. Anderegg, James W. Prall, Jacob Harold, and Stephen H. Schneider, “Expert Credibility in Climate Change,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2010.

[2] James F. Tracy, “The Forces Behind Carbon-Centric Environmentalism,” Global Research, November 12, 2013.

[3] “TV News and Extreme Weather: Don’t Mention Climate Change,” Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, December 18, 2013. It might be added that corporate media and progressive-left counterparts uniformly fail to consider other possible causes of such unusual weather events, such as geoengineering and similar “environmental modification techniques” acknowledged by the US military and undertaken in many industrialized countries. See, for example, Michel Chossudovsky, “Climate Change, Geoengineering, and Environmental Modification Techniques,” Global Research, November 24, 2013.

[4] Independent journalist James Corbett has published several insightful interviews with Tim Ball, available for download here.

Republished at on January 31, 2014.

About these ads


  1. Excuse me if this is off topic. A NY Judge has declared it is constitutional for Homeland Security to declare areas of our country constitutional free zones – one hundred miles around all borders and all international ports of entry. Sounds mighty frightening to me!

    • You are indeed correct. This has actually been in place for some time now, Alex Jones has been ranting about this for the last couple of years. I think it was included in the Patriot Act, or the NDAA legislation, I’m not sure, buy yea, some frightening stuff for sure!

      • Probably have seen this on the AJ site but the gravity of it did not sink in. Now that the ACLU has finally taken up a cause I agree with and a judge dismisses their case, it is very chilling. When you consider how many airports are international entry points, pretty much the whole country has been declared constitutional free!

  2. False scientists and fake politicians! Its now coming out that Obama is Bill Ayers son! That’s why they staged the scripted “mailman” Youtube to “testify” under fake polygraph test that Bill Ayers rich mobster mom, Mary, said Obama was a “foreign student” – – – because being a foreign student is better than being Bill Ayers, a domestic terrorist’s son!

    • So if Bill Ayers is his Father…who was his real mother? Two white parents don’t make a mixed race child. Thoughts?

      • I think the “smart money’s” on Frank Marshall Davis. Spitting image of him. Friend of gramps. Spent a lot of time “bonding” with him in his youth. Gramps used to bring him over to Franks.

        Frank was a pedophile, Communist pornographer and poet. Sort of the Gene of his day. He used to write a lot about “deflowering” underage white women. He had some racy photos of Stanley Ann.

        Gramps and Grandma were quite a pair. He was a globe trotting furniture salesman. She was a high school-educated bank executive. Grandma hat LOTS of social security numbers too. She was ahead of her time “flipping” real estate for the bank. None dare call it “money laundering”.

        Mom was either a social worker with a masters degree or a PhD (you choose) who peddled “micro loans” in Indonesia, oddly, just at a time when the CIA was engineering a regime change there.

        There are photos of “mom” and the grand-parents and little Stanley-Ann in her French language school uniform in Beirut. Those furniture salesmen really used to get around in those days.

        Now, every bit of that is just as believable as the tale we’re trying to unravel. Funny that. Someone should really talk to the Yale and Princeton English Departments about bolstering their program.

      • Lophatt, I always thought that’s who is father was as well. They look too much a like. It horrifies how Obummer’s background has been protected…I fear it is even worse than we suspect it is.

      • The “horrifying” part is that so much of it IS out there and nothing is done about it. All of my stuff comes from other’s careful research. I’m just paraphrasing it.

        It is very clear to me what happened with this. The fact that nobody will touch it is telling.

      • It is indeed scary. Everyone used to laugh at me when I shrugged and called him the “Anti-Christ”. Now? Not so much. It is damn frightening what he’s gotten away with.

      • My guess is that this is Obama’s mom Khadijah and second family
        …The connections will probably disappear from the Internet… but lots of people figured it out before I did. Listening to Bill speak through puppet Nancy Ruth Owens was the clincher for me, then seeing all the connecting themes, quotes and mis-speaches in Fugitive Days and Dreams *from* my Father (by Bill Ayers) And THEN seeing that family picture with Khadijah and the Ayers and Obama – and pictures of the dohrn-Ayers boys with young Obama.

      • Khadijah, now the wife of Louis Farrakahn, is my guess, from looking through online pictures for family resemblances – she has a younger son who looks very much like Obama. Plus there are pictures of her with Obama along with who I think is Mary and Thomas Ayers and I think Khadijah’s mom. If I can find a link to that image, I’ll share it – the shapes of the mouth of both Obama and Mary Ayers in that picture are comically similar and frankly, look like the Joker of Batman. Khadijah’s mom looks like the same woman that early pictures of Obama is seen visiting and being carressed by in Africa. There are accounts online of two women in hajibs sitting behind Obama and being rudely asked to leave just because of their attire – I think that the identity of those women might provide a clue (my guess is they are Khadijah and her mom) – Check out Bill Ayers’ wikipedia that seems to be written by himself, he talks about telling Diana Oughton that monogamy isn’t for him way back when Obama would have been born and also about attending orgies. Read this article to hear evidence that Bill Ayers wrote Dreams *from* my Father and this article too: and and then read Fugitive Days and also and you will see an alarming number of common themes, vocabulary and connections. Frank Marshall Davis doesn’t live in Obama’s neighborhood nor has he been fingered as writing his book, nor has his son penned a sweet play about Obama’s conversations with Michelle on their first date: play itself is a short, sweet dramatization of what Barack and Michelle might have talked about on that now canonized interlude at a Baskin-Robbins. And, although no one’s going to start a race riot after seeing this play, you do get to watch some delicious moments. Right out of the blocks, the woman character says, “Hey– Your mama’s white, right?” “So,” comes the retort. “So how come you don’t date white girls?” “Who says I don’t?”
        Watch the video with the Mailman supposedly testifying (to who?) with polygraph and the biggest push is to get everybody to believe that Mary Ayers told the Postman that Obama was foreign. So staged and scripted.

      • Yikes, that would be something…
        I’ve always contended his mother was a jackel (“Omen” readers out there?)

      • Nancy Ruth Owens (scripted puppet) on YouTube is the one who I heard from that Obama’s dad is white and mom is black. She shows what looks to be a severely photoshopped picture of a man with dyed red hair, and no lips!!! It looks to me to be an altered picture of Bill Ayers. Nancy says that Obama’s father is named Thomas Beauchamp Owens but I don’t believe it. However, coincidentally, Bill Ayers father IS named Thomas G. Ayers. Nancy never says what the black mother’s name is, I didn’t watch all her YouTube videos, too violent. But I just started looking at photographs from when Obama was a senator, before he knew people would be scrutinizing him. And it seems there are some connections that are more like family than others. Some people live closer and seem to have appeared more often with him than others. Khadijah Farakahn seems suspect to me. Its hard to find the old pictures because new ones are drowning out the old. That is one sign that somebody dishonest with cash wants old info to disappear.


    Based upon Goebbels’ Principles of Propaganda by Leonard W. Doob, published in Public Opinion and Propaganda; A Book of Readings edited for The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. I can paste ‘em here if you can’t locate (isn’t too long).

  4. Has anybody seen these bizarre “Nancy Ruth Owens” YouTubes where she claims to be Obama’s incestuous (as in doing it with Obama!) half-sister. She claims to have been going on “missions” since she was 9, and to have been raped by Pablo Escobar when she was 10. And to have killed and cut off all sorts of people’s limbs and pulled out their hearts and killed JFK, jr. The most interesting thing about listening to her, though, is that she says that Obama’s dad was white and named Thomas Owens while his mom was black. The thing that is interesting about this is that Thomas G. Ayers is the father of Bill Ayers who has been fingered as the author of Obama’s book, Dreams from My Father. And Louis Farrakhan’s wife Khadijah. REmember when there were two women sitting behind Obama with hajib, headscarves, who were asked to leave and it caused a stir? That was probably his mom, Khadijah, and grandma.

    • From all accounts, a DNA test would prove whether the two girls in the Whitehouse are the Offspring of Mr. Obama, and also prove if he has ever engaged in heterosexual relations. I would bet money on the answer to both points being no.

  5. Of course the climate is always changing, and too much pollution is a bad thing. Surely we have all seen blue skies turn to milky gray with all the crisscrossing of airplane trails. If geo-engineering is a good thing, was is their a massive coverup? What would Americans do if they knew the worst storms are caused intentionally?

  6. Climate Change Alert!
    The mayor of Indianapolis banned driving in the city today due to cold temperatures. Are we really this lame of a country anymore. I grew up in upstate NY and would drive 2 hours to go skiing in sub zero temps all the time. Granted, I’m a little older now and not as enthusiastic about going out in the cold, but it seems to me that if we aren’t going to become wimpified(had a better word for this) on our own, the government will enforce a program of wimpification on us. What a bunch of nanny state BS! What if these wimps had been in charge of the Battle of the Bulge,, or the Frozen Chosin? Why don’t we just hang a sign on the front door saying “come on in and whoop us, We’re too cold to fight”. Give people a reason to stay home and watch the price is right and they will take it every time. Probably just a lock down exercise like after the BMB.

    • Rich, we are in the deep south now but I spent 30 years of my life in Mpls and another several years in another northern State. I experienced the ’94 freeze in Mpls – record number of days where the highs didn’t get out of the -30 range…it was crazy. Lots of warnings to be careful (as bazaar stuff can happen to cars) and schools closed but the state office alerts + the Weather Channel drama = it’s like the new reality TV drama. Yes people, it is cold. Yes, you have to dress right and be smart about things. It’s winter…it is a cold winter. The world is not ending because of the cold :)

      Now, Canada: Please shut our attic door…

    • Exactly, it is the wussification of America. Worked for a utility in upstate NY and attendance was mandatory during storms. When the gov. declared states of emergency, car insurance becomes null and void. The company always said they would cover any liabilities and thank goodness, never had to find out if that was true. Had to travel the thruway and on rare occasions they closed it, the trip was a thousand times more dangerous traveling on winding, deserted, country roads!

    • I am a libertarian. I believe the state should have no power to make such decrees.

      I live in Indianapolis,and can refute one aspect of Rich’s argument.

      I grew up in Chicago, where nightmarish cold and snow was normative. Here, the line that Interstate 70 draws, slicing through the center of the city, two worlds of weather exist. It’s weird. If you live in northern Indiana, you are used to harsh winters. If you live in southern Indiana you have little idea.

      Rarely is such severe weather seen here. The mayor, if he did not act as he did, would be ruined, politically. This place simply can’t go on as if life is normal. We don’t get weather like this. So cut the poor slob some slack.

      • Slack? HA! I’m giving him all the slack in the world. I certainly wouldn’t want a person’s political scalp for not telling me to button my coat, and wear warm sockies. That is my responsibility and part of my libertarian make up as well. Of course, if everyone stays inside from the cold and fails to shovel their sidewalks, the resulting slip/fall injuries will be his fault too. So he is screwed either way.

  7. Rush Limbaugh has a caller on discussing chemtrails! He has to be a brave man to be the first to discuss this on a national level! Let’s all take pictures and forward to our reps as this brave caller has done! He jokes about if they are trying to counteract global warming they are very successful, wonder how many this may awake? He has a fb page that I will like!

    • “He has to be a brave man to be the first to discuss this on a national level”

      I heard it. I didn’t know what to make of it. Certainly Snerdley knows better than to send such calls through.

      Rush is a master of the craft. I had a friend in college who was working on his PhD in communications. This was the early 80s. I never watched TV, but he did. He said that all comedians in America waited to see if Johnny Carson broached a subject before they knew it was “safe.” Johnny was the gatekeeper of what we are allowed to joke about–probably because his instincts were a gift, not because he was taking orders.

      I see Rush as holding that position, in conservative thought.

      I think it was a trial balloon. He was testing the waters. Everyone knows that he would think of chemtrails as a “kook-test” question. Perhaps he thinks it’s on the brink of breaking out, so he let a level-headed caller make the case, and he stood back, taking the stance of an observer well marinated in irony. He can’t be blamed; he didn’t promote it. But if the culture is ready, he can always say that he treated her respectfully. Because that’s true. If there is a backlash, he can say the opposite.

      He knows his business.

      • Timing is everything! Loved Johnny Carson. Rush was very respectful and to me expressed real concern. Let’s hope this story is about to break, these manmade storms are literally killing us. I’m in SC and many poor folks had their water lines burst with this extended, unprecedented freezing. Was not previously aware most in the south do not have cellars and water lines spraying in the ceiling cause a huge reconstruction issue.

  8. Pingback: Τα Θαυμαστά Επιτεύγματα της Οικο – Προπαγάνδας « ΑΒΕΡΩΦ

Comments are closed.