Packing List Page: Date: Of Ref# Sender: Name: Address: Recipient: Name: Address: Ci: Fill & Download for Free

Joshua Levy has already written about Peter Norvig's completely absurd now-17,259-word palindrome.Here's an almost 5000-word multi-sentence palindrome essay. It's mostly gibberish, but it makes syntactical sense, and that's all that matters.Star? Not I! Movie – it too has a star in or a cameo who wore mask – cast are livewires.Soda-pop straws are sold, as part-encased a hot tin, I saw it in mad dog I met. Is dog rosy? Tie-dye booths in rocks.All ewes lessen ill. I see sheep in Syria? He, not I, deep in Syria, has done. No one radio drew old one.Many moths – I fondle his; no lemons are sold. Loot delis, yob, moths in a deli bundle his tin. Pins to net a ball I won – pins burst input. I loot to get a looter a spot paler. Arm a damsel – doom a dam. Not a base camera was in a frost, first on knees on top spot. Now a camera was a widened dam.Ask: Cold, do we dye? No, hot – push tap, set on to hosepipe. Nuts in a pod liven.A chasm regrets a motto of a fine veto of wars. Too bad – I all won. A sadist sent cadets – a war reign a hero derides. A bad loser, a seer, tossed a cradle – he begat to cosset – a minaret for Carole, Beryl, Nora. We’re not as poor to self.I risk cold as main is tidal. As not one to delay burden, I don’t set it on “hot”. A foot made free pie race losses runnier. As draw won pull, eye won nose. Vile hero saw order it was in – even a moron saw it – no, witnessed it: Llama drops – ark riots. Evil P.M. in a sorer opus enacts all laws but worst arose. Grab a nosey llama – nil lesser good, same nicer omen.In pins? No, it is open. If a top spins, dip in soot.Madam, as I desire, dictates: Pull aside, damsels, I set a rag not for a state bastion. A test I won e.g. a contest I won.Kidnap, in part, an idle hero. Megastars, red, rosy, tied no tie. Blast! A hero! We do risk a yeti’s opposition!He too has a wee bagel still up to here held.Demigods pack no mask, cap nor a bonnet, for at last a case is open – I left a tip – it wets. A dog wets too. Radios to help pay my tip, pull a tip.Ale, zoo beer, frets yon animal. Can it? New sex arose but, we sots, not to panic – it’s ale – did I barrel? Did I lose diadem, rare carrot in a jar of mine? Droop as tops sag – unseen knots.A cat ate straw as buck risk cud; evil foe, nil a red nag ate? Bah! Plan it – silage. Model foot in arboreta.I, dark Satanist, set fire – voodoo – to slat. I design a metal as parrot, I deem it now. One vast sum is no ten in set – amen! Indeed, nine drag a yam, nine drag a tie. Dame nabs flower; can we help man? Woman is worse nob.Mud level rose, so refill a rut. A nag of iron I made to trot I defied – I risk leg and its ulnae. Can a pen I felt to bid dollar or recite open a crate, open a cradle, his garret?Sample hot Edam in a pan. I’m a rotten digger – often garden I plan, I agreed; All agreed? Aye, bore ensign; I’d a veto – I did lose us site. Wool to hem us? No, cotton. Site pen in acacias or petals a last angel bee frets in.I met a gorilla (simian); a mate got top snug Noel fire-lit role. Manet, Pagnol, both girdle his reed bogs.Flan I reviled, a vet nods to order it, Bob, and assign it. Totem users go help mates pull as eye meets eye. Son – mine – pots a free pie, yes? No. Left a tip? Order a dish to get. A ring is worn – it is gold. Log no Latin in a monsignor, wet or wise. Many a menu to note carrot.Cat in a boot loots; As I live, do not tell! A bare pussy, as flat on fire, I know loots guns, fires a baton, nets a hero my ale drop made too lax.If it is to rain, a man is a sign; I wore macs, no melons rot. I use moths if rats relive, sir, or retire.Vendor pays: I admire vendee, his pots net roe. Nine dames order an opal fan; I’ll ask cold log fire vendor to log igloo frost. Under Flat Six exist no devils.Marxist nods to Lenin. To Lenin I say: “Mama is a deb, besides a bad dosser.”Gen it up to get “ova” for “egg”. I recall a tarot code: yell at a dessert side-dish sale. Yes/nos a task cartel put correlate: E.S.P. rocks a man. I am a man, am no cad, I’m aware where it’s at!Fire! Its an ogre-god to help, man, as I go. Do not swap; draw, pull a troll!It’s not a cat I milk – calf, for a fee, sews a button – knit or tie damsel over us. Mined gold lode I fill until red nudes I met in a moor-top bar can. I sit, I fill a diary – trap nine men in ten-part net – oh, sir, I ask, cod nose? No, damp eel.So, to get a name! I say, Al! I am Al! Last, I felt, to breed, deer begat.To can I tie tissue – damp – or deliver Omani artist – a man of Islam.In a den mad dogs lived on minis a signor who lived afore targets in at. As eremites pull, I, we, surf, fantasise, mend a bad eye. No hero met satyr; Tony, as I stressed, won’t, so cosset satyr.A vet on isles made us sign it, a name. Foe man one sub.Aside no dell I fret a wallaby; metal ferrets yodel, like so. On a wall I ate rye. Bored? No, was I rapt! One more calf? O.K., calf, one more, bossy! No! Lock cabin, rob yam, sip martini. Megastar was in a risk.Cat? No, I’m a dog; I’m a sad loyal pet. A design I wore – kilts (a clan); if net drawn, I put it up. Royal spots snag – royal prevents rift.Composer, good diet, are both super, God – label it a love of art, lustre. Video bored, no wise tale e.g. a mini tale – no sagas seen. Knack: cede no foes a canal.Pay – as I sign I lie; clear sin it is; e.g. “Amadeus” sign I – lira for ecu, decimal – sin as liar.Trad artistes pull a doom, a drawer won’t.Is it sold loot? No, I suffered loss. A man is god; Amen! I came nice Tahiti (sic).It’s ale for a ban if for a fast – is role to help mash turnip? Use zoo? No – grasp order – use no zoos. Warts on time did sag.No grade “X” “A” Level? Oh, “A”! I’d a “B” or a “C”. So – pot? No, we lop. Date? Take no date! Bah! Play L.P.Miss (a lass, all right?) flew to space in NASA era. Rose no (zero) cadets ate raw. As a wise tart I fined rags red Lenin, we help pay bet – a risk – cash to Brian. I put a clam in a pool – a pool wets.Mahdi puts a stop to harem – miss it in one vote, lost in one, veto of none. Post-op, no tonsil; I ate; no tastier, eh? We sleep at noon time so I dare not at one; no time stops as I time tides. A bed: under it, roll; in a mania, panic!In a pond I did as Eros as Lee felt tenrec. “Ink” – list it under “I”. Termites put pen in a way. Democrats wonder, I too. To slay moths a dog did.I saw elf; elf, far now, is a devilish taboo, rag-naked. I hid a bootleg disc. I, saboteur, toss it in. Oops! No legs! Laminated, a cask, conker in it, negates all if it is simple.Hot pages are in a mag, nor will I peer, familiar tat, so lewd, native rot. Toner, ewe wore no trace; vagabond ewes do. Oh, Ada! Have pity! A pitiable eel – “Oh wet am I!” – to save, note: bite gill as I do.Call a matador minor, eh? As I live, don’t! Is torero no rigid animal debaser if tipsy? Ale drew esteem in a matador. A bolero, monks I rate play or go dig rocks; a can I step on.Go! Gas – it evades a bedsit – set a roost on fire. Boss sent a faded eclair to green imp or dog, I’d don a belt to boot it; if Ada hid a boot, panic.I mock comic in a mask, comedian is a wit if for eventide. Vole no emu loved is not a ferret, so pet or witness a weasel if not. I hired less, am not so bossy, as yet amateur.To stir evil, Edna can impugn a hotel: bad loos, hot on Elba: I may melt. Tart solicits it rawer, gets it rare. Push crate open; I ram buses, use no trams.Did I say, not to idiot nor a bare ferret, to trap rat, strap loops rat? Stewpot was on. Hot? I was red! Lessen it! Fine man on pot? No, pen inside by a bad law. So I made rips – nine delays.Some Roman items in a.m. ordered “Is room for a ban?” “It is,” I voted: I sat pews in aisle. Beryl, no tiro to my burden, made off for a contest, I won kiss. I may raid fine dales. I raid lochs if I to help am.Forecast for Clare v. Essex: If no rain, a man is ref. Fusspots net foxes.Senor is a gnome, latinos’ bad eyesore. Help misses run to border, Casanova, now, or drab hotel.Ma has a heron; I sleep, pet’s on nose, sir! Rev. I rag loved art live – fine poser. Ultra-plan: I feign, I lie: cedar to disperse – last one? No, last six. Enamel bonnet for a dark car to toss a snail at. In it all, Eve lost; Seth’s a hero slain on a trap – Rise, Sir Ogre Tamer.Upon Siamese box I draw design. I, knight able to help, missed an alp seen in Tangier of fine metal pots. Tin I mined rages – order nine, melt ten. Tone radios; tones are not to concur. Ten-tone radar I bomb – best fire-lit so hostel side meets eerie mini red domicile. A gulf to get is not a rare tale; no time to nod.Row on, evil yobs, tug, pull. If dogs drowse, fill a rut. An era’s drawers draw. Put in mid-field in a band I dig a tub deep. Staff on a remit did refill a minaret.Sam’s a name held in a flat, or, sir, bedsit. I wonder, is it illicit ore? No ties? A bit under? Retarded? Is ‘owt amiss? I’m on pot; not so Cecil, a posh guy a hero met. A red date was not to last so Cecil sat.Tip? An iota to pay, a dot; sad, I drop item. I’d ask, call, Odin, a Norseman’s god: “Pay payee we owe radio dosh o.n.o.” I to me? No, I to media.Peril in golf – is ball a “fore”? K.O.!Vexed I am re my raw desires. Alto has eye on nose but tone-muser pianist is level-eyed. I lost a tie. Blast! In uni no grades are musts. Avast! Never port! Sea may be rut.Part on rose? – It’s a petal. Define metal:Tin is . (I gulp!) can!I am a fine posse man, I pull a ton. Ron, a man I put on, I made suffer of evil emu’s sadism. Leo’s never a baron – a bad loss but evil – topple him, Leo’s lad. Assign a pen, can I? A pal is note decoding.Is damp mule tail-less? No, ill; I breed for its tone. Radio speed, to grower, grew. Open a lot? No, stamp it; if for a free peso – not ecu -deign it. Times ago stone rates, e.g. at Scilly, display a wont.No wish to get a design I, Sir Des, I’ve let? No bus sees Xmas fir. O.K. – cab – tart it up; tie lots – diamond, log or tinsel; first end errata edit. So “le vin (A.C.)”, Martini, Pils lager, one tonic.I pegged a ball up to here when I got a top star role, Beryl. Gun is too big – won’t I menace? Yes? No?Ill? A cold? Abet icecap’s nip. U.S.A. meets E.E.C. inside tacit sale – see! Beg a cotton tie, ma! No trial, so dodo traps exist. Arabs under-admire card label good hood stole.In rage erupted Etna. Will a rotunda, bare villa, to tyro. Lack car? Non-U! Get a mini! My, my, Ella, more drums per gong; get a frog – nil less. Rod, never ever sneer. Got to?I disperse last pair of devils (ah!) here today or else order cash to breed emus. Said I: “Are both superlative?” C.I.D. assign it lemon peel still. I wore halo of one bottle from a ref (football) – a tip; so hit last ego slap a mate got.Late p.m. I saw gnu here (non-a.m.) or an idea got a dog to nod – I made felt to boot.Fill in a lad? Nay, not all, Edna – lash to buoy. Did you biff one Venus? Not I! “Broth, girl!” ladies ordered – “No, with gin!” – a fine plate, maybe suet; no carton I made rots in it.Med: a hill, Etna, clears in it. Ali, Emir, to slap in/slam in. All in all I made bad losers sign it – alibi. Set a lap for a level bat.A bed, sir, eh? To put cat now? Drat! Such an idyll of a dog’s lair! That`s it, open it – a cage! Big nit sent rat! Some day (A.D.) send ewe. No, draw a pot now, do! Of wary rat in a six ton tub.Edna, ask satyr: “Tel. a.m.?” No, tel. p.m.; Israeli tuner is damp. Use item: “Anna Regina”. No! Dye main room (“salle”) red!Nice caps for a sea cadet in U.S.A. – Now I, space cadet, am it, sea vessel rep. Pin it on Maria, help Maria fondle her fine hotpot. No! Meet; set up to net, avoid a lesion. Set acid arena: Bruno one, Reg nil. Like it to sign in? Even I am nine-toed! I vote votes.Oh, can a nose-rut annoy? No, best is Dorset. I know, as liar, to snoop, malign. “I’ll order it to get a bedroom door,” began a miser I fed.Am I to peer, fan? Is a door by metal? Ere sun-up, drowse, nod, lose magnet. Food? Buns? I’ll ask. Corn? I’ll ask. Corn – I snack. Cats snack (cold rat). Sum for a bag: nil. First, is remit “traps in net”? Yes, on a par. Coots yell over a dam I made. Bared nudist went a foot, I made roots. I tip a canon: “Row, sir, at same tide; man one: row tug.”Sewer of denim axes a wide tail – a terror recipe to hero made manic. I, to resign? I ? Never!“OFT I FELT ITS SENSUOUSNESS” – title fit for evening is erotic; I named a more hot epic – error retaliated – I was examined for ewe’s gut, wore no named item.A star is worn on a cap, it is too red. Am I too fat? Newts I’d under a bed. Am I mad? Are volleys too crap? A nosey tennis part-timer sits rifling a bar of mustard.Lock cans, stack cans in rocks, all in rocks, all I snub. Do often games, old ones, word-pun use; relate, my brood, as in a free pot I made fires, I manage brood. Moor debate got tired rolling, I lampoon, so trail saw on kites.Rod sits, ebony on nature, so Nana chose to veto video. Ten in main evening is O.T.T. i.e. killing; Ere noon, urban eradicates noise, lad, I ovate not. Put esteem on top (to hen, if reheld).No fair ample hair – am not I nipper-less? Eva estimated ace caps I won as united. A Caesar of space, Cinderella’s moor, Niamey Don (a Niger-an name), ties up mad sire, nut! I, Lear, simpleton male, try tasks “A” and “E”but not “XI”. Sanitary raw food won top award one Wednesday – a demo.Start nesting, I beg a cat. I? Nepotist? Ah, trials, God! A folly, Dinah, custard won’t act up; other is debatable. Velar: of palate; sibilating is “s”.Resold: a bed, a mill, an ill animal – snip, also trim. Eilat in Israel can tell I had ‘em. Tin I stored (am I not raconteuse?) by a metal pen. If a night, I wondered, rose, I’d all right orbit on sun, even off.I buoy, did you? Both Sal and Ella, Tony and Alan (“Ill if too bottle-fed, am I?”) do not. God! A toga! Ed in a Roman one, rehung! Was I, M.P. et al., to get a map? Also get salt? I, hospital lab to offer, am, or felt to be, no fool – a hero.Will it sleep? No, melting is sad ice. Vital re-push to be raid, I assume. Deer, both sacred roes, Leroy (a doter, eh?) has lived for. I, apt sales rep’s idiot to greens, revere vendors selling or fat egg-nog reps.Murder O’Malley, my mini mate – gun on rack. Calory total: liver, a bad nut or all I wanted (“et puree garnie”): lots. “Do, oh do, ogle bald racer,” I’m dared – N.U.S. bar at six.Esparto, dodo’s lair to name it, not to cage bees, elasticated, is nice. Esteem, as up in space, cite bad local lions, eye can emit now. G.I. boots in ugly rebel or rat’s potato gin (eh?) were hot. Pull a bad egg – epic, I note, no regal slip in it. Ram can . (I’ve lost idea!)Tarred nets, rifles, nitro, gold – no maid stole it. Put it, rat, back or if Sam (“X”) sees sub on televised rising, I sedate Goths. I won’t – no way.Alps, idyllic stage set, are not so gas-emitting, I educe. To nose, peer, far off, I tip mats onto lane. Power grew or got deep so I dare not stir. Of deer, billions sell. I ate lump – mad sign, I do cede – tonsil a pain, acne pang is sad also. Elm I help pot, live – tub’s sold; a ban or a bar, even so, elms, I’d assume, live for. Effused am I not, up in a manor, not all up in a mess.Open if a main A.C. plug is in it.Late men I fed late – pasties or not. “Rapture” by a maestro prevents a vast sum erased.Argon in units, albeit at solid eye level, sits in a . (I presume not) . tube, son. No eyes: a hot laser – is Ed wary?Mermaid, ex- evoker of all A.B.s, I flog. Nil I repaid. Emotion! Emotion, oh so do I dare, woe!Wee yap-yap dog’s name’s Ron. An idol lacks a dime tip, or did, as today a potato in a pitta slice costs a lot – tons. A wet adder ate more hay. Ugh! So, pal, ice cost on top? No, miss, I’m a two-sided rat, erred nut, I base it on erotic ill; It is I, red now; it is debris, rot.Alf, an idle he-man as “master animal lifer” did time, ran off at speed, but a G.I. did nab an idle if dim nit. Upwards rewards are natural life’s words, God. Fill up guts, boy, live now or do not emit one later. A rat on site got flu.Gaelic, I’m odd Erin, I’m Eire, esteemed islet. So hostile rifts ebb. Mob, I.R.A., dare not net R.U.C. – no cotton. Erase not, so I dare not nettle men in red rose garden – I’m in it.Stop late men if foreign at nine. Esplanades, simple hotel, bath, gin – king is Edward IX; obese; Ma is no pure mater. Go! Rise, sir; part anon.I also rehash tests – ‘O’ Level Latin, Italian. S.A.S., so, to track radar. Often nobleman exists alone – not sales reps – I do. Trade ceiling, i.e. final part, lures open if evil trade.Volga River rises on no steppe. Elsinore has a hamlet – Oh, Bard, row on Avon!A sacred robot nurses simple hero’s eye; dabs on it a lemon. Gas, iron, Essex often stops, suffers in a mania. Ron fixes several crofts, acer of maple. Hot, I fish; cold, I arise laden; if diary amiss, I know it set no car off. Foe-damned ruby motor, it only rebels.Ian I swept aside to visit, in a bar of moorside red, Romanis met in a more mossy ale den. Inspired am I, Oswald. A bay bed is nine p on top. No name, niftiness- elder saw it. Oh no! Saw top wet star’s pool – part star, part otter. Refer a baron to idiot, Tony, as I did.Smart ones use submarine.Poet, arch-super-artiste, grew artistic. I lost rattle; my amiable, not oh so old, able to hang up, mina, can deliver it, so true. “Ta, matey!” – says so Boston (Mass.) elder I hit.On file S.A.E. was sent – I wrote poster re fat on side, volume one – loved it, never off it, I was in. Aide mocks a manic; I mock comic, I nap: too bad I had a fit, I too. Bottle ban odd, I go drop mine, ergo trial ceded a fatness, sober if not so, or a test is debased.A vet is agog – no pet’s in a cask – corgi dog, royal pet, a risk no more.Lob a rod at a man I meet. Sewer delays pit fires – a bedlam in a dig – iron ore rots it. No devil is a hero – Nimrod.At a mall a cod is all I get. I bet on Eva, so Tim ate whole eel bait, I pay tip, Eva had a hood sewed. No B.A. gave car to Nero, we were not to rev it and we lost a trail; I’m a free pill, I wrong a man. I erase gap; to help miss it, I fill a set. A gent in ire knocks a cadet.Animals’ gel on spoon – it is so true to basics – I’d gel; too bad I hide kangaroo baths – I lived as I won raffle, flew as I did go, dash, to my, also too tired now, star comedy: A wan, inept, upset I’m retired, nut; its ilk, nicer. Nettle feels a sore; sad, I did no panic in a pain, am an ill or tired, nude, based item; it is a spot.Semitone, not a tone, radios emit; no, on tape; elsewhere it’s a tone.Tail is not on; pots open on foot, even on it, so let oven (on, it is) simmer – a hotpot’s a stupid ham stew.Loop a loop, animal – cat up in air.Both sacks I rate by apple hewn in elder’s garden if it rates, I was aware – tasted a core.Zones or areas, Annie, cap, so twelfth girl, lass, alas, simply (alpha beta) done, Kate. Tadpole won top Oscar, Obadiah, “O” Level axed.Argon gas did emit no straw, so ozone sure drops argon, oozes up in Ruth’s ample hotel or sits afar off in a bar – of elastic, is it?I hate cinema; cinema dogs in a mass. Older effusion to old – lost, is it now? Reward: a mood.All upsets it.Radar trails an Islamic educer of a riling issue, damages it in Israel. Ceiling is, I say, a plan, a case of one deck. Can knees sag as one Latin image elates, I wonder?Oboe diverts ultra foe, volatile bald ogre – push to berate; I’d do, ogre. So, p.m., Oct. first, never play organ’s stops – lay or put it up in ward ten.Final cast like rowing – I sedate play, old as am I, God! Am I! On tacks I ran; I saw rats. A Gemini tramp is May born.I back colony’s sober omen of lack of lace. Rome, not Paris, a wonder.Obey retail law – a noose killed oyster. Reflate my ball, a water-filled one. Disabuse no name of emanating issue.Damsels, I note, vary tastes so cost now desserts. I say no! Try taste more honeyed. A bad nemesis at naff ruse will upset. I, mere Satanist, e.g. rater of a devil – (Oh wrong is a sin!) – I’m no devil’s god, damned.Animals, if on a mat, sit. Rain, a more vile drop, made us site it in a cottage. Breed deer – bottle fits a llama.I lay, as I emanate, go to sleep, mad ones on docks – air is hot. Entrap, net, nine men in party raid – all if it is in a crab-pot room, an itemised, under-lit, nullified old log den – I’m sure voles made it rot in knot.Tubas we see far off lack limit. A cat on still or tall upward paws to no dog is an ample hot-dog, ergo nastier if tastier, eh? We, raw amid a conman, a mama in a mask, corpse et al., err.Octuple tracks at a son’s eyelash side distressed a tall eye doctor, a tall ace, rigger of a vote: got put in egress; odd, abased, is ebbed, as I am, Amy, asinine lot! Nine lots! Don’t six rams live? Don’t six exist?Alfred, nuts or fool gigolo, trod never if gold locks all in a flap on a red rose; made nine or ten stops.I heed never, I’m Daisy, a prod never, I terrorise viler starfish. To me suitors, no lemons, came rowing. Is a sin a mania? Rot!Sit! I fix a looted amp or delay more, hasten not. A baser if snug stool, wonkier, if not – Alf says – super, a ballet to no devil, is a stool too. Ban it, actor, race to no tune.May names I wrote wrong (Is no man in it, a long old log?) sit in row, sign irate Goths; I dare drop it. At felon’s eye I peer, fast open – I’m nosey, esteem eyes. All upset, ample hogs resume totting. Is sad nabob tired? Roots don’t evade liver in Alf’s gob.Deers I held right; oblong, apt enamel or tile rifle on gun spot to get a man – aim is all. I rogate, minister. Feeble gnats, alas late, prosaic, a canine pet is not to consume hot.Loo, wet, issues old idiot; evading, I sneer, obey a deer, gall a deer, gain alpine dragnet for egg I’d net to ram in a pan I made to help master. Rags I held, arcane poet, arcane poetic error, all odd; I bottle fine panacean lust. I’d nag elks I ride if editor toted a minor. I fog a natural life.Roses, or level dumb ones – rows in a mown, ample, hewn acre. Wolfsbane made it a garden in May, a garden indeed.Nine mates, nine tons I must save now on time – editor raps a late man. G.I.s edit also, too. Do over if tests in a task radiate. Rob ran; I, too, fled.“Omega” – list in alphabet.A gander, a line of live ducks, irk cubs. A wart, set at a cast on knee, snug as spots.A poor denim for a janitor, racer, armed aide, solid idler – rabid; I’d elastic in a pot, tons to sew.Tubes or axes went in a clam, in an oyster. Free booze – lap it all up. Pity, my apple hot, so I’d a root stew. God, a stew! Tip it at feline! Posies, a cat’s altar often, no baron packs. A monk caps dog – I meddle here – hot? Pull its leg! A bee was a hoot, eh?No, it is opposite. Yaks I rode wore hats, albeit on deity’s orders. Rats age more held in a trap, nip and I know it – set no cage now.It’s eta; no, it’s a beta – Tsar of Tonga rates isles. Mad Ed is all upset at cider, is Ed? Is a madam too? Snip? I’d snip, spot a fine position, snip nine more cinemas.Do ogres sell in a mall? Yes, on a barge so rats row tubs.Wall last canes up or Eros, an imp, lives to irk, rasp or dam all tides sent. I won’t – I was no Roman – even I saw tired row – a sore. He lives on. “No!” we yell.Up, now! Wards are in nurses’ sole care. I, peer, fed, am too fat? Oh, not I, test no dined ruby ale; dote not on salad it’s in – I am sad.Locks I rifle so troops atone re war. Only rebel or a crofter animates so cottage beheld arcades, so trees are sold, abased. I redo, rehang, I err – a wasted act; nests I’d – as an owl – laid. A boot’s raw foot, even if a foot to master, germs (ah!) can evil do.Pan is tune-pipe – so hot notes, paths up to honeydew.Odd locks, a maddened (I was aware) macaw on top, spot no seen knots, rifts or fan, I saw. Are maces a baton, madam? Oodles, madam? Rare laptops are too late – got too lit up.Nits rub – snip now, I’ll abate, not snip, nits I held.Nubile Danish tomboys I led to old loser as no melons I held; no fish to my name. Nod lower, do I dare? No, one nods a hairy snipe. (Edit: one hairy snipe, eh?) See silliness, else we’ll ask cornish to obey deity’s or god’s item. I, God, damn it! I was in it! To Hades, acne trap, sad loser! As warts pop, a dosser I – we – vile rat, sack! Same row, oh woe! Macaroni, rats, as a hoot, tie. I vomit on rats.Source: Longest Palindrome

NOT ALARMING NOT WARMINGThe Arctic floats on water and ocean currents vary warming and cooling in lock step with Arctic ice expanding and contracting. The earth’s climate is only understood with data from a long horizon. What happens in one year is surely just noise, although this just in and it is rather ironic that based on the last 5 years the Arctic ice is expanding beyond the limits of 2016.Record-Early Arctic Sea Ice GROWTHArticles Extreme Weather GSMRECORD-EARLY ARCTIC SEA ICE GROWTHSEPTEMBER 3, 2020 CAP ALLON“According to both the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) and the National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC), Arctic Sea Ice has turned an astonishing corner these past few weeks.In order to get a true picture of the state of sea ice it is necessary to determine both its extent AND its volume, reads the DMI’s polarportal.dk.Well, looking at the true picture, DMI data clearly shows Arctic Sea Ice volume (or thickness) began building at a record-early date this year and at a record-pace, too. And while the 2020 season was a little on the low side nothing whatsoever out of the ordinary occurred — until now, that is:[polarportal.dk]Over the past two weeks we have witnessed the earliest uptick in ice building for quite some time. The melt ended and the ice began building in the third week of August, taking with it the apocalyptic prophesies of many a MSM shill.“This is a historic shift in the Arctic,” says David Mauriello of the ORP.And after closely tracking the current trend, Mauriello’s prediction is for the Arctic circle to be all-but covered in ice within the next 4-6 weeks.”2020 November2016 NovemberThere is much evidence that the Earth is cooling and the comfort we have enjoyed under the Holocene interglacial now over 12,000 years is ending. This should not be a surprise as interglacials in the past lasted a few thousand years.Somehow big media push fears that the Arctic is melting and this would be a tragedy. See James Hansen predictions about the Arctic and global warming.NASA “Climate Prophet” James Hansen said the Arctic would be “Free of Summer Ice” by 2018Bolstered by the sycophantic-praise he received following his 1988 Congressional testimony on man-made global warming, NASA climate scientist/activist James Edward Hansen continued his prophesies well into the 2000s–despite his ever-growing list of climate fails.ElectroverseHow many times do alarmism cry wolf about the melting of the Arctic and are proven wrong? Many. Here is the data showing no such melting. Here is the thing if the Arctic is melting but the Antarctic ice is expanding then the Arctic melt is not global, Right?Further the time scale must be in many decades or centuries not annual snap shots or we are just witnessing climate variability.The Antarctic is the coldest place on earth and contains 90 % of global ice and is 10 times larger than the Arctic. The Antarctic is not melting and has been expanding for at least the last 60 years. There is a vast amount of ice there.Impossible to claim that climate change is making the North Pole and melt and theSouth Pole not. This is as foolish as thinking a lady can be half pregnant.What follows are a number science studies confirming that fear of some rapid Arctic melting is false. It is not happening. Source of these references - Search results for "arctic melt"Arctic Temps Show Little Change Over Past 90 Years, In Sync With Oceanic Surface Temperature CyclesBy P Gosselin on13. January 2021Data show Arctic more stable than media doomsayers portray it to be. In the latter part of the latest Klimaschau video, Arctic mean temperature trends above 70°N are examined: The first chart (8:38) goes back to 2000. Though the running 37-month average rose until 2006, it’s been steady ever since: Source: climate4you Over the last […]Posted in Misc. | 1 ResponseGreenland Fall Temperatures Unchanged. Proxy Data Show No Warming At 8 Of 9 Antarctic Peninsula Sites Since 1830!By P Gosselin on29. December 2020By Kirye and Pierre Gosselin Before looking at Antarctica Peninsula, we first take a look at Greenland, which also is considered by the global warming alarmists to be part of the most threatening tipping points. If the ice on Greenland ever melted, like they warn it will, sea levels globally would rise some 6 meters. […]Posted in Antarctic, Arctic | Leave a response3 More New Studies Show Modern Arctic Sea Ice Extent Is Greater Than Nearly Any Time In The Last 10,000 YearsBy Kenneth Richard on29. October 2020For years scientists have been using biomarker evidence (IP25, PIP25) to reconstruct the Arctic’s sea ice history. The evidence shows modern (20th-21st century) Arctic sea ice is at its greatest extent since the Holocene began. Scientists (Wu et al., 2020) have determined that from about 14,000 to 8,000 years ago, when CO2 lingered near 250 […]2 More Studies Affirm Nothing Unusual Or Unprecedented Is Occurring In Polar Climates TodayBy Kenneth Richard on9. November 2020Only a few thousand years ago, when CO2 levels were both stable and low (~265 ppm), the (1) Arctic had far less ice and more vegetation than it does now and (2) the massive rate of ice melt in Antarctica rendered modern melt rates negligible by comparison.A new study (Cherezova et al., 2020) reveals that until about 6,500 years ago Bolshevik Island in the Russian High Arctic brimmed with grass, birch and willow trees, and large herbivores grazing on grass year-round. At that time sea levels were rising at rates of 7.9 mm/yr, which is more than 5 times faster than the global sea level rise trend since 1958 (~1.4 mm/yr, Frederikse et al., 2018).Today this same High Arctic island is treeless with “very scarce vegetation.” It is locked in sea ice and mean annual temperatures only reach -13°C, which is a “similar climate to the Lateglacial.” Modern climate warming “is not observed” in either the meteorological or ice core data (Tvyordoe Lake) for this region. The ice caps are today about the same size as they were during the peak of the last ice age (~20,000 years ago).Image Source: Cherezova et al., 2020Another new study (Jones et al., 2020) reveals that from about 7,500 to 4,500 years ago, when CO2 was about 150 ppm lower than today, Antarctica’s Ross Sea glaciers abruptly lost 220 meters (!) of ice surface height. This ice loss – at times reaching >400 cm per year – occurred throughout the region regardless of the topography. This strongly implies the “overarching external driver” of the glacier retreat was an ocean warming trend.The authors point out that the ice surface lowering may have “continued below the present-day glacier surface,” only to advance again during the last few hundred years.Image Source: Jones et al., 2020A recent study (Sinclair et al., 2012) indicates the sea surface temperatures in this region (western Ross Sea) have been rapidly cooling (-1.59°C/decade) since 1979, and there has been no net ocean warming since 1882.Image Source: Sinclair et al., 2012Still another study from this region (Yokoyama et al., 2016) corroborates a “widespread collapse of the Ross Ice Shelf” between 5,000 and 1,500 years ago. Modern melting rates are the slowest in the last 5,000 years and there was “much warmer water beneath the ice shelf at 5 ka compared with the present.”These studies strongly imply modern polar climate changes and ice melt rates in both hemispheres are neither unprecedented or unusual. In fact, if there is anything anomalous about today’s polar climates, it’s that they are colder and ice melt is less pronounced than just about any time in the last 8,000 years.Images Source: Yokoyama et al., 2016https://notrickszone.com/In The Arctic, AMO/NAO ‘Predominantly Force Ocean Temperatures’ And ‘Cause Major Melting Events’By Kenneth Richard on1. October 20186 New Papers Link Arctic/North Atlantic Climate Changes To Natural Factors 1. Natural variability/NAO/AMO “predominantly force ocean temperatures” and Greenland ice sheet melt Hahn et al., 2018 “North Atlantic Natural Variability Modulates Emergence of Widespread Greenland Melt in a Warming Climate … Using reanalysis data and a large ensemble of climate model simulations, we find that a […]Posted in Arctic, Natural Oceanic Oscillations, Natural Variability | 75 ResponsesNew Arctic Study Finds Spring Sea Ice Melted 2 Months Earlier Than Today During Roman, Medieval TimesBy Kenneth Richard on16. August 2018Scientists have determined that today’s Arctic sea ice concentrations are still much higher than they have been for most of the last several thousand years, undermining claims that modern era Arctic sea ice changes are remarkable, unusual, or unprecedented. Source: Kolling et al., 2018 In the graphical illustration of Late Holocene West Greenland sea ice changes […]Posted in Arctic, Paleo-climatology, Sea Ice | 22 ResponsesFIBBING ABOUT GLACIER MELTS AND MOREHotel snowed in Glacier National Park Spring 2016 [I grew up a few miles from the Park saw major Spring snow cover]Snowed InSurviving a winter in Glacier National Park takes a strong marriage—and 25 pounds of coffee.https://www.npca.org/articles/1144-snowed-inThe Rational Climate e-BookPatrice PeyotSelect passages on misleading climate science“The inconvenient reality is that even this easy gamble, yes they melt, has often been lost by the manipulators. It was already reported how the managers of Glacier National Park, a large wilderness area in Montana's Rocky Mountains, have had to remove signs stating that «glaciers will be gone by 2020» as nature did not want to cooperate with their dire predictions.This was not the first time that glaciers had been devious and contradicted lightly formulated forecasts. The leak of the Climatic Research Unit's (CRU) “Climategate 208” emails from the University of East Anglia (UEA), as if not embarrassing enough, coincided with the exposure of some blatant errors in the IPCC AR4 report (IPCC, 2007a), most notably a claim that Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035, an affirmation that turned out to completely lack of any scientific basis, e.g. (Bagla, 2009), (Cogley, 2011) and led to a contorted apology of the Chair and Vice-Chairs of the IPCC, and the Co-Chairs of the IPCC Working Groups (IPCC, 2010). Senior glaciologist Vijay KumarRaina, formerly of the Geological Survey of India, had to deny the unsubstantiated claims by IPCC by dismissing that measurements made of a handful of glaciers would be representative of the fate of India's 10,000 or so Himalayanglaciers and that they would be shrinking rapidly in response to climate change (Raina, 2009).The document, i.e. a “Discussion Paper, Ministry of Environment and Forests” is not available any longer on its original web site (electronic form of book burning?) but the Heartland Institute archives it. In it, Raina (2009) states “Glaciers in the Himalayas, over a period of the last 100 years, behave in contrasting ways... It is premature to make a statement that glaciers in the Himalayas are retreating abnormally because of the global warming.A glacier is affected by a range of physical features and a complex interplay of climatic factors. It is therefore unlikely that the snout movement of any glacier can be claimed to be a result of periodic climate variation until many centuries of observations become available.While glacier movements are primarily due to climate and snowfall, snout movements appear to be peculiar to each particularglacier” and in fact they “cooperate” so little that “one side of a glacier tongue may be advancing while the other is stagnant or even retreating” Raina (2009). Vijay Kumar Raina's is now former or ex- of all the positions he occupied andis identified as the author209 of a controversial discussion paper and tagged by desmog as a member of climate resistance210, an honor; imagine he had the gall to state “Climate changes naturally all the time, sometimes dramatically.The hypothesis that our emissions of CO2 have caused, or will cause, dangerous warming is not supported by the evidence”. Well, getting rid of him (Raina) will not make Himalayan glacier melt faster, but many will probably have rejoiced….”Ref = Dr. Patrice PeyotThe Rational Climate e-BookThis book addresses all aspects of climate and paleo-climates, from atmospheric physics, to astronomical influences and geological and geochemical drivers. It covers the computer models claiming to simulate the climate and the policies that are projected from themhttps://patricepoyet.org/See new book review -The Rational Climate e-BookBy Andy May Patrice Poyet has just published a new 431-page eBook entitled, The Rational Climate e-Book, it is free to download here. Dr. Poyet studied geochemistry, remote sensing, and computer sc…https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/01/18/the-rational-climate-e-book/WRITTEN BY PIERRE GOSSELIN ONJAN 14, 2021. POSTED IN LATEST NEWSArctic Temps Show Little Change Over Past 90 YearsData shows the Arctic more stable than media doomsayers portray it to be.In the latter part of the latest Klimaschau video, Arctic mean temperature trends above 70°N are examined.The first chart (8:38) goes back to 2000. Though the running 37-month average rose until 2006, it’s been steady ever since:Source: climate4youOver the last five years, the plot in fact shows some cooling off.No real warming since the 1930sNext, looking back long term, we examine the data going back 100 years:Source: climate4youThe above chart from climate4you shows that the Arctic mean temperatures were almost as warm back in the 1930s and 40s as they are today.Moreover, Arctic temperatures trended downward from 1930 to 1988, a time when manmade CO2 emissions were rising worldwide.Next from 1990 to 2016, they rose. In the last few years, there’s been no increase. So what’s really happening?Ocean cycles (stupid)So why have Arctic temperatures not gone up continuously like they were supposed to do, according to CO2 global warming theory?The answer of course is that there are obviously many other factors at play, some being much more powerful than trace gas CO2. For example, oceanic sea surface temperature cycles, here especially the AMO.AMO likely the powerful driverNext, we roughly superimpose a chart of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), one that also includes cyclone frequency:As the above chart shows, when the AMO was in its warm phase from the 1930s to the 1950s, Arctic temps were warmer. The warm North Atlantic sea surface temperatures warmed the adjacent Arctic.But then by the mid-1970s, the Atlantic sea surface had cooled, and the Arctic responded accordingly.Next in the 1990s and 2000s, the Atlantic sea surface warmed strongly, and so did the Arctic. Arctic temperatures have little to do with atmospheric CO2 concentrations.Cyclones respond to the AMOInterestingly, tropical cyclone frequency also varied in sync with the AMO. During periods of a warm AMO phase, tropical cyclones were tended to be more frequent. And when the AMO was in its cool phase, cyclone frequency tamed down.Unfortunately, activist scientists like to ignore the role of oceanic cycles on climate variability, and constantly fudge the numbers and cook the data to try to pin everything on man-made CO2.Arctic Temps Show Little Change Over Past 90 YearsSlew Of Recent Published Findings Show Man’s Share Of Arctic Ice Melt Grossly Exaggerated, And Uncertain!By P Gosselin on22. April 2018Half a dozen recent papers show that man’s responsibility for Arctic ice melt has in reality been grossly exaggerated and that Arctic sea ice science is fraught with far greater uncertainty than what we are often led to believe. One paper even notes that Arctic sea ice decline could be over. Alarmists often claim that […]Posted in Arctic | 25 ResponsesIce-Free Arctic Fantasies Melting Away As Temperatures Plummet…Sea Ice Mass Grows ImpressivelyBy P Gosselin on14. March 2018German skeptic and weather expert ‘Schneefan’ here writes how climate activist Mark C. Serreze recently announced this year’s sea ice extent was at the smallest all-time area. But since then Arctic temperatures have plummeted and sea ice area has grown to over 14 million square kilometers: At the sea ice portal, the development is clearly […]Posted in Arctic | 52 ResponsesScientists Affirm: ‘No, The Arctic Is Not Melting’ … ‘Nothing Has Changed Since 1900’By Kenneth Richard on16. November 2017Global Warming Theory ‘Completely Disconnected From the Observations’ Extensive analysis of temperature trends in the Arctic reveals that there has been no detectable long-term change since the beginning of the 20th century, and thus predictions of a sea ice-free Arctic in the coming decades due to dramatically rising temperatures are not rooted in observation. Butina, […]Posted in Antarctic, Arctic, Glaciers | 29 ResponsesPolar Stability: Antarctic Cold Deepens, Arctic Refuses To Melt Faster In June/July 2017By P Gosselin on4. August 2017Schneefan at his excellent German climate and weather site http://wobleibtdieerderwaermung.de here reports that Arctic sea ice has grown in mass recently, defying the doomsday scenarios that a re-hyperventilating Al Gore has been hawking lately. Schneefan writes that Arctic sea ice volume at the start of August at about the mean of the 2004 – 2013 […]Arctic Melting Due To Global Warming, But Antarctic Ice Growth Due To Ocean Currents, NSIDC SaysBy P Gosselin on8. October 2012Hooray, Spiegel reports on the Antarctic sea ice record! Though, the piece was pretty much buried in the back pages. Yet, thanks to science reporter Axel Bojanowski, Spiegel at least mentions that the South Pole did set a sea ice record last month, and even presented the following NSIDC chart: September sea ice extent at […]End Of May Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Highest In Five Years… No Evidence Of Warming Or MeltingBy P Gosselin on31. May 2020Over the past 40 years of satellite observation, Antarctic sea ice defied global warming predictions and gained impressively. The mean temperature of the southern ice cap also shows no warming. In 2017, after decades of inconvenient rise, sea ice extent suddenly fell to record low level and panic activity among global warming alarmists began to […]Posted in Antarctic | 4 ResponsesSweden Glacier Melt Far More Rapid In Mid 20th Century Than Today. Arctic Sea Ice Now StabilizingBy P Gosselin on29. March 2020A recent paper published in the Swedish journal Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography authored by Holmlund and Holmlund, found that the strongest melts of the Storglaciären in Sweden occurred between the 1930s and 1960s. The glacier mass then even increased from the early 1970s to the mid 1990s. According to the authors, geodetic volume […]Posted in Arctic, Misc. | 4 ResponsesScientists Find Antarctica Is Rapidly Cooling And Any Ice Sheet Melt Is Not Due To CO2, But NaturalBy Kenneth Richard on15. July 2019Natural variability rules in Antarctica. Scientists identify clouds, wind, and localized solar heating – not CO2 – as the factors driving ice melt. Rising CO2 leads to Antarctic cooling. Image Source: Lüning et al. 2019 Antarctica rapidly cooling in recent decades In a review of the scientific literature, Lüning et al. 2019 report Antarctica as a […]Looking at Arctic data from 1979 then seeing a sharp retraction in 2012, but a sharper rebound in 2017. What do you call this? Melting or expanding?Strong Arctic sea-ice growth this yearAndy May / February 24, 2019Guest Post by JavierFebruary is not over, and Arctic sea-ice extent is already over half a million square kilometers higher than last year at this day.The growing season has not ended, and 2019 Arctic sea-ice extent is already higher than the previous four years and six out of the last 14 years.Figure 1. Arctic sea-ice extent. Note the left edge of the graph is February 1, not January 1. Charctic Interactive Sea Ice GraphArctic sea-ice has stubbornly resisted the very warm years between 2015-2017 caused by the big El Niño. Are we going to see an increase in Arctic sea-ice over the next few years? Only time will tell, but the idea cannot be discarded.Antarctic sea-ice is also growing this year with respect to last year, so global sea-ice extent is going to see an important jump this year.Stay tuned for the March results but the “Arctic melting pause” is alive and kicking 12 years later. It started the year Al Gore said Arctic sea-ice was doomed. Talk about timing.Strong Arctic sea-ice growth this yearARCTIC Ice Hockey StickPosted: July 19, 2018 | Author: Jamie Spry | Filed under:MOTHER NATURE, once again, not complying with the prognostications and computer models of the Climate Crisis Industry!Science MattersUpdate July 18, 2018No one knows how long this divergence of surplus ice will persist, but for now 2018 Arctic ice extent resembles a hockey stick. Presently the ice is 525k km2 above 11 year average (2007 to 2017 inclusive) and ~1M km2 greater than 2007. More detailed report from July 14 below.https://climatism.blog/2018/07/19/arctic-ice-hockey-stick-climatism/ARCTIC Ice Hockey Stick (ARCTIC Ice Hockey Stick)The Arctic is Not Melting away soon or at all.You may be suspicious of charts and words but this photo is of a Russian climate research Ice Breaker ship out of Siberia stuck in the thick ice needing rescue.The Siberian Times‏‪@siberian_timesFollowFollow ‪@siberian_timesMoreA glimpse into work of TransArctic2019 expedition, biggest research of high Arctic since 80s. J'list Natasha Kadyrova says: ‘Our ship gnawed into thick ice floe & froze to be moved along by wind & currents. 15 institutions -3 from Europe-sent teams 2 collect data from ice & water6:11 AM - 28 Apr 2019In June 2018, Arctic ice extent held up against previous years despite the Pacific basins of Bering and Okhotsk being ice-free. The Arctic core is showing little change, perhaps due to increased thickness (volume) as reported by DMI.The image above shows ice extents on day 195 (July 14) for years 2007, 2012, 2017 and 2018. Note this year ice is strong on both Russian and N. American sides. Beaufort Sea and Canadian Archipelago are solid. E. Siberian and Chukchi Seas are also solid, despite early melting in Bering Sea. Hudson and Baffin bays still have…View original post 224 more wordsICE, ICE BABY! Huge Expansion Of Thick Arctic Ice Over The Last Ten YearsThe Antarctic registered the coldest March day in history this year a minus 72 C.Home / 2020 / May / 31 / End Of May Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Highest In Five Years… No Evidence Of Warming Or MeltingEnd Of May Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Highest In Five Years… No Evidence Of Warming Or MeltingBy P Gosselin on 31. May 2020Share this...Over the past 40 years of satellite observation, Antarctic sea ice defied global warming predictions and gained impressively. The mean temperature of the southern ice cap also shows no warming.In 2017, after decades of inconvenient rise, sea ice extent suddenly fell to record low level and panic activity among global warming alarmists began to perk up. Surely the days of a growing Antarctic ice cap were over – at least they hoped.But since 2017, the ice has grown back and once again has reached near normal levels and the long-term trend continues to be upward:Sea ice extent up to 2019. Data source: JMASchneefan just posted that latest May Antarctic sea ice extent. The data show that minimum 15% sea ice concentration coverage has climbed to a 5-year high for this time of the year:Image: NSIDC.So the Antarctic long-term trend for sea ice continues to be robustly upward.No warmingOne aspect that is supposed to indicate global warming is a rapid warming at the poles. But here too there has been no evidence of warming over Antarctica:Global warming alarmists likely are going to have to wait a long time before they can begin dreaming about sounding the climate alarms over Antarctica. Things there are going the opposite way.https://notrickszone.com/2020/05/31/end-of-may-antarctic-sea-ice-extent-highest-in-five-years-no-evidence-of-warming-or-melting/GLOBAL WARMING SMACKDOWN! Tankers Trapped In Midsummer Arctic Sea IcePosted: June 30, 2018 | Author: Jamie Spry | FShipping in the Gulf of Ob is paralysed and the situation complicated, icebreaker company Rosatomflot says. | The Independent Barents Observer“THE global warming, which there has been so much talk about for such a long time, seems to have receded a little and we are returning to the standards of the 1980’s and 1990’s…”― Andrey Smirnov (Icebreaker company rep)*Via The Barents Observer :It is late June, but the winter has not abandoned the Gulf of Ob. The shallow bay, which houses two of Russia’s biggest Arctic out-shipment terminals for oil and gas, remains packed with fast ice.It has created a complicated situation, Rosatomflot says. The state company which manages the Russian nuclear-powered icebreakers, confirms that independent shipping in the area is «paralysed» and that LNG carriers and tankers are stuck.The shipping companies had expected the Gulf of Ob to be free of ice in the course of June and that icebreaker assistance would not be necessary. They were wrong.According to Rosatomflot, there appears to be a need for icebreaker services in the area at least until after the first week of July. There are currently two nuclear-powered icebreakers in the Gulf of Ob, the «Taymyr» and the «Vaygach». In addition, there are several smaller tugs and icebreakers working in the waters around the Sabetta port.According to the icebreaker company, this is the first summer in four years that the Gulf of Ob is packed with this much ice.«The global warming, which there has been so much talk about for such a long time, seems to have receded a little and we are returning to the standards of the 1980s and 1990s,» says company representative Andrey Smirnov.Read on…*AND how we have been repeatedly promised the “end of summer Arctic ice” by the Climate Crisis Industry and sycophant mainstream media!HOW sure they were that your lifestyle and “carbon pollution” was melting away the Arctic and drowning cuddly Polar Bears!2007 : BBC claimed Arctic summers would be ice free ‘by 2013′…BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’2007 : Arctic Sea Ice Gone in Summer Within Five Years? | National GeographicArctic Sea Ice Gone in Summer Within Five Years? | National Geographic2007 : AP Fake News climate activist Seth Borenstein reported “Could all Arctic ice be gone by 2012″…This just inStar-News – Google News Archive Search2008 : ARCTIC activist fake ‘scientist’ Mark Serreze predicted an “ice free” Arctic by 2008!North Pole could be ice free in 2008 | New ScientistMARK SERREZE’S Arctic Ice “Death Spiral” …“The ice is in a “death spiral” and may disappear in the summers within a couple of decades, according to Mark Serreze, an Arctic climate expert at the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado.”ARCTIC ICE “Death Spiral” | National Geographic2009 : “THE entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months will be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years…” – Al GoreGore: Polar ice cap may disappear by summer 2014 | USA TODAY2013 : Paul Beckwith of Sierra Club Canada knew, without a shadow of doubt, that “Arctic sea ice will vanish in 2013” …(NB, The link to this article and photo has since been pulled by The Sierra Club! “Page not found“)Why Arctic sea ice will vanish in 2013 | Sierra Club Canada2013 : Ice-free Arctic in two years heralds methane catastrophe – scientist (Professor Peter Wadhams) | The GuardianIce-free Arctic in two years heralds methane catastrophe – scientist | The Guardian*AUSTRALIA’S ‘Climate Commission‘ – Will Steffen and Tim Flannery in full panic mode. An alarmist prediction so bad, that even Gavin Schmidt thought it implausible!STEFFEN claims a melting arctic and The emission of methane from the Arctic Ocean would wreak financial havoc…“Warming is strongest in the northern high latitudes … An example is the loss of Arctic sea ice, which contributes to the thawing of the permafrost under the East Siberian Sea.” “Recent observations show that methane is beginning to bubble up … as the Arctic sea ice continues to retreat and the region continues to warm.”oThe release of the East Siberian Sea methane would lead to impacts worth about US$60 trillion (by comparison, the total value of the world’s economy in 2012 was about US$70 trillion, and the value of the Australian economy is about US$1.5 trillion).https://climatism.blog/2018/07/19/arctic-ice-hockey-stick-climatism/ARCTIC Ice Hockey StickPosted: July 19, 2018 | Author: Jamie Spry | Filed under:MOTHER NATURE, once again, not complying with the prognostications and computer models of the Climate Crisis Industry!Science MattersUpdate July 18, 2018No one knows how long this divergence of surplus ice will persist, but for now 2018 Arctic ice extent resembles a hockey stick. Presently the ice is 525k km2 above 11 year average (2007 to 2017 inclusive) and ~1M km2 greater than 2007. More detailed report from July 14 below.Permafrost Far More Stable Than Claimed…German Expert Calls Danger Of It Thawing Out “Utter Imbicility”!By P Gosselin on1. December 2012Die Welt blogger and science journalist Ulli Kulke writes here about how another scare story (melting permafrost) is a load of “imbecility”.In the above paper, permafrost expert Georg Delisle shows that permafrost scare is irrational bedwetting. Source: Poster Bad Honnef.Some alarmist scientists claim melting permafrost could lead to a dangerous “tipping point” as methane and CO2 released would act to enhance global warming further, which in turn would cause more permafrost to melt, thus accelerating global warming until it careens out of control.Just in time for Doha, this disaster scenario has once again been hyped up, with Kevin Schaefer of the National Snow and Ice Data Center recently sounding the alarms. So has UNEP.Kulke writes, however, that the permafrost is much more stable than claimed and that studies have been conducted on permafrost – since decades. Kulke writes:I remember a seminar in Bad Honnef in the spring of 2008 where geoscientist and permafrost expert Georg Delisle from Hanover presented his research.He studied time periods from the last 10,000 years when the global temperature was warmer than today for several thousand years by as much as 6°C. Ice cores that had been extracted from Antarctica and Greenland provide exact information about the composition of the atmosphere during the these warm periods. His conclusion: ‘The ice cores from both Greenland and Antarctica provide no indication of any elevated release of greenhouse gases at any time even though back then a deep thawing of the permafrost when compared to today would have been the case.’ This was clear to see on the poster he used for his presentation. Obviously CO2 and methane are much more stable in the ground also when it thaws, Poster Bad Honnef.”Delisle is an expert on permafrost. What does he think about the claims being made that there’s a risk it will thaw out and release lots of climate-shattering gas? Kulke tells us what Delisle said emphasis added:‘…it is utter imbecility to suppose that the entire permafrost could thaw out by the end of the century. It would take thousands of years.‘ His study ‘Near-surface permafrost degradation: How severe during the 21st century?’ was the basis for his presentation. It had been peer reviewed and has not to my knowledge been refuted to this day. 2007GL029323.”Kulke writes that it would be nice if the IPCC took such research into account, the same applies for the sun as a factor as well.By the way, the Poster Bad Honnef concludes:• Permafrost in the Arctic will remain mostly intact in the 21st century.• When making a comparison to other earlier warm periods, the massive release of greenhouse gases from disintegrating permafrost is considered improbable.Another global warming myth debunked. Now bring on the “melting ice caps”.Permafrost Far More Stable Than Claimed…German Expert Calls Danger Of It Thawing Out “Utter Imbicility”Articles GSM“It should be remembered that the heating observed since 1900 has actually started in the 1700s, i.e. at the minimum of the Little Ice Age , the coldest period of the last 10,000 years (corresponding to the millennial minimum of solar activity that astrophysicists call Maunder Minimal Solar ). Since then, solar activity, following its millennial cycle, has increased by heating the earth’s surface.”Furthermore, the models fail to reproduce the known climatic oscillations of about 60 years.These were responsible, for example, for a warming period (1850-1880) followed by a cooling period (1880-1910), a heating (1910-40), a cooling (1940-70) and a a new warming period (1970-2000) similar to that observed 60 years earlier.See below.Italian petition90 leading Italian Scientists have just issued a petition with details confirming no climate crisis from human industrialization and exposing the computer modeling errors of alarmists that deny the dominant role of the sun in the climate and natural variability. The petition says -Climate simulation models do not reproduce the observed natural variability of the climate and, in particular, do not reconstruct the warm periods of the last 10,000 years. These were repeated about every thousand years and include the well-known Medieval Warm Period , the Hot Roman Period, and generally warm periods during the Optimal Holocene period.These PERIODS OF THE PAST HAVE ALSO BEEN WARMER THAN THE PRESENT PERIOD, despite the CO2 concentration being lower than the current, while they are related to the millennial cycles of solar activity. These effects are not reproduced by the models.The full terms of the Italian petition follows -90 Leading Italian Scientists Sign Petition: CO2 Impact On Climate “UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED” … Catastrophic Predictions “NOT REALISTIC”By P Gosselin on4. July 2019In 1517, a 33-year-old theology professor at Wittenberg University walked over to the Castle Church in Wittenberg and nailed a paper of 95 theses to the door, hoping to spark an academic discussion about their contents. Source. The same is happening today in Italy concerning climate science as dogma.90 Italian scientists sign petition addressed to Italian leadersTo the President of the RepublicTo the President of the SenateTo the President of the Chamber of DeputiesTo the President of the CouncilPETITION ON GLOBAL ANTHROPGENIC HEATING (Anthropogenic Global Warming, human-caused global warming)The undersigned, citizens and scientists, send a warm invitation to political leaders to adopt environmental protection policies consistent with scientific knowledge.In particular, it is urgent to combat pollution where it occurs, according to the indications of the best science. In this regard, the delay with which the wealth of knowledge made available by the world of research is used to reduce the anthropogenic pollutant emissions widely present in both continental and marine environmental systems is deplorable.But we must be aware that CARBON DIOXIDE IS ITSELF NOT A POLLUTANT. On the contrary, it is indispensable for life on our planet.In recent decades, a thesis has spread that the heating of the Earth’s surface of around 0.9°C observed from 1850 onwards would be anomalous and caused exclusively by human activities, in particular by the emission of CO2 from the use of fossil fuels in the atmosphere.This is the thesis of anthropogenic global warming [Anthropogenic Global Warming] promoted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the United Nations, whose consequences would be environmental changes so serious as to fear enormous damage in an imminent future, unless drastic and costly mitigation measures are immediately adopted.In this regard, many nations of the world have joined programs to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and are pressured by a intense propaganda to adopt increasingly burdensome programs whose implementation involves heavy burdens on the economies of the individual member states and depend on climate control and, therefore, the “rescue” of the planet.However, the anthropogenic origin of global warming IS AN UNPROVEN HYPOTHESIS, deduced only from some climate models, that is complex computer programs, called General Circulation Models .On the contrary, the scientific literature has increasingly highlighted the existence of a natural climatic variability that the models are not able to reproduce.This natural variability explains a substantial part of global warming observed since 1850.The anthropogenic responsibility for climate change observed in the last century is therefore UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED and catastrophic predictions ARE NOT REALISTIC.The climate is the most complex system on our planet, so it needs to be addressed with methods that are adequate and consistent with its level of complexity.Climate simulation models do not reproduce the observed natural variability of the climate and, in particular, do not reconstruct the warm periods of the last 10,000 years. These were repeated about every thousand years and include the well-known Medieval Warm Period , the Hot Roman Period, and generally warm periods during the Optimal Holocene period.These PERIODS OF THE PAST HAVE ALSO BEEN WARMER THAN THE PRESENT PERIOD, despite the CO2 concentration being lower than the current, while they are related to the millennial cycles of solar activity. These effects are not reproduced by the models.It should be remembered that the heating observed since 1900 has actually started in the 1700s, i.e. at the minimum of the Little Ice Age , the coldest period of the last 10,000 years (corresponding to the millennial minimum of solar activity that astrophysicists call Maunder Minimal Solar ). Since then, solar activity, following its millennial cycle, has increased by heating the earth’s surface.Furthermore, the models fail to reproduce the known climatic oscillations of about 60 years.These were responsible, for example, for a warming period (1850-1880) followed by a cooling period (1880-1910), a heating (1910-40), a cooling (1940-70) and a a new warming period (1970-2000) similar to that observed 60 years earlier.The following years (2000-2019) saw the increase not predicted by the models of about 0.2 ° C [two one-hundredths of a degree]per decade, but a substantial climatic stability that was sporadically interrupted by the rapid natural oscillations of the equatorial Pacific ocean, known as the El Nino Southern Oscillations , like the one that led to temporary warming between 2015 and 2016.The media also claim that extreme events, such as hurricanes and cyclones, have increased alarmingly. Conversely, these events, like many climate systems, have been modulated since the aforementioned 60-year cycle.For example, if we consider the official data from 1880 on tropical Atlantic cyclones that hit North America, they appear to have a strong 60-year oscillation, correlated with the Atlantic Ocean’s thermal oscillation called Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation .The peaks observed per decade are compatible with each other in the years 1880-90, 1940-50 and 1995-2005. From 2005 to 2015 the number of cyclones decreased precisely following the aforementioned cycle. Thus, in the period 1880-2015, between number of cyclones (which oscillates) and CO2 (which increases monotonically) there is no correlation.The climate system is not yet sufficiently understood. Although it is true that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, according to the IPCC itself the climate sensitivity to its increase in the atmosphere is still extremely uncertain.It is estimated that a doubling of the concentration of atmospheric CO2, from around 300 ppm pre-industrial to 600 ppm, can raise the average temperature of the planet from a minimum of 1° C to a maximum of 5° C.This uncertainty is enormous.In any case, many recent studies based on experimental data estimate that the climate sensitivity to CO2 is CONSIDERABLY LOWER than that estimated by the IPCC models.Then, it is scientifically unrealistic to attribute to humans the responsibility for warming observed from the past century to today. The advanced alarmist forecasts, therefore, are not credible, since they are based on models whose results contradict the experimental data.All the evidence suggests that these MODELS OVERESTIMATE the anthropogenic contribution and underestimate the natural climatic variability, especially that induced by the sun, the moon, and ocean oscillations.Finally, the media release the message according to which, with regard to the human cause of current climate change, there would be an almost unanimous consensus among scientists that the scientific debate would be closed.However, first of all we must be aware that the scientific method dictates that the facts, and not the number of adherents, make a conjecture a consolidated scientific theory .In any case, the same alleged consensus DOES NOT EXIST. In fact, there is a remarkable variability of opinions among specialists – climatologists, meteorologists, geologists, geophysicists, astrophysicists – many of whom recognize an important natural contribution to global warming observed from the pre-industrial period and even from the post-war period to today.There have also been petitions signed by thousands of scientists who have expressed dissent with the conjecture of anthropogenic global warming.These include the one promoted in 2007 by the physicist F. Seitz, former president of the American National Academy of Sciences, and the one promoted by the Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), whose 2009 report concludes that “Nature, not the activity of Man governs the climate”.In conclusion, given the CRUCIAL IMPORTANCE THAT FOSSIL FUELS have for the energy supply of humanity, we suggest that they should not adhere to policies of uncritically reducing carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere with THE ILLUSORY PRETENSE OF CONTROLLING THE CLIMATE.http://www.opinione.it/…/redazione_riscaldamento-globale-…/…PROMOTING COMMITTEE:1.Uberto Crescenti, Emeritus Professor of Applied Geology, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara, formerly Rector and President of the Italian Geological Society.2.Giuliano Panza, Professor of Seismology, University of Trieste, Academician of the Lincei and of the National Academy of Sciences, called of the XL, 2018 International Award of the American Geophysical Union.3.Alberto Prestininzi, Professor of Applied Geology, La Sapienza University, Rome, formerly Scientific Editor in Chief of the magazine International IJEGE and Director of the Geological Risk Forecasting and Control Research Center.4.Franco Prodi, Professor of Atmospheric Physics, University of Ferrara.5.Franco Battaglia, Professor of Physical Chemistry, University of Modena; Galileo Movement 2001.6.Mario Giaccio, Professor of Technology and Economics of Energy Sources, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara, former Dean of the Faculty of Economics.7.Enrico Miccadei, Professor of Physical Geography and Geomorphology, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti-Pescara.8.Nicola Scafetta, Professor of Atmospheric Physics and Oceanography, Federico II University, Naples.SIGNATORIES90 Leading Italian Scientists Sign Petition: CO2 Impact On Climate “UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED” … Catastrophic Predictions “NOT REALISTIC”“THE EARTH IS ACTUALLY COOLING”Global Temps Continue Century-Record Plunge, Despite Rising Co2 Emissions!NO CLIMATE CHANGE IN TEMPERATURE.Temperature increases over the past 140 years at 0.8*C are too small and within the range of natural variability to constitute human made global warming.NASA Goddard Institute finds warming of 0.8* Celsius (1.4* Fahrenheit) since 1880. This means an average of only 0.0175 degree Celsius temperature increase annually. This minute amount is within the statistical error of the data. Yes, weather by itself is evidence of no global warming/ climate change as the test is whether the weather adds to a new weather pattern over many years even millennia.Monday, 01 October 2018NASA Sees Climate Cooling Trend Thanks to Low Sun ActivityWritten by James MurphyThe climate alarmists just can’t catch a break. NASA is reporting that the sun is entering one of the deepest Solar Minima of the Space Age; and Earth’s atmosphere is responding in kind.So, start pumping out that CO2, everyone. We’re going to need all the greenhouse gases we can get.“We see a cooling trend,” said Martin Mlynczak of NASA’s Langley Research Center. “High above Earth’s surface, near the edge of space, our atmosphere is losing heat energy. If current trends continue, it could soon set a Space Age record for cold.”The new data is coming from NASA’s Sounding of the Atmosphere using Broadband Emission Radiometry or SABER instrument, which is onboard the space agency’s Thermosphere Ionosphere Mesosphere Energetics and Dynamics (TIMED) satellite. SABER monitors infrared radiation from carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide (NO), two substances that play a vital role in the energy output of our thermosphere, the very top level of our atmosphere.“The thermosphere always cools off during Solar Minimum. It’s one of the most important ways the solar cycle affects our planet,” said Mlynczak, who is the associate principal investigator for SABER.Who knew that that big yellow ball of light in the sky had such a big influence on our climate?There’s a bit of good news in all of this. When the thermosphere cools, it literally shrinks, therefore reducing aerodynamic drag on satellites in low Earth orbit. In effect, the shrinking thermosphere increases a satellite’s lifetime.But that appears to be where the good news ends, unless you prefer cold weather and increased space junk. “The bad news,” according to Dr. Tony Phillips, editor of SpaceWeather.com -- News and information about meteor showers, solar flares, auroras, and near-Earth asteroids, is: “It also delays the natural decay of space junk, resulting in a more cluttered environment around Earth.”Mlynczak and his colleagues have created the Thermosphere Climate Index (TCI), which measures how much NO is dumped from the Thermosphere into outer space. During Solar Maximum the TCI number is very high. At times of Solar Minimum, TCI is low.“Right now, (TCI) is very low indeed,” said Mlynczak. “SABER is currently measuring 33 billion Watts of infrared power from NO. That’s ten times smaller than we see during more active phases of the solar cycle."SABER has been in orbit for only 17 years, but Mlynczak and the scientists at NASA’s Langley Research Center have been able to recreate TCI measurements back to the 1940s. “SABER taught us how to do this by revealing how TCI depends on other variables such as geomagnetic activity and the sun’s UV output — things that have been measured for decades,” said Mlynczak.In fact, TCI numbers now, in the closing months of 2018, are very close to setting record lows since measurements began. “We’re not quite there yet,” Mlynczak reports. “but it could happen in a matter of months.”The new NASA findings are in line with studies released by UC-San Diego and Northumbria University in Great Britain last year, both of which predict a Grand Solar Minimum in coming decades due to low sunspot activity. Both studies predicted sun activity similar to the Maunder Minimum of the mid-17th to early 18th centuries, which coincided to a time known as the Little Ice Age, during which temperatures were much lower than those of today.If all of this seems as if NASA is contradicting itself, you’re right — sort of. After all, NASA also reported last week that Arctic sea ice was at its sixth lowest level since measuring began. Isn’t that a sure sign of global warming?All any of this “proves” is that we have, at best, a cursory understanding of Earth’s incredibly complex climate system. So when mainstream media and carbon-credit salesman Al Gore breathlessly warn you that we must do something about climate change, it’s all right to step back, take a deep breath, and realize that we don’t have the knowledge, skill or resources to have much effect on the Earth’s climate. God — and that big yellow ball of light in the sky — have much more impact on our climate than we ever could.James Matkin • 6 months agoThe earth is actually cooling and NASA grudgingly begins to admit reality over the fiction of failed computer modelling by the iPCC. So much waste and damage from the futile attempt to reduce our Co2 emissions for a colder climate. The climate alarmists have ignored solar natural variability not because of the science but because of their left wing economic agenda. They have ignored leading science papers like the 400 page study THE NEGLECTED SUN Why the Sun Precludes Climate Catastrophe, by Professor Fritz Vahreholt and Dr. Sebastian Luning. This study demonstrates that "the critical cause of global temperature change has been, and continues to be, the sun's activity." As NASA admits the sun is in a cooling phase and the solar cycles make impossible "the catastrophic prospects put forward by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the alarmist agenda dominant in contemporary Western politics."https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/30214-nasa-sees-climate-cooling-trend-thanks-to-low-sun-activity

Scientology has been investigated numerous times by many governments and academics and a huge amount of evidence exists that Scientology is a criminal organization and that Ronald Hubbard was a charlatan. The book Let's Sell These People A Piece Of Blue Sky by Jon Atack is probably the best book on Scientology available and packed with strong evidence of the fraud used by Hubbard.The articles by Jon Atack which are available free online such as Never Believe A Hypnotist also are excellent.Here is a brief article on how Hubbard was aware he was a fraud.Scientology, Ron Hubbard and Hypnosis 3 - Hubbard's IntentionsI have repeatedly run into talking points used to derail or disrupt posts and threads on the covert use of hypnosis by design in Scientology. I have had to deal with the same issues over and over.So, to be efficient I am going to try to address the most frequently used points here and to have one place to route these ideas when they come up in the future.To continue, this is the third post in a series. The first post addressed two claims.Claim: hypnosis is outdated and no longer accepted by psychology.Claim: Hypnosis has no scientific evidence and therefore as a claim presented without evidence can be rejected without examination.The second post addressed one claim.Claim: You cannot "know" if Scientology founder Ron Hubbard knew a lot about hypnosis because he lied so much and he plagiarized so many ideas.I recommend that anyone interested in reading my response to those claims to read the appropriate post. I tried to be concise and thorough enough to address those issues clearly.Claim: You cannot know the intention of Ron Hubbard. Some people forward this claim and believe Hubbard was alternating between good and evil or that he lied or contradicted himself too much to be deciphered or that Scientology is too filled with contradictions to be understood.Fact: Hubbard was a pathological liar and frequently contradicted himself. That is true. He also had behavior that can be compared against his statements and we can decipher his true intentions from the combination of his claims AND behavior and his private communication.Supporting Evidence: Hubbard made statements in his affirmations (private self-hypnosis commands intended for himself and no one else) that I call the Rosetta Stone of Scientology because they help ex Scientologists decipher the information in Scientology.I have them posted at Mockingbird's Nest asA Psychiatric View With Comments On The Admissions By Lafayette Ronald Hubbard (1947)I will put a few excerpts here to highlight Hubbard's intention regarding hypnosis and in general. To understand Scientology I absolutely recommend reading the post in full. These excerpts are just for this post on his intentions.LRH is obviously L Ron HubbardLRH:Your psychology is good. You worked to darken your own children. This failure, with them, was only apparent. The evident lack of effectiveness was "ordered." The same psychology works perfectly on everyone else. You use it with great confidence.LRH: Material things are yours for the asking. Men are your slaves. Elemental spirits are your slaves. You are power among powers, light in the darkness, beauty in all.LRH : Your psychology is advanced and true and wonderful. It hypnotizes people. It predicts their emotions, for you are their ruler.LRH: No matter what lies you may tell others they have no physical effect on you of any kind.LRH: Lord help women when you begin to fondle them. You are master of their bodies, master of their souls as you may consciously wish. You have no karma to pay for these acts.LRH: You can tell all the romantic tales you wish. You will remember them, you do remember them. But you know which ones were lies. You are so logical you will tell nothing which cannot be believed.LRH: You use the minds of men. They do not use your mind or affect it in any way.So, Hubbard in his private affirmations clearly described his "psychology" as such that it "hypnotizes" people and that men are his slaves and regarding women that he was master of their bodies and souls. He described himself as being able to lie and be both believed and he was immune to physical effects from his lies. He described himself as the ruler of people who uses the minds of men but they do not use or affect his mind.Imagine having these goals and using self-hypnosis commands repeatedly for years to bring these things into your mind.To gain more insight into Hubbard's intention I want to quote a letter he wrote to his wife Polly, who he called Skipper and it has come to be known as "The Skipper Letter" among Scientology watchers. It was written in 1938 after Hubbard allegedly wrote a manuscript entitled Excalibur that he hoped would give him fame."Living is a pretty grim joke, but a joke just the same. The entire function of man is to survive. The outermost limit of endeavour is creative work. Anything less is too close to simple survival until death happens along. So I am engaged in striving to maintain equilibrium sufficient to at least realize survival in a way to astound the gods. I turned the thing up so it's up to me to survive in a big way . . . Foolishly perhaps, but determined none the less, I have high hopes of smashing my name into history so violently that it will take a legendary form even if all books are destroyed. That goal is the real goal as far as I am concerned. Things which stand too consistently in its way make me nervous. It’s a pretty big job. In a hundred years Roosevelt will have been forgotten — which gives some idea of the magnitude of my attempt. And all this boils and froths inside my head and I’m miserable when I am blocked.”Here is a small excerpt from the article What Motivated L. Ron Hubbard? Historian Jon Atack Follows the Clues (posted at The Underground Bunker blog on August 26, 2013Hubbard added that he was going to “make Napoleon look like a punk” in comparison to the fame he would come to enjoy.So, “Excalibur” was not about spiritual immortality, or spiritual anything. Hubbard felt that he had made contact with some underlying force in the universe, and that he was the only person ever so to do, but he wanted to exploit that force not for the good of the world (which finds no mention anywhere in this five-page letter), but to “smash” his name into history.Believers will say that Hubbard changed his mind, but at the very end of his life, there is a telling confirmation of his “only goal.” When Hubbard dropped his body, almost fifty years later, he had failed to spend $648 million of the monies he’d extracted from the Dev-OTs. A paltry million went to the wife who had endured prison to protect him, far less to his surviving children. But half a billion dollars went to the Church of Spiritual Technology, which lists as its corporate purpose, “To perpetuate the name L. Ron Hubbard.” Not the “technology,” just the name, please note. end quote Jon AtackOkay, it seems pretty clear to me that Hubbard wanted to control people by enslaving men via his lies, psychology and hypnosis and to control the souls and bodies of women by similar means.He gave us strong evidence in word and deeds that he sought these goals in life and fame in death.But I can add a bit more from his vast collection of statements in Scientology doctrine.Regarding wanting to control people with his lies and psychology that hypnotizes people:Quotes from Ron Hubbard on the Confusion Technique:[Quote]Now, if it comes to a pass where it's very important whether or not this person acts or inacts as you wish, in interpersonal relations one of the dirtier tricks is to hang the person up on a maybe and create a confusion. And then create the confusion to the degree that your decision actually is implanted hypnotically.The way you do this is very simple. When the person advances an argument against your decision, you never confront his argument but confront the premise on which his argument is based. That is the rule. He says, "But my professor always said that water boiled at 212 degrees."You say, "Your professor of what?""My professor of physics.""What school? How did he know?" Completely off track! You're no longer arguing about whether or not water boils at 212 degrees, but you're arguing about professors. And he will become very annoyed, but he won't know quite what he is annoyed about. You can do this so adroitly and so artfully that you can actually produce a confusion of the depth of hypnosis. The person simply goes down tone scale to a point where they're not sure of their own name.And at that point you say, "Now, you do agree to go out and draw the water out of the well, don't you?""Yes-anything!" And he'll go out and draw the water out of the well.[End Quote]Ron Hubbard Lecture, 20 May 1952 "Decision."source The truth about the Fraud called Scientology"If you can produce enough chaos — it says in a textbook on this subject — if you can produce enough chaos you can assume the total management of a psyche — if you can produce enough chaos.The way you hypnotize people is to misalign them in their own control and realign them under your control, which necessitates a certain amount of chaos, don’t you see?Now, the way to win through all of this is simply to let the guy have his stable data, if they are stable data and if they aren’t, let him have some more that are stable data and he’ll win and you’ll win.In other words, you can take any sphere — any sphere which is relatively chaotic and throw almost any stable datum into it with enough of a statement and you will get an alignment of data on that stable datum. You see this clearly?The whole society is liable to seize upon some stupid stable datum and thereafter this becomes a custom of some sort and you have the whole field of morals and mores and so forth stretching out before your view."Hubbard, L. R. (1955, 23 August). Axiom 53: The Axiom Of The Stable Datum. Academy Lecture Series/Conquest of Chaos, (CofC-2). Lecture conducted from Washington, DC."Another way to hypnotize somebody would be to put him in the middle of chaos, everything going in all directions, everybody shooting at him and suddenly throw him a stable datum, and make it a successful stable datum so that it’s all called off once — the moment he grabs this. And this gives you the entire formula of brainwashing: interrogate, question, lights, pain, upset, accusation, duress, fear, privation and we throw him the stable datum. We say, “If you’ll just adopt ‘Ughism’ which is the most wonderful thing in the world, all this will cease,” and finally the fellow says, “All right, I’m an ‘Ugh.’ ” Immediately you stop torturing him and pat him on the head and he’s all set.Ever after he would believe that the moment he deserted “Ughism,” he would be drowned in chaos and that “Ughism” alone was the thing which kept the world stable; and he would sell his life or his grandmother to keep “Ughism” going. And there we have to do with the whole subject of loyalty, except — except that we haven’t dealt with loyalty at all on an analytical level but the whole subject of loyalty is a reactive subject we have dealt with. "Author: Hubbard, L. R.Document date: 1955, 21 September, 1955, 21 SeptemberDocument title: Postulates 1,2,3,4 In Processing - New Understanding of Axiom 36, Postulates 1,2,3,4 In Processing - New Understanding of Axiom 36“A confusion can be defined as any set of factors or circumstances which do not seem to have any immediate solution. More broadly, a confusion is random motion.”“Until one selects one datum, one factor, one particular in a confusion of particles, the confusion continues. The one thing selected and used becomes the stable datum for the remainder.“Any body of knowledge, more particularly and exactly, is built from one datum. That is its stable datum. Invalidate it and the entire body of knowledge falls apart. A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply the one that keeps things from being in a confusion and on which others are aligned.” – Ron Hubbard [ref]“Any time anybody gets enough altitude he can be called a hypnotic operator, and what he says will act as hypnotic suggestion. Hypnotism is a difference in levels of altitude…if the operator can heighten his own altitude with regard to the subject…he doesn’t have to put the subject to sleep. What he says will still react as a hypnotic suggestion….With parity, such as occurs between acquaintances, friends, fellow students and so on, there is no hypnotic suggestion” (Education and Dianetics, 11 November 1950, Research and Discovery, volume 4). Source Jon AtackAlso, even earlier, in 1950:[Quote]One error, however, must be remarked upon. The examination system employed is not much different from a certain hypnotic technique. One induces a state of confusion in the subject by raising his anxieties of what may happen if he does not pass. One then "teaches" at a mind which is anxious and confused. That mind does not then rationalize, it merely records and makes a pattern. If the pattern is sufficiently strong to be regurgitated verbatim on an examination paper, the student is then given a good grade and passed.[End Quote]Ron Hubbard lecture 29 August 1950, "Educational Dianetics."source Lermanet.comFrom a tape on the Philadelphia Doctorate Course lectures in 1952 entitled Structure/Function we get this:RON THE HYPNOTISTStructure/Function: 11 December 1952 page 1"All processes are based upon the original observationthat an individual could have implanted in him by hypnosisand removed at will any obsession or aberration,compulsion, desire, inhibition which you could think of – by hypnosis.“"Hypnosis, then, was the wild variable;sometimes it worked,sometimes it didn’t work.It worked on some people; it didn’t work on other people.Any time you have a variable that is as wild as this, study it.Well, I had a high certainty already –I had survival. Got that in 1938 or before that. And uh…"Ron HubbardFrom the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course lectures we have a couple extremely relevant quotes. The tapes are listed by their number:SHSBC-402Of course, we go on a tradition "if you learn anything about man that will help him,you help him with it." ..."If you learn anything about man that you can manipulate himYou're going to manipulate men,you've got to change their definitionsand change their goalsand enslave them and do this and do that.SHSBC-447Now, brainwashing simply is the trick of mixing up certainties.All you have to do if you want to know and develop the entire fieldof brainwashing as developed by Pavlov,is simply to make somebody ..... into a confused or hypnotic state in which he can believe anything. Ron HubbardComplimenting this is a quote from Philadelphia Doctorate Course lecture tape numbered 39 from 1952 - known as the games maker tape or lecture"Now here’s a process that has to do with the making of games, and all this process adds up to, is you just address to those factors which I just gave you, oh, run and change postulates and any creative process that you can think of and shift postulates around, you get a whole process." End quoteTHE ONLY WAY YOU CAN CONTROL PEOPLE IS TO LIE TO THEM. You can write that down in your book in great big letters. The only way you can control anybody is to lie to them.Lecture: "Off the Time Track" (June 1952) as quoted in Journal of Scientology issue 18-G, reprinted in Technical Volumes of Dianetics & Scientology Vol. 1, p. 418. Ron HubbardConclusion:Hubbard plainly defined "postulates" broadly as decisions, conclusions and this can be called beliefs. Changing postulates in a person is changing their beliefs.So, he called brainwashing the trick of mixing up certainties. Putting a person into a confused state in which he would believe anything was how he phrased it. He said if you can manipulate men you WILL, not leaving any exceptions for himself ! And he said you will change their definitions and their goals which were their certainties and you will enslave them !He said he started with hypnosis which could "implant or remove any inhibition, compulsion, aberration or desire you could think of BUT it has the wild variable that it works on the some people but not others and it works sometimes but not others." So, he was trying to see who it worked on and when and likely how to get it to work as often as possible on as many people as possible. He wanted people in Scientology to shift around the certainties, the postulates, the decisions and beliefs of people to change their definitions and goals, to definitions he wanted them to believe and goals that benefited Hubbard.This all aligns with the "game" he wanted.His private communication to himself and to his wife Polly make it clear that his ideas regarding "you" using psychology, hypnosis and brainwashing and lying to control people as he described in Scientology doctrine was really him describing his own intention. The evidence is overwhelming.Posted by Mockingbird at 12:58 AMEmail ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to PinterestNo comments:Post a CommentNote: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.Newer PostOlder PostHomeSubscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)BLOG ARCHIVE► 2015 (182)► 2016 (92)► 2017 (40)► 2018 (23)▼ 2019 (71)► January (15)► February (2)► March (4)▼ April (10)Jon Atack - Scientology ExpertSelf Sabotage in ScientologyScientology: Plan For World PeaceMy Road Out of ScientologyGetting Into and Getting Out of Scientology - The ...Blog ArchiveScientology, Ron Hubbard and Hypnosis 1: Hypnosis ...Scientology, Ron Hubbard and Hypnosis 2: Hubbard's...Scientology, Ron Hubbard and Hypnosis 3 - Hubbard'...Scientology -The Evidence - What Convinces Sciento...► May (1)► June (4)► July (8)► August (1)► September (1)► October (1)► November (19)► December (5)Picture Window theme. Powere