The Lancet, a once respected and prestigious British Medical Journal, has sold its credibility and its reputation cheaply once again.

The last time was when it developed and published a fake survey of Iraq war deaths at the behest of George Soros.  That survey was proven to be wildly in error.

Skip forward to 2009 and the Lancet is at it again!  This time hyping the medical benefits of fighting mythical global warming.

Just as in the earlier fake research, the global warming cabal is refusing to make the details of their work known to the public and other professional organizations. Why the secrecy?  Perhaps because it is all mystical.

The pattern of faking, lying, publicizing, and cover up, is endemic to the hard left in the world.  For them the ends justify the means and the prospect of controlling every aspect of life for all the billions of people in the world is a goal too great to allow plebian matters like truth to get in the way.

The Lancet appears to have decided that it is no longer a publication interested in truth, a sad requiem for a medical journal.

This time around the funding is from the Wellcome Trust, another ‘philanthropic’ trust overtaken by radical lefties.

They must have had to stretch a bit to fit the faux Global Warming agenda into their mission: “funding research to improve human and animal health“.  Although that is not too difficult for an organization that has a Sanger Institute!

Perhaps their global warming suggestions will enable them to practice more of the eugenics Margaret Sanger was a proponent of?

After all, take away the Man and there can be no Man Made Global Warming!

No dia 3 de Setembro, após diversos adiamentos, o Rei da Pop foi enterrado. Colocado num mausoléu de alta segurança, ao lado de Charlie Chaplin, no cemitério de Forrest Lawn, em Los Angeles, por 157 mil euros, Michael Jackson descansa finalmente em paz. O vídeo do enterro foi produzido pela família Jackson, que controlou todos os detalhes. Para quem sempre seguiu a carreira deste ícone, o funeral foi tudo menos «normal».

Para além de a cerimónia parecer mais um encontro celebrativo entre muitas caras desconhecidas, em que estão todos a sorrir, os amigos de longa data do cantor não estavam presentes.

Mais de 200 pessoas estiveram no funeral, mas nomes como Eddie Murphy, Will Smith, Eddie Van Allen, Edward Lewis, Steven Spielberg, John Landis, Joe Pesci, Martin Scorcese, Liza Minelli, Shirley Mclaine, Paul McCartney, Slash, Bill Clinton, Emmanuel Lewis , Sean Lennon, Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan, Britney Spears, Sheryl Crow, Fergie, R. Kelly, P. Diddy, Al Fayed, Dan Ackroyd, Danny Glover, David Copperfiel, Paula Abdul, Whoopi Goldberg, Beyoncé Knowles, Carlos Santana, Baby Face, ou Alejandro Sanz, todos eles amigos chegados ao Rei da Pop, muitos deles desde o início da sua carreira a solo, simplesmente não compareceram ao último adeus. Porquê?! É curiosamente estranho que entre os convidados, os amigos chegados de Michael Jackson não estavam.

É claro que vemos uma Elisabeth Taylor, Macaulay Culkin, Quincy Jones, Berry Gordon, o reverendo Al Sharpton, todos eles sorridentes, vemos, na maioria, muitas caras desconhecidas que nem conheciam o Michael Jackson, mas e os restantes, os amigos verdadeiros que nunca o abandonaram?

Fica o vídeo. Comentem p.f.

Olha o que eu acabei de apagar.

Ah, como eu odeio isso. Odeio receber esse tipo de email.

Eu recebo ao menos 3 desses todo mes, várias pessoas me enviam essas coisas e não entendem que isso é fake.

Vamos por parte.
POR FAVOR NAO DELETE NEM PRECISA LER SO REPASSE
Meodels. Não precisa ler? É para não identificar as diversas falhas ou não perceberem quão mal você escreve?

Escrever coisas em maiusculo é como se estivesse gritando desesperado quando alguém estava com arma na sua cabeça, ENTÃO POR OBSÉQUIO NÃO FAÇA ISSO SE NÃO FOR NECESSÁRIO.

Quem apagar, não tem coração…
Prefiro não ter coração que não ter cérebro, afinal é o cérebro a parte do corpo que gera e interpreta os sentimentos e não o coração. [/romantismo]
E o mundo não funciona com coração, funciona com o cérebro. Vide Bill Gates.

Olá meu nome é Krista Marie e acabo de ter uma filha , que se chama Natalie. Aos olhos do mundo,  e recentemente os doutores descobriram que minha pequena Natalie tem um cancer no cérebro Desafortunadamente meu marido e eu não temos o dinheiro para pagar a operação, mas meu esposo e eu conseguimos uma ajuda da AOL, e eles nos ajudarão com cinco centavos por cada pessoa que receber este email Por favor, reenvie este e-mail para cada pessoa que você conhece, e ajudem a minha pequena Natalie….
Olá, meu nome é Goku… ops… Krista Marie? Não era nome de uma cantora country lá dos USA?

Voltando ao assunto, tudo bem Krista Marie? Tua filha que tinha cancer já não tinha nascido em 2004? Nasceu outra em 2009 com o mesmo cancer e nome? -___-;

Agora pensem for duck’s sake. A AOL não tem como verificar quem recebeu esse email. Mesmo se tivesse, quando ela o fizesse seria processada por diversos tipos de delitos que incluiriam invasão de privacidade (que é quase global, só na China que não deve existir.).

Segundo, a AOL Brasileira faliu… tem mais de um ano. Po, quem criou a versão 2009 desse hoax antigo nem para se atualizar? VSF

Terceiro… experimenta procurar no Google Brasil por Krista Marie e verifica qual o primeiro resultado.

Quarto, a pessoa que fakeou isso estava com muita fome. Comeu 90% da pontuação das frases.

POR FAVOR NÃO DELETE REPASSE…
Por obséquio, use o God Dammit termo APAGAR ao invés de DELETAR. Só por isso vou APAGAR esse email.

Se querem me enganar, pelo menos façam direito. Essas baboseiras não colam comigo… alias, não deveriam colar com ninguém.

Agora um rápido estudo sobre esse hoax.

Número de emails válidos: 527 (incluindo o meu)
Número de repasses: 15 (incluindo o que chegou no meu email)

A parte mais legal de toda a mensagem é essa:
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Cassiana – (…) Indústria de Máquinas Frigoríficas <recepcao@(…).com.br>
Que feio Cassiana, usando o email da recepção para espalhar correntes de hoaxes… muito feio isso.

Concluindo: não adianta você criar um email e cuidar para que ele permaneça spam free, sempre terá uma salsinha que repassará teu email e colocará teu email spam-free no meio do tiroteio dos spams.

Ah, se tu já me enviou algo deste genero, não precisa pedir desculpas. Apenas não faça mais isso.

Environmentalists Get Angry Over Climategate Scandal

Chain email is the term used to classify emails that attempt to entice unsuspecting users to distribute email to other users on the pretext of offering rewards or information.

There are many examples of chain emails such as messages containing a virus warning or the promise of a prize if you distribute to other people.

I was recently made aware of a hoax email relating to an “Ericsson T18 & R320 laptop promotion”.

This claims to be from Ericsson promising a free laptop if you forward an email to 20 people and is a classic example of a chain email. There is a similar email claiming to be from Nokia which also promises a reward.

The Ericsson hoax has been around since May and is still being circulated which shows how widely this email has spread.

The purpose of these emails is to cause a nuisance by disrupting the network and wasting people’s time.  Please ignore them.

James Delingpole
www.jamesdelingpole.com
If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka CRU) and released 61 megabytes of confidential files onto the internet.When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.

Al Gore set to make Billions Off the Global warming Hoax

¿A quién no le ha llegado esta foto de una araña "típica" de Irak? ¡Pero si es el bicho abrazacaras de Alien!

¿Sabes lo que es el phising? Porque yo creía que, a estas alturas de la vida, todos sabíamos más o menos que no hay que creerse todo lo que corre por internet.  Exactamente del mismo modo que no hay que creerse todo lo que dicen en televisión, en la radio o en el patio de vecinos.  Hay que seleccionar lo que nos llega porque muchas veces sólo nos llega basura.

Y claro, en un país de ignorantes informáticos como es el mío (hoy me siento generoso y no lo califico como “país de ignorantes” a secas, quizá sea el espíritu navideño que, por fin, ha conseguido hacer mella en mi integridad reaccionaria) si alguien no sabe lo que es el phising, difícilmente va a saber lo que es un hoax.

No hay problema.  A grandes rasgos, un hoax es un bulo.  Algo que corre libremente por la red, un rumor que te alerta sobre algo para que no seas tú el pringao que pique.  O al revés, un rumor que te avisa para que te aproveches de algo y no seas tú el pringao que se quede sin alguna tremenda ventaja.

Hoy me ha llegado el enésimo hoax a mi correo, avisándome de que BAJO NINGÚN CONCEPTO conteste a una posible llamada que muestre el número 600.113.99.00 porque entonces seré yo quien pague la factura del espabilao que me esté llamando, mientras él se dedicará a llamar a teléfonos eróticos tailandeses.  ¡Pues menos mal que me avisan por correo electrónico! Sin duda es una fuente mucho más fiable que mi operador telefónico, así que ni siquiera me preocuparé por averiguarlo.  Me lo creo sin más y punto.  Ni siquiera lo buscaré en internet, no sea que lo encuentre.

¿De verdad somos tan borricos? ¿Somos tan simples?

¿Podemos llegarnos a creer sin ningún problema que hay una araña que corre a 50 km/hora y que te devora vivo, como la de la foto de arriba? ¿Nos creemos sin dudarlo que si reenviamos un correo a 5000 personas, Bill Gates nos dará dinero? ¿O que AOL donará un dólar para operar a una pobre niña ciega, sorda y minusválida por cada mensaje que reenviemos de un correo?

¿De verdad somos así?

Pues menos mal que la rueda ya la inventaron en el neolítico, porque si la tuviésemos que inventar ahora… ufff… tengo mis dudas…

Alan Skokal played a nasty trick on academics in 1995.  He purposely created a lunatic article for publication to point out the misuse of science by Kristeva, Derrida,  Lyotard, Baudrillard, and others who implied that science was a social construct.  Not only did the hoax reveal the questionable standards of academic journals, but Skokal’s article revealled a deeply anti-science, anti-rational viewpoint within academia.  This is not a theory per se, but it serves as an interesting cautionary tale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair

http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/index.html

http://www.mathematik.uni-muenchen.de/~bohmmech/BohmHome/sokalhoax.html

The Notion of Fact v. the Idea of Fiction: Climate-Gate and the war for (Cyber)Space

By Jimmy M.

     As of last Tuesday, November 24^th, evidence was discovered that challenged the supporters for global warming. These findings have echoed what many of Al Gore’s critics have claimed all along: all of his findings concerning the damage being caused to the planet are lies. In the headquarters of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), hackers were able to penetrate the computer database, releasing emails that proved the scientists were manipulating the data in favor of global warming. These hackers were able to bypass the Freedom Information Act, and other governmental agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The emails show that there is not a consensus among scientists that the planet is warming and will become unhabitable in the future. These scientists have claimed that those who argue in favor of global warming have ignored the real discoveries and any attempts that go against the green movement agenda have been expurgated from reports. Interestingly enough, these reports also show a global government is being formed or is in the slow process of forming sometime soon.

     Now, my spin on all of this is there are two very important questions that must be answered. The first is the reception of the hackers. Of course, what they have done is illegal and a violation of a individual’s privacy (thanks to the fourteenth amendment and because of those wonderful species of people known as “corporate lawyers”). How should the public receive these hackers? Are they good or bad? This can only be explained through the rule of proportionality. This rule weighs the ends and the means. Should it be that the ends justify the means, the act is generally considered good. For example stealing an antiodte because your mother is sick. The act is criminal but the intention is to save the life of your mother. Does this mean it is wrong to have done it? It is all subjective. I think the hackers have struck at a convenient time, namely the fact that the Climate Change Treaty in Copenhagen, a subject discussed in greater detail before, is only less than a month away. If nations are to do what is best for the world and keeping it sustainable, they must have all the facts straight. For if one has wrong facts, one will make the wrong decisions. The scientists who have credible evidence must step forward and address their peers. By seizing the moment they can eclipse the face of the Earth and allow others to marvel at “truth”. Their shadows stand now like that of the moon and these hackers like the sun have lent them their light in this moment.

      The other important question I would like answered by these events is how this will affect governments’ approaches to cyber warfare. Who were these hackers and what nation will prosecute them for their actions? Cyber warfare is becoming a greater medium to defeat one’s enemies. I do understand that cyber warfare may be the prime tool in the future but how will cyberspace and information be used for good instead of causing others harm? The cyber trenches are long and narrow and the foxholes of blogs are filled with either absolutely absurd rhetoric or a perspective which is being pushed under the carpet, being held like a cyber POW. The last time I stated that governemnts should consider the availability of money into their decisions. It seems now you could add the integrity of those scientists and their findings. And what is surprising most is that none of the mainstream media is even reporting any of this. What else are major networks hiding?

None, zero, zip, nada. Not a single member of the alphabet-media crew are reporting a single story about ”ClimateGate.” Maybe some of you haven’t heard of “CllimateGate” because nobody, except Fox News, is reporting it. ClimateGate is the results of a hacker, or whistle-blower, releasing hundreds of e-mails showing global warming scientist hiding, lying and deleting information that proves global warming/climate change is a myth. Liberal global-warming truthers are all enraged that their “cause” has been busted.

The reason MSNBC isn’t reporting “ClimateGate” is because their parent company, General Electric, will greatly benefit from Obama’s green economy wishes. If cap-and-trade is passed into law, GE will reap billions of dollars in contracts. It really does pay to be pals of Obama. Ask GE’s CEO Jeff Immelt who is also an economic adviser to Obama. See a pattern?

A few Republicans in the House and Senate have taken notice of “ClimateGate” and are calling for investigations. I guess Obama and the liberals didn’t hear about it, since they hate Fox News, and Obama wants to move forward with a climate deal.

Transcript From Inhofe Radio Interview Monday, November 23, 2009

Senator Inhofe: This is a huge issue and of course we have the Gitmo issue and we have the, of course, cap-and-trade is now taking a new turn.  Jed, if I could…

Jed Babbin: Yeah.

Senator Inhofe: Would you let me make one sentence?

Jed Babbin: Please.

Senator Inhofe: This is out of a speech that I made, Melanie, back on the floor of the Senate, and it was repeated, John Gizzi picked it up and put it in Human Events. This was 4 years ago, in talking about the science, cooking the science. I said I would discuss the “systematic and documented abuse of the scientific process by which an international body that claims it provides the most complete and objective science assessment in the world on the subject of climate change, the United Nations IPCC.”  Now that was four years ago; so we knew they were cooking the science back then, and you’ve been talking about the, you know, what’s happened recently with the bloggers coming up with what they did, what they…

Jed Babbin: Let me interrupt you there Senator, because I think that’s a really important point.  Ladies and gentlemen, if you haven’t followed that story, what Senator Inhofe’s talking about, in Britain, a blogger got into some of the official government records about climate change and how the measurements were being taken to show…

Melanie Morgan: And the politics behind it.

Jed Babbin: And the – well but they were basically saying, “Oh yea, hey, let’s make it look like Jim so-and-so did that, and let’s help him cook the books, and let’s change the data…”

Melanie Morgan: And “let’s beat up those who don’t agree with us.”

Jed Babbin: Yea, but it’s all a huge fraud! I mean, Senator, am I exaggerating?

Senator Inhofe: No you’re not.  If you remember, mine was the hoax statement, and that was, what, five years ago I guess.

Jed Babbin: Well, we ought to give you a big pat on the back for being …

Melanie Morgan: Yea, you deserve an an ‘atta boy, and now you are finally being vindicated.

Senator Inhofe: Well, on this thing, it is pretty serious. And since, you know, Barabara Boxer is the Chairman and I’m the Ranking Member on Environment and Public Works, if nothing happens in the next seven days when we go back into session a week from today that would change this situation, I will call for an investigation.  ‘Cause this thing is serious, you think about the literally millions of dollars that have been thrown away on some of this stuff that they came out with.

Melanie Morgan: So what will you be calling for an investigation of?

Senator Inhofe: On the IPCC and on the United Nations on the way that they cooked the science to make this thing look as if the science was settled, when all the time of course we knew it was not. 

Jed Babbin: Should somebody stop further spending on this until we get this investigation, Senator?

Senator Inhofe: Well, I don’t know how you do that, though, ‘cause we’re not the ones that are calling the shots.  The interesting part of this is it’s happening right before Copenhagen.  And, so, the timing couldn’t be better. Whoever is on the ball in Great Britain, their time was good.

Melanie Morgan: Well, Senator, thank you very much for coming back and handling a little bit, a tiny little bit of heat from the kitchen.

Senator Inhofe: Okay.

Jed Babbin: Thanks very much Senator.

Senator Inhofe: Thanks, you bet.

Jed Babbin: Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma on the Environment Committee over there, and one of the real fighters.

Melanie Morgan: He certainly is…

All this is being reported and yet Obama goes out and speaks about a climate bill.

US President Barack Obama said Tuesday the world has moved “one step closer” to a “strong operational agreement” on climate change at next month’s Copenhagen summit after his talks with Indian and Chinese leaders.

Hey Obama! Wake up and put your golf clubs down. The global warming/climate change hoax has been discovered. The gig is up and it’s time to stop beating the “Earth is dying due to man” routine.

The reason to why the other members of the alphabet-media are not reporting “ClimateGate” is simple. All of them are run by liberals and they never report real news. Plus, it goes against one of Obama’s pet project. Spreading the wealth.

It’s time for Obama, Al Gore, Barbara Boxer, John Kerry, Henry Waxman and every other liberal “global warming truther” to confess. Admit that global warming/climate change is a myth, hoax and total fraud.

Watch Liberal lunatic, a global warming truther, Ed Begley Jr., go bat-shit crazy when confronted with the truth about global warming/climate change being a hoax. Hacked e-mails have proved that global warming scientist have been changing, hiding and deleting facts that show it’s all been junk science.

Liberal Ed should be pissed. He has lived a total lie and the truth hurts. I love watching a liberal Hollywood snob get owned.

Too Funny and Too True!

Thanks to Minnesotans For4 Global Warming!

On a more serious note here is an interview with Tim Ball, retired climatologist, discussing the Global Warming Fraud!

Here’s a Rogues’ Gallery of some of the fraudsters!

More here, here, here and here.

Competitive Enterprise Institute files lawsuit against NASA for coverup!

And on the lighter side…

http://www.eastangliaemails.com/search.php

On Sep 29, 2009, at 5:08 PM, Michael Mann wrote:

Hi Andy,
I’m fairly certain Keith is out of contact right now recovering from an operation, and is
not in a position to respond to these attacks. However, the preliminary information I have
from others familiar with these data is that the attacks are bogus.
It is unclear that this particular series was used in any of our reconstructions (some of
the underlying chronologies may be the same, but I’m fairly certain the versions of these
data we have used are based on a different composite and standardization method), let alone
any of the dozen other reconstructions of Northern Hemisphere mean temperature shown in the
most recent IPCC report, which come to the conclusion that recent warming is anomalous in a
long-term context.
So, even if there were a problem w/ these data, it wouldn’t matter as far as the key
conclusions regarding past warmth are concerned. But I don’t think there is any problem
with these data, rather it appears that McIntyre has greatly distorted the actual
information content of these data. It will take folks a few days to get to the bottom of
this, in Keith’s absence.
if McIntyre had a legitimate point, he would submit a comment to the journal in question.
of course, the last time he tried that (w/ our ‘98 article in Nature), his comment was
rejected. For all of the noise and bluster about the Steig et al Antarctic warming, its now
nearing a year and nothing has been submitted. So more likely he won’t submit for
peer-reviewed scrutiny, or if it does get his criticism “published” it will be in the
discredited contrarian home journal “Energy and Environment”. I’m sure you are aware that
McIntyre and his ilk realize they no longer need to get their crap published in legitimate
journals. All they have to do is put it up on their blog, and the contrarian noise machine
kicks into gear, pretty soon Druge, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and their ilk (in this case,
The Telegraph were already on it this morning) are parroting the claims. And based on what?
some guy w/ no credentials, dubious connections with the energy industry, and who hasn’t
submitted his claims to the scrutiny of peer review.
Fortunately, the prestige press doesn’t fall for this sort of stuff, right?
mike

I’m sure you’re aware that you will dozens of bogus, manufactured distortions of the
science in the weeks leading up to the vote on cap & trade in the U.S. senate. This is no
On Sep 29, 2009, at 4:30 PM, Andrew Revkin wrote:

needless to say, seems the 2008 pnas paper showing that without tree rings still solid
picture of unusual recent warmth, but McIntyre is getting wide play for his statements
about Yamal data-set selectivity.
Has he communicated directly to you on this and/or is there any indication he’s seeking
journal publication for his deconstruct?
–
Andrew C. Revkin
The New York Times / Environment
620 Eighth Ave., NY, NY 10018
Tel: 212-556-7326 Mob: 914-441-5556
Fax: 509-357-0965
[2]http://www.nytimes.com/revkin

–
Michael E. Mann
Professor
Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
Department of Meteorology Phone: (814) 863-4075
503 Walker Building FAX: (814) 865-3663
The Pennsylvania State University email: [3]mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
University Park, PA 16802-5013
website: [4]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
“Dire Predictions” book site:
[5]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

I haven’t written anything on the very damning evidence which broke on Thursday regarding the emails which were released exposing global warming for the huge scam and hoax that it is. I wanted to make sure that this actually played out to be real, which evidently it has. Al Gore must be creating a little warming of his own…in his pants, that is over this bit of news. My liberal friends (yes I have many) usually avoid the topic, but now that the scam has been revealed, I wonder if they will blindly follow Al Gore and the other scientists who were in it strictly for the grant money, or will their eyes be opened to reality. The legitimate climatologists who dared to buck the climate change promoters should be commended for sticking to the facts instead of promoting the junk science which Al and the other liars have been touting, and stating that “the debate is over.” 

I wonder, yet doubt if the Nobel Committee will rescind Al Gore’s Nobel Prize, and the Academy of Motion Pictures will kindly ask for his Oscar to be returned, or if the multi millions of dollars old Al has illegally made from this false religion of globalwarmingism will be re-paid to the suckers who bought into it. If this plays out with Congressional hearings, shouldn’t this new-found reality rock these climate-change believer’s non-warming world? Should Al and his shady accomplices be charged with fraud and go to jail? Don’t hold your CO2-filled breath too long my friends. So far only Fox News has dared to report this breaking news story. Nothing from the mainstream media, and nothing, repeat nothing from the White House yet. My guess is that when the Obama thugs speak of this, they will avoid the substance of the issue and attack the hackers and leakers of this information and go along their merry way to Copenhagen to throw the USA under the bus once again and tout us as the bad guys who are polluting the world. Will this finally be the story which breaks Cap & Trade and global warming into little pieces of nothing only to float away in the non-rising seas? Maybe…maybe not.

 Read about the email scandal here:

Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’?

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/

Le gouvernement des Etats Unis, aurait censuré une publicité dont le but était de sensibiliser les gens à la faim dans le monde , au virus du sida etc..

J’ai donc voulu chercher cette video et je l’ai trouvé, effectivement en la visionnant,j ‘ai été hypnotisé et je suis resté bouche bée devant la vérité énoncée. Les images sont belles, le message est profond…

En aucun cas je ne cherche à minimiser le drame qu’ont connu les New Yorkais mais que dire à propos des chiffres astronomiques de victimes des grands fléaux de ce monde que sont la misère, la faim et le SIDA ?

Quel annonceur risquerait sa carrière en diffusant ce spot publicitaire aux USA? Et effectivement aucun, car aprés certaines recherches , cette publicité n’a jamais été censuré pas le gouvernement americain parce que tout simplement , elle n’a jamais été diffusé dans le pays de l’oncle Sam.

Par respect pour les familles des victimes du 11 Septembre et pour ne pas boycotter la marque , la cible de cette campagne n ‘était pas les americains mais plutot les portuguais du Braisil.  Les affiches d’origines , ont été ecrites en portuguais et étaient dediés pour un magasine papier MTV ce qu’assure le chargés des relations de presse MTV en France ; Julien Pescatore.

Alors pourquoi cette video a été diffusé sur le net? est-ce du marketing viral? Et bien non , les affiches sont trés bien réalisés mais le texte qui se trouve sur la pub est illisible!! . Ceux qui ont diffusé cette pub sur le net , ont du réécrire eu même le texte sur celle-ci . ce n’est donc pas du marketing viral !

Quel beau coup de Pub finalment pour MTV! qui voit sa notoriété s’accroître et cela sans le moindre coût. Ce sont les internautes eux-mêmes qui se chargent de la promotion par le biais de leur messagerie électronique.

On se demande bien quel est l’objectif de MTV à part celui de creér du Buzz!! car ni le traitement de l’information , ni celui de la pauvreté  ne sont les refrains de MTV….

Cette video  n’est donc qu’un grand hoax car dans la video au tout debut on nous informe que les USA ont censuré la pub et que celle-ci n’est finalement passé qu’une seule foi , ce qui est un gros menssonge , canulars, !!!!!

C’est vraiment dommage de transmetre des informations erronés car cela pourrait desservir la bonne cause…

Sources:

http://www.hoaxbuster.com et http://www.paperblog.fr/1713807/publicite-censure-de-mtv-mon-cul/

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOG9sqFDByw&feature=player_embedded

“Vous avez 3 nouveaux messages“

La petite alerte de votre boîte mail clignote quelques instants dans le coin inférieur droit de votre écran avant de disparaitre tranquillement. De nouveaux mails ? Qu’est-ce que cela peut bien être, vous interrogez vous en votre for intérieur avant de cliquer sur l’icône adaptée ; la réponse apparait bien vite : vous avez un mail d’un ami concernant un repas à venir, une newsletter et…

Ho ! Ho non ! Pas ça !

La terreur des boîtes mails est là. Elle vous regarde de ses petits yeux invisibles, attendant patiemment que vous cliquiez dessus. Non, il ne s’agit pas d’un spam (un pourriel, rendons à la francophonie ce qui lui appartient) vous proposant une pompe à pénis suédoise pouvant rajouter 5 cm à votre sexe en moins de 2 jours, ni d’un message d’une mystérieuse Natasha vous proposant un lien vers sa webcam (les spams proposent rarement des liens vers des sites de vente d’électroménager, allez savoir pourquoi), mais de bien pire.

C’est un mail de votre amie Caroline.

Et alors ? Et alors l’objet du message commence par “Fw :” et contient des mots comme “important” ou “faites suivre SVP“

Mon dieu, non… Pas ça… Pas une de ces putains de chaîne vous dites vous… Et puis, impossible de mettre l’adresse de Caroline dans la catégorie “Spam” ou encore de lui renvoyer un mail simplement annoté d’un “Caroline, tu m’envoies encore un mail de ce style et je t’éclate ta petite gueule avec la portière de ta Mini de pétasse” ; non, vous ne voulez pas perdre le contact avec elle. Car Caro, elle est quand même sympa (pour vous mesdemoiselles)/elle a de gros seins (pour vous messieurs), alors non, couper les ponts est hors de question.

"Le cri", de Munch, peint en 1893 en réaction à la réception d'une chaîne mail

Caroline fait partie de cette catégorie de gens naïfs qui ont envie de rendre service ; alors quand un message lui parait important, qu’il sert une cause juste et qu’il est recommandé de le faire suivre, elle le fait. Attention, quand je dis cause juste, ça reste les causes des chaînes mails : La semaine du bisous, de l’amitié, un nouveau virus arrive en ville, facebook va devenir payant, le mail qui attire la chance, l’argent, et toutes sortes de choses, ou une cause politique pas du tout caricaturale type “La forêt amazonienne va être transformée en aéroport pour avions livreurs de 4×4” ou quelque chose du même goût. Bref, que du crédible.

Pourtant, Caroline, il est facile de reconnaître les messages piégeux ! Tout d’abord, ils sont toujours indiqués “urgent“, “faire suivre à tous vos contacts“, “important“, de manière trop lourde : si c’était vraiment si important, la simple lecture du message suffirait. Et pour faire plus important encore et être sûûûr que personne ne loupe l’info, ce type de messages est souvent écrit en Comic sans MS taille 22 avec des phrases en rouge, d’autres en vert, d’autres encore en bleu… Ajoutons à cela d’autres rituels variés : quelques bonnes fautes d’orthographe et un tutoiement de rigueur (internet mon amour) sont de la partie, ainsi qu’un sens approximatif de l’utilisation des majuscules et du soulignage.  Enfin, le nombre de “>” avant chaque phrase permet de constater avec effroi le nombre de fois où le dit mail a été renvoyé par d’augustes andouilles. Si c’était si pratique que ça, on imagine que des administrations fortement productrices en documents comme l’Etat s’en inspireraient. Un essai fut d’ailleurs tenté en 1914, avec un succès relativement mitigé, étant donné le peu de personnes disposant d’une connexion à internet à l’époque. Je me suis cependant procuré un extrait de ce mail aux archives nationales :

“De : Etatmajor@gouv.fr

Date : 01/08/1914

Objet : Fw : URGENT : Mobilisation générale !!!

>>>> Attention ! Lis bien ce message ! Il faut absolument que tu le fasses suivre à TOUS tes contacts !

>>>>Sinon, l’armée allemande va déferler sur la Marne et RENDRE FACEBOOK PAYANT !!! Le président Poincaré a demandé

>>>> la mobilisation GENERALE des armées de terre et de mer, et il réquisitionne TOUS LES ANIMAUX !!!

>>>> Si tu as une voiture et un harnais, tu dois AUSSI le DONNER ! Sinon, le génie allemand COUPERA MSN

>>>> DANS TOUT LE SECTEUR DE VERDUN !!

>>>> Il reste peu de temps ! La mobilisation commence le 2 Août 1914 !!!!

>>>> FAIS SUIVRE A TOUS TES CONTACTS c’est important ! Si tes amis ne te croient pas, dis leur que c’est VRAI !!

>>>> Un jeune homme n’y a pas cru et les GENDARMES sont venus le chercher ! Envoie à tout ton carnet d’ADRESSES !

>>>> Merci pour la FRANCE…

0

Cet épisode méconnu de notre histoire a pourtant marqué les esprits, bien que ce soit la version papier de ce document (une version plus allégée et plus sobre, il est vrai) qui soit restée dans les livres.

Ca a quand même vachement moins de gueule qu'une bonne chaîne.

Comprends-tu Caroline ? Depuis cet échec (vu le peu de personnes ayant fait suivre le message à l’époque sur internet), plus aucune administration sérieuse ne prend le risque de faire ce genre de messages. Alors, je sais que souvent, il y a des menaces à la fin de ces mails, pour te motiver encore plus, du genre “Attention, si tu ne renvoies pas ce mail, tu auras la malchance et le mauvais œil sur toi / l’amour de ta vie sera écrasé par un bison quai de Javel / Rachida Dati entrera au gouvernement / le fantôme d’un enfant viendra craquer tous les élastiques des slips sur ton séchoir / tes amis te quitteront tous“, mais il ne faut pas quand même trop y croire. Enfin c’est ridicule, crois-tu vraiment que quelqu’un pourrait par exemple faire rentrer Rachida Dati dans un gouvernement ? Caroline, sois raisonnable !

Dernièrement, j’ai d’ailleurs reçu d’une lectrice et néanmoins amie, qui voulait me montrer l’absurdité de ces courriers, un formidable  exemple dénonçant les vaccinations contre la grippe A ; il commençait ainsi :

0

> > >  > > URGENT.
> > > > A faire suivre.

> > Bonsoir a tous,
> > > > >
> > > > > Je t’envoie un papier qu’il faut faire circuler un
> > > > maximum. Lit le attentivement, et parle en autour de toi.
> > > > > C’est important et avec ce qui se passe, le temps presse.
> > > > > Il faut absolument enrayer la machine qui est en route

0

0

Je vous passe la mise en forme et les couleurs ; retenons déjà toute la beauté de la chose : la personne nous fait circuler un papier par internet (c’est déjà très fort, demain, il essaie avec du carton), et commence son propos par “Bonjour à tous“, suivi d’un tutoiement. “Bonjour à tous, tu vas bien ?” ; mais retenons surtout le bel appui sur 8 lignes comme quoi c’est super important. J’imagine le mec à “Qui veut gagner des Millions ?“

Même Jean-Pierre Foucault en est dubitatif

Oui, la composition, le renvoi et l’utilisation générale de ce genre de mails est en réalité un véritable handicap, trop peu reconnu en nos contrées. L’auteur du mail dont je vous parle en tout cas expliquait que le vaccin contre la grippe A était en réalité un vaste complot mondial auquel participait “Monsieur Sarkosy” (notez que les gens qui se plaignent le plus de voir son nom partout sont souvent aussi ceux qui l’écrivent le moins bien. Comme quoi, ça ne doit pas encore être assez. Coucou le Parti Communiste.) Par ailleurs, ce complot serait en fait un “génocide” (rien que ça) dans lequel les “élites” vont vacciner d’abord de gré par la manipulation, puis de force, toute la population. Comme en Grèce ou en Suisse, par exemple, où ça a déjà commencé (il ne manquait que la musique de fond à ce mail) ; il est vrai qu’on imagine bien le complot mondial des Chefs d’Etat qui ont décidé de se débarasser de toute la population mondiale, d’un coup, hop, histoire de rester entre gens fréquentables. Excellent plan.

Alors, effectivement, quand on lit des choses pareilles, on pense sérieusement à abattre les auteurs. Mais ce ne sont pas eux, le vrai problème. Le vrai problème, ce sont les gens comme Caroline, qui n’ont pas fini de transformer notre boîte mail en paniette à pipeaux. Pour ceux-là, deux solutions : soit réussir à leur indiquer qu’ils peuvent s’orienter sur un site tel que www.hoaxbuster.com , pour distinguer le vrai du faux (puisque dans 0,2% des cas, il y en a quand même ; oui, j’indique le site, je suis bon), soit leur renvoyer une chaîne vantant les mérites de l’euthanasie face au handicap mental lourd.

A vous de voir. Moi j’ai déjà choisi.

Here on Watts Up With That.

Here are a few of my favorites, with links to the original e-mails.

• Phil Jones writes to University of Hull to try to stop sceptic Sonia Boehmer Christiansen using her Hull affiliation. Graham F Haughton of Hull University says its easier to push greenery there now SB-C has retired.(1256765544)
• Michael Mann discusses how to destroy a journal that has published sceptic papers.(1047388489)
• Tim Osborn discusses how data are truncated to stop an apparent cooling trend showing up in the results (0939154709). Analysis of impact here. Wow!
• Phil Jones encourages colleagues to delete information subject to FoI (Freedom of Information) request.(1212063122)
• Phil Jones says he has use Mann’s “Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series”…to hide the decline”. Real Climate says “hiding” was an unfortunate turn of phrase.(0942777075)
• Kevin Trenberth says they can’t account for the lack of recent warming and that it is a travesty that they can’t.(1255352257)
• Tom Wigley discusses how to deal with the advent of FoI law in UK. Jones says use IPR argument to hold onto code. Says data is covered by agreements with outsiders and that CRU will be “hiding behind them”.(1106338806)
• Reaction to McIntyre’s 2005 paper in GRL. Mann has challenged GRL editor-in-chief over the publication. Mann is concerned about the connections of the paper’s editor James Saiers with U Virginia [does he mean Pat Michaels?]. Tom Wigley says that if Saiers is a sceptic they should go through official GRL channels to get him ousted. (1106322460) [Note to readers - Saiers was subsequently ousted]
• Later on Mann refers to the leak at GRL being plugged.(1132094873)

It goes on and on. There are FORTY-SEVEN of these.

Is this science?

Comments in CRU source code

Check out these comments in the source code of a CRU program that explains why CRU uses some data, but not other data.

From documents\harris-tree\recon_esper.pro:

; Computes regressions on full, high and low pass Esper et al. (2002) series,
; anomalies against full NH temperatures and other series.
; CALIBRATES IT AGAINST THE LAND-ONLY TEMPERATURES NORTH OF 20 N
;
; Specify period over which to compute the regressions (stop in 1960 to avoid
; the decline
;

Is this science?

Note: a search engine for the leaked e-mails is now online.

You recently may or may not have seen the following exchange between Phelim McAleer & Al Gore from the movie ‘Not Evil, Just Wrong‘:

Phelim McAleer, the director of Not Evil Just Wrong, asked Al Gore at The Society of Environmental Journalists Conference in Madison, Wisconsin about the British Court Case that found his documentary An Inconvenient Truth had nine significant errors. One of the errors has to do with the decline of polar bears. Gore notes in the film that polar bears are drowning because they have to swim farther to find ice.

That’s um, not exactly true. The study cited in Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth blames the polar bear losses on a storm rather than global warming.

Now that the U.S. House of Representatives has passed the recent Cap and Tax bill, it will now move to the Senate. It is important to mention this piece of legislation as it deals with the liberals religion known as ‘Climate Change’ (a.k.a. ‘Global Warming’).

It was revealed in an EPA report this summer, which had been suppressed, just how much some of the scientists at the EPA are highly skeptical of the Global Warming/Climate Change phenomenon. Also this summer, Polar Bear testimony was forbidden that shows most of those animals have actually been increasing in population during the past few years or are at optimum levels.

Christopher Booker of the UK Telegraph reported about this testimony earlier this year that Dr. Mitchell Taylor was forbidden from delivering:

Over the coming days a curiously revealing event will be taking place in Copenhagen. Top of the agenda at a meeting of the Polar Bear Specialist Group (set up under the International Union for the Conservation of Nature/Species Survival Commission) will be the need to produce a suitably scary report on how polar bears are being threatened with extinction by man-made global warming.

This is one of a steady drizzle of events planned to stoke up alarm in the run-up to the UN’s major conference on climate change in Copenhagen next December. But one of the world’s leading experts on polar bears has been told to stay away from this week’s meeting, specifically because his views on global warming do not accord with those of the rest of the group.

Dr. Mitchell Taylor has been researching the status and management of polar bears in Canada and around the Arctic Circle for 30 years, as both an academic and a government employee. More than once since 2006 he has made headlines by insisting that polar bear numbers, far from decreasing, are much higher than they were 30 years ago. Of the 19 different bear populations, almost all are increasing or at optimum levels, only two have for local reasons modestly declined.

Dr. Taylor agrees that the Arctic has been warming over the last 30 years. But he ascribes this not to rising levels of CO2 – as is dictated by the computer models of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and believed by his PBSG colleagues – but to currents bringing warm water into the Arctic from the Pacific and the effect of winds blowing in from the Bering Sea.

He has also observed, however, how the melting of Arctic ice, supposedly threatening the survival of the bears, has rocketed to the top of the warmists’ agenda as their most iconic single cause. The famous photograph of two bears standing forlornly on a melting iceberg was produced thousands of times by Al Gore, the WWF and others as an emblem of how the bears faced extinction – until last year the photographer, Amanda Byrd, revealed that the bears, just off the Alaska coast, were in no danger. Her picture had nothing to do with global warming and was only taken because the wind-sculpted ice they were standing on made such a striking image.

He concludes his report by saying:

So, as the great Copenhagen bandwagon rolls on, stand by this week for reports along the lines of “scientists say polar bears are threatened with extinction by vanishing Arctic ice”. But also check out Anthony Watt’s Watts Up With That website for the latest news of what is actually happening in the Arctic. The average temperature at midsummer is still below zero, the latest date that this has happened in 50 years of record-keeping. After last year’s recovery from its September 2007 low, this year’s ice melt is likely to be substantially less than for some time. The bears are doing fine.

So next time you get an e-mail regarding ‘Climate Change’ or ‘Global Warming’, do yourself a favor and do some research to find out for your self just how badly you are being lied to.

(piotrskarga.pl)

All the news that fits, they print.

Story from Michael Goldfarb of the Weekly Standard. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

With the release of hundreds of emails by scientists advocates of global warming showing obvious and entirely inappropriate collusion by the authors — including attempts to suppress dissent, to punish journals that publish peer-reviewed studies casting doubt on global warming, and to manipulate data to bolster their own arguments — even the New York Times is forced to concede that “the documents will undoubtedly raise questions about the quality of research on some specific questions and the actions of some scientists.” But apparently the paper’s environmental blog, Dot Earth, is taking a pass on publishing any of the documents and emails that are now circulating.

[...]This is the position of the New York Times when given the chance to publish sensitive information that might hinder the liberal agenda. Of course, when the choice is between publishing classified information that might endanger the lives of U.S. troops in the field or intelligence programs vital to national security, that information is published without hesitation by the nation’s paper of record.

Click here to read all the details.

Glenn Beck gives a good summary of the e-mails here:

Here is my previous post on the hacked e-mails.

Related posts

• Comparison of hockey stick graph data to a larger data set in the same area
• Government-funded research unit destroyed original climate data
• The state of the debate about catastrophic man-made global warming
• Peer-reviewed article in journal Science says solar activity impacts climate
• Famous UN IPCC hockey stick graph is based on cherry-picked data
• Princeton physics professor testifies to Senate about global warming
• Global warming advocates refuse to give their data to skeptics
• Peer-reviewed article in journal Science says prior ice melting caused by solar variation
• Oceans are not warming now
• Polar ice caps are not melting now
• Polar bear populations are not decreasing now
• Global warming is not caused by humans