24.11.2014 Views

Fusione Fredda, Tesla, Onda Scalare, Campo di Torsione, «Energia libera»..= Tutti Pseudo-Scienza?(Riepilogo italiano) / Cold Fusion, Tesla, "Free Energy", "Over-Unity".. = All Fake Science?

Il nuovo paradigma sulle tecnologie energetiche con geo-socio-impatto finanziario / The new paradigm on energy technology with geo-socio-financial impact

Il nuovo paradigma sulle tecnologie energetiche con geo-socio-impatto finanziario / The new paradigm on energy technology with geo-socio-financial impact

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Disclosure Impact - Review of Dubious Claims? 12:<br />

Denial of Catastrophic Global Warming By Manmade CO2<br />

• ->>cont 10 Crisis Idea: eg2■ Man's CO2 only catastrophic warming idea ignores:<br />

• p-Other man/noman made element might have far more impact, etc : Hence this<br />

phenomena is not even Western science consensus, only main me<strong>di</strong>a/gov’t(except<br />

US since 2017 in west, but many non western nations actually passively not agreeing)<br />

/NGO/IPCC consensus(Lafrembois, Bo Carter, Moncton, J Lovelock, JL Ward+), which is<br />

opposite of me<strong>di</strong>a claims(science consensus but still me<strong>di</strong>a level debate exists):<br />

• i-IPCC foun<strong>di</strong>ng charter itself says "Purpose is to show human is changing<br />

climate"(Maurice Strong), ii-Many scientists are forced into or tricked into<br />

signing(K-E Puls, Iv Giaever, Jud Curry+), iii-”Mistakenly" counted as supporting<br />

IPCC(Wil Soon, Al Carlin+), iv-Needs lawsuit to remove name from support(P<br />

Reiter+), v-Hurts career to <strong>di</strong>sagree with me<strong>di</strong>a/NGO's view regardless of actual<br />

scientific consensus(Dav Bellamy, Phi Ver<strong>di</strong>er+), vi-Education content altered to<br />

make sense of increasingly contra<strong>di</strong>ctory theory(Joh Ball+).<br />

• From pure data tracking/academic only point of view as of 2016 from 1990s when<br />

"crisis pre<strong>di</strong>ction" science-policy was formulated is still being adhered as correct can<br />

be safely stated either some kind of large well coor<strong>di</strong>nated corruption, hoax, fraud, or<br />

beyond normal collective incompetency(Wil Happer, Dav Evans+), i.e. ignore data<br />

altering to keep fun<strong>di</strong>ng/job security/public reputation etc is much more "practical<br />

way to do science" than sticking to pure science,<br />

398

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!