Monday, November 30, 2009

Al Gore Confronted On Climategate In Chicago

We Are Change Chicago
November 30, 2009

CHICAGO IL – On Tuesday, November 24th 2009, We Are Change Chicago attended a book signing with former vice president Al Gore, at the Borders Bookstore on 150 N. State Street.

The previous Thursday, news had begun to circulate that hacked documents and communications from the University of East Anglia’s Hadley Climate Research Unit (CRU) had been published to the internet. The information revealed how top scientists conspired to falsify data in the face of declining global temperatures in order to prop up the premise that man-made factors are driving climate change. Please review ClimateGate for Dummies.

To ensure the public that the media and Al Gore are aware of the facts that prove global warming to be a hoax, patriots from WAC Chicago marched to the book signing. Scattered throughout a crowd of a few hundred were members of WAC Chicago ready to ask Al Gore what he thought about ‘ClimateGate.’

First up was Saad Ali. As he approached Gore, he peacefully and respectably asked, “Sir, can you comment on the emails and documents that were hacked [ClimateGate] that reveal… that the research was a fraud and that it was all manipulated?” Gore, with an evil smirk, claimed that “he never read them.” By the look on his face and his stutter, it became quite clear that Gore was extremely uncomfortable with the question, so he quickly glared towards his security. The agents grabbed and assaulted Saad, escorting him away from Gore for merely asking a simple question. The press took notice and started filming and snapping pictures of what was going on. One of which appeared the next day in the Chicago Sun Times.

We Are Change Chicago at the Al Gore book signing.

Following Saad’s confrontation, Sati Word, a member of WAC Chicago, questioned Gore on why the IPCC hasn’t released any reports on sunspot activity. However, before he could get an answer from Gore, security grabbed Sati and escorted him out of the building.

A little while later, Anthony, an activist from We Are Change Ohio, approached Gore and handed him the petition of the 31,486 scientists who say that Global Warming is a complete hoax. Anthony asked, “What do you think about the science behind this sir?” Mr. Gore rolled his eyes, and security escorted him out of the building.

Steve (swizzlesteve), was the last activist to question Gore. Within seconds of asking, “Any comments on ClimateGate? The emails that prove it’s a scam, a farce, that global warming is a joke, any comment?” Mr. Gore is heard to utter a few “uhhhhhhhs” and security quickly steps in to remove him as well.

The press was waiting outside Borders. They wanted to find out who this group was, that dared question what the elite had forced us to consume as truth. WBBM news radio, 780, ran a sound bite of WAC Chicago, WGN news ran footage, Medill Reports wrote an article, and blog posts were popping up all over the internet about the Al Gore confrontation in Chicago. Many also asked about the footage of WAC Chicago chasing after Gore’s SUV after the event. You will find all of it in this video. Al Gore was confronted multiple times in line, outside the event as he rushed to his waiting Mercedes SUV, (were you expecting something electric?), and once again in the streets of Chicago. We Are Change had people outside with signs, banners, fliers, and DVDs. Activists were inside asking questions and demanding answers; the world is waking up, it’s a great time to be alive.

We Are Change Chicago outside Borders

Climategate Master Criminal Phil Jones Collected $22.6 Million in Grants

Sunday, November 29, 2009

Saturday, November 28, 2009

Friday, November 27, 2009

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Monday, November 23, 2009

Climatic Research Unit Hacked, Man-Made Climate Change Fraud is Exposed


Hackers Leak E-mails, Stoke Climate Debate


LONDON — Computer hackers have broken into a server at a well-respected climate change research center in Britain and posted hundreds of private e-mails and documents online — stoking debate over whether some scientists have overstated the case for man-made climate change.

The University of East Anglia, in eastern England, said in a statement Saturday that the hackers had entered the server and stolen data at its Climatic Research Unit, a leading global research center on climate change. The university said police are investigating the theft of the information, but could not confirm if all the materials posted online are genuine.

More than a decade of correspondence between leading British and U.S. scientists is included in about 1,000 e-mails and 3,000 documents posted on Web sites following the security breach last week.

Some climate change skeptics and bloggers claim the information shows scientists have overstated the case for global warming, and allege the documents contain proof that some researchers have attempted to manipulate data.

The furor over the leaked data comes weeks before the U.N. climate conference in Copenhagen, when 192 nations will seek to reach a binding treaty to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases worldwide. Many officials — including U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon — regard the prospects of a pact being sealed at the meeting as bleak.

In one leaked e-mail, the research center’s director, Phil Jones, writes to colleagues about graphs showing climate statistics over the last millennium. He alludes to a technique used by a fellow scientist to “hide the decline” in recent global temperatures. Some evidence appears to show a halt in a rise of global temperatures from about 1960, but is contradicted by other evidence which appears to show a rise in temperatures is continuing.

Jones wrote that, in compiling new data, he had “just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e., from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline,” according to a leaked e-mail, which the author confirmed was genuine.

One of the colleague referred to by Jones — Michael Mann, a professor of meteorology at Pennsylvania State University — did not immediately respond to requests for comment via telephone and e-mail.

The use of the word “trick” by Jones has been seized on by skeptics — who say his e-mail offers proof of collusion between scientists to distort evidence to support their assertion that human activity is influencing climate change.

“Words fail me,” Stephen McIntyre — a blogger whose Web site challenges popular thinking on climate change — wrote on the site following the leak of the messages.

However, Jones denied manipulating evidence and insisted his comment had been taken out of context. “The word ‘trick’ was used here colloquially, as in a clever thing to do. It is ludicrous to suggest that it refers to anything untoward,” he said in a statement Saturday.

Jones did not indicate who “Keith” was in his e-mail.

Two other American scientists named in leaked e-mails — Gavin Schmidt of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, and Kevin Trenberth, of the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research, in Colorado — did not immediately return requests for comment.

The University of East Anglica said that information published on the Internet had been selected deliberately to undermine “the strong consensus that human activity is affecting the world’s climate in ways that are potentially dangerous.”

“The selective publication of some stolen e-mails and other papers taken out of context is mischievous and cannot be considered a genuine attempt to engage with this issue in a responsible way,” the university said in a statement.

Climate Emails Stoke Debate
Scientists’ Leaked Correspondence Illustrates Bitter Feud over Global Warming

The Wall Street Journal
NOVEMBER 23, 2009

The scientific community is buzzing over thousands of emails and documents — posted on the Internet last week after being hacked from a prominent climate-change research center — that some say raise ethical questions about a group of scientists who contend humans are responsible for global warming.

The correspondence between dozens of climate-change researchers, including many in the U.S., illustrates bitter feelings among those who believe human activities cause global warming toward rivals who argue that the link between humans and climate change remains uncertain.

Some emails also refer to efforts by scientists who believe man is causing global warming to exclude contrary views from important scientific publications.

“This is horrible,” said Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute in Washington who is mentioned negatively in the emails. “This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn’t questionable practice, this is unethical.”

In all, more than 1,000 emails and more than 2,000 other documents were stolen Thursday from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University in the U.K. The identity of the hackers isn’t certain, but the files were posted on a Russian file-sharing server late Thursday, and university officials confirmed over the weekend that their computer had been attacked and said the documents appeared to be genuine.

“The selective publication of some stolen emails and other papers taken out of context is mischievous and cannot be considered a genuine attempt to engage with this issue in a responsible way,” the university said.

Most climate scientists today argue that the earth’s temperature is rising, and nearly all of those agree that human activity is likely to be a prime or at least significant cause. But a vocal minority dispute one or both of those views.

A partial review of the hacked material suggests there was an effort at East Anglia, which houses an important center of global climate research, to shut out dissenters and their points of view.

In the emails, which date to 1996, researchers in the U.S. and the U.K. repeatedly take issue with climate research at odds with their own findings. In some cases, they discuss ways to rebut what they call “disinformation” using new articles in scientific journals or popular Web sites.

The emails include discussions of apparent efforts to make sure that reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations group that monitors climate science, include their own views and exclude others. In addition, emails show that climate scientists declined to make their data available to scientists whose views they disagreed with.

The IPCC couldn’t be reached for comment Sunday.

In one email, Benjamin Santer from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif., wrote to the director of the climate-study center that he was “tempted to beat” up Mr. Michaels. Mr. Santer couldn’t be reached for comment Sunday.

In another, Phil Jones, the director of the East Anglia climate center, suggested to climate scientist Michael Mann of Penn State University that skeptics’ research was unwelcome: We “will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!” Neither man could be reached for comment Sunday.

The emails were published less than a month before the opening of a major climate-change summit in Copenhagen.

Representatives of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a large professional organization, expressed concern that the hacked emails would weaken global resolve to curb greenhouse-gas emissions. The association believes “that climate change is real, it is related to human activities, and the need to counteract its impacts is now urgent,” said Ginger Pinholster, an association spokeswoman. She added that the association’s journal, Science, evaluates papers solely on scientific merit.

John Christy, a scientist at the University of Alabama at Huntsville attacked in the emails for asking that an IPCC report include dissenting viewpoints, said, “It’s disconcerting to realize that legislative actions this nation is preparing to take, and which will cost trillions of dollars, are based upon a view of climate that has not been completely scientifically tested.”

Mojib Latif, a climate researcher at Germany’s Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences, said he found it hard to believe that climate scientists were trying to squelch dissent. Mr. Latif, who believes in man-made global warming but who has co-authored a paper ascribing current cooling to temporary natural trends, said, “I simply can’t believe that there is a kind of mafia that is trying to inhibit critical papers from being published.”

Alex Jones TV: Doom & Gloom Climate Fraudsters Exposed

November 23. 2009

On the Sunday edition of the Alex Jones Show, the hacked CRU documents and the victory this represents for the truth and the ongoing effort to defeat the New World Order. The documents reveal how scientists working for the globalists one-world government effort falsified data to push the climate change scam. In addition to faking global temperature data, the outed scientists engaged in a coordinated campaign to ostracize climate skeptics and use their influence to keep dissenting reports from appearing in peer-reviewed journals, as well as using cronyism to avoid compliance with Freedom of Information Act requests.

Call For Independent Inquiry Into Climategate as Global Warming Fraud Implodes

Hacked emails discussed manipulating data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
November 23, 2009

Calls for an independent inquiry into what is being dubbed “Climategate” are growing as the foundation for man-made global warming implodes following the release of emails which prove researchers colluded to manipulate data in order to “hide the decline” in global temperatures.

Former British chancellor Lord Lawson was the latest to demand an impartial investigation be launched into the scandal, which arrives just weeks before the UN climate conference in Copenhagen. “They should set up a public inquiry under someone who is totally respected and get to the truth,” he told the BBC Radio Four Today programme.

The emails were leaked at the end of last week after hackers penetrated the servers of the Climatic Research Unit, which is based at the University of East Anglia, in eastern England. The CRU is described as one of the leading climate research bodies in the world.

The hacked documents and communications reveal how top scientists conspired to falsify data in the face of declining global temperatures in order to prop up the premise that man-made factors are driving climate change. Others illustrate how they embarked on a venomous and coordinated campaign to ostracize climate skeptics and use their influence to keep dissenting reports from appearing in peer-reviewed journals, as well as using cronyism to avoid compliance with Freedom of Information Act requests.

As expected, the establishment media has gone into whitewash overdrive, characterizing the emails as evidence of “rancor” amongst the climate community and focusing on some of the lesser emails while ignoring the true significance of what has been revealed.

Organizations with close ties to the CRU have engaged in psychological terrorism by fearmongering about the planet with doomsday scenarios, illustrating their argument with outlandish propaganda animation videos which show pets drowning and others that show computer-generated polar bears crashing to earth in a throwback to 9/11 victims jumping from the towers, when in reality polar bear population figures are thriving.

“One of the emails under scrutiny, written by Phil Jones, the centre’s director, in 1999, reads: “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature [the science journal] trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline,” reports the London Telegraph.

The author admitted to the Associated Press that the e mail was genuine.

In another example, researchers discuss data that is “artificially adjusted to look closer to the real temperatures”. Apparently, the “real temperatures” are whatever global warming cheerleaders want them to be.

As Anthony Watts writes, attempts to claim e mails are “out of context,” as the defense has been from CRU, cannot apply in this instance.

You can claim an email you wrote years ago isn’t accurate saying it was “taken out of context”, but a programmer making notes in the code does so that he/she can document what the code is actually doing at that stage, so that anyone who looks at it later can figure out why this function doesn’t plot past 1960. In this case, it is not allowing all of the temperature data to be plotted. Growing season data (summer months when the new tree rings are formed) past 1960 is thrown out because “these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to the real temperatures”, which implies some post processing routine.

Spin that, spin it to the moon if you want. I’ll believe programmer notes over the word of somebody who stands to gain from suggesting there’s nothing “untowards” about it.

Either the data tells the story of nature or it does not. Data that has been “artificially adjusted to look closer to the real temperatures” is false data, yielding a false result.

Another email discusses changing temperature data to fix “blips” in studies so as to make them conform with expectations, which of course is the cardinal sin of scientific research.

“Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organized resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more” was revealed in the 61 megabites of confidential files released on the Internet for anyone to read, writes Andrew Bolt.

Another email appears to celebrate the death of climate change skeptic John L Daly, with the words, “In an odd way this is cheering news.”

In another communication, the author expresses his fantasy to “beat the crap out of” climate change skeptics.

In another exchange, researchers appear to discuss ways to discredit James Saiers of the Geophysical Research Letters journal, by means of an academic witch hunt, because of his sympathies with climate change skeptics.

“If you think that Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official AGU channels to get him ousted.”

Other emails express doubt about whether the world is really heating up and infer that data needs to be reinterpreted.

“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.”

Scientists discuss trying to disguise historical data that contradicts the man-made climate change thesis, such as the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), which must be ‘contained’ according to one email.

Suppression of evidence is also discussed, with scientists resolving to delete embarrassing emails.

“And, perhaps most reprehensibly,” writes James Delingpole, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority.”

“This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”

“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”“It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice!”

Scientists also “discussed ways of dodging Freedom of Information Act requests to release temperature data,” reports the Daily Mail.

The emails show that scientists relied on cronyism and cosying up to FOIA officials to prevent them from being forced to release data.

“When the FOI requests began here, the FOI person said we had to abide by the requests,’ the email says. “It took a couple of half-hour sessions to convince them otherwise.”

“Once they became aware of the types of people we were dealing with, everyone at UEA became very supportive. I’ve got to know the FOI person quite well and the chief librarian – who deals with appeals.”

It is important to stress that this compendium merely scratches the surface of the monumental levels of fraud that have been exposed as a result of the hacked emails.

People will look back on this moment as the beginning of the end for global warming alarmism and the agenda to implement draconian measures of regulation and control along with the levy of a global carbon tax.

Many more revelations will be forthcoming as a result of this leak, and the desperate effort on behalf of the establishment to whitewash the whole issue will only end up making the damage worse.

Alex Runs Down Man-made Climate Change Hoax Exposed in CRU Emails

Kurt Nimmo
November 23, 2009

Globalist minion Al Gore and the United Nations climate change shysters led by Phil Jones are in trouble. Last week hackers uncovered a pile of email and documents revealing what many of us already knew — the climate change agenda is based not only on easily debunked junk science, but outright lies and deception.

In the wake of the damning revelations exposed by these anonymous hackers, the climate change snake oil salesmen Gore and his complaisant entourage of now discredited scientists are in full retreat. Even the corporate media — guilty of peddling the fabrication of man-made climate change for years with the best propaganda money can buy — are desperately scrambling to put the best spin possible on the emerging travesty.

In the above video, Alex Jones examines the startling revelations of the CRU files and spells out what it means for the global elite who have planned to use the ruse to impose crippling carbon taxes and put the finishing touches on their global totalitarian super-state and its accompanying control and slave grid.

Infowars and Prison Planet are now feverishly going through the documents and will post the result in the hours and days ahead. In the meantime, here are a few quotes from the perpetrators:

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.

Kevin Trenberth

I seem to be getting an email a week from skeptics saying where’s the warming gone. I know the warming is on the decadal scale, but it would be nice to wear their smug grins away.

Phil Jones

In any case, if the sulfate hypothesis is right, then your prediction of warming might end up being wrong. I think we have been too readily explaining the slow changes over past decade as a result of variability–that explanation is wearing thin. I would just suggest, as a backup to your prediction, that you also do some checking on the sulfate issue, just so you might have a quantified explanation in case the prediction is wrong. Otherwise, the Skeptics will be all over us–the world is really cooling, the models are no good, etc. And all this just as the US is about ready to get serious on the issue.

Mike MacCracken

Ironically, the E1-IMAGE scenario runs, although much cooler in the long term of course, are considerably warmer than A1B-AR4 for several decades! Also – relevant to your statement – A1B-AR4 runs show potential for a distinct lack of warming in the early 21st C, which I’m sure skeptics would love to see replicated in the real world… (See the attached plot for illustration but please don’t circulate this any further as these are results in progress, not yet shared with other ENSEMBLES partners let alone published).

Tim Johns

Your final sentence though about improvements in reviewing and traceability is a bit of a hostage to fortune. The skeptics will try to hang on to something, but I don’t want to give them something clearly tangible.

Phil Jones

Looks pretty good to me. Only one issue. In our discussion of possible participants in Bern, I think (someone correct me if I’m wrong) we concluded that the last two on the list (w/ question marks) would be unwise choices because they are likely to cause conflict than to contribute to concensus [sic] and progress.

Christoph Kull

Mike, I agree very much with the above sentiment. My concern was motivated by the possibility of expressing an impression of more concensus than might actually exist . I suppose the earlier talk implying that we should not ‘muddy the waters’ by including contradictory evidence worried me. IPCC is supposed to represent concensus but also areas of uncertainty in the evidence. Of course where there are good reasons for the differences in series (such as different seasonal responses or geographic bias) it is equally important not to overstress the discrepancies or suggest contradiction where it does not exist.

Keith Briffa

The key thing is making sure the series are vertically aligned in a reasonable way. I had been using the entire 20th century, but in the case of Keith’s, we need to align the first half of the 20th century w/ the corresponding mean values of the other series, due to the late 20th century decline. So, if we show Keith’s series in this plot, we have to comment that “something else” is responsible for the discrepancies in this case. Otherwise, the skeptics have an field day casting doubt on our ability to understand the factors that influence these estimates and, thus, can undermine faith in the paleoestimates.

Michael E. Mann

Dr. Tim Ball On the Significance of the CRU Hacked Documents

Corbett Report
November 23, 2009

Retired climatologist Dr. Tim Ball joins us to discuss the significance of the recently leaked emails and documents from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University which expose deceit, duplicity and collusion between climate researchers to maintain the fraud of the manmade global warming theory. These emails reveal stunning behind-the-scenes details about how this fraud has been developed and perpetuated, and Dr. Ball shares his insights on what they show.

Inhofe to call for hearing into CRU, U.N. climate change research

By Tony Romm
The Hill
11/23/09 01:23 PM ET

The publication of more than 1,000 private e-mails that climate change skeptics say proves the threat is exaggerated has prompted one key Republican senator to call for an investigation into their research.

In an interview with The Washington Times on Monday, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) announced he would probe whether the U.N.‘s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “cooked the science to make this thing look as if the science was settled, when all the time of course we knew it was not.”

“[T]his thing is serious, you think about the literally millions of dollars that have been thrown away on some of this stuff that they came out with,” Inhofe, the ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, said during the interview.

He added that it was “interesting” that the e-mails surfaced only weeks before an important climate change summit would bring world leaders to Copenhagen.

Fueling Inhofe’s concerns is last week’s news that a blogger hacked into the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (Cru) and published about 1,000 e-mails and more than 3,000 private documents relating to climate change.

Some of those communications disparaged climate change skeptics and their views, while others contained conversations about how to best portray climate change research.

The scientists have since insisted their e-mails were hardly deceptive and that their words were taken out of context. Still, their assurances have not settled the concerns of their biggest foes — including Inhofe, who has long maintained global warming is a hoax.

However, it is not immediately clear what Inhofe hopes to accomplish with his proposed hearing. U.S. lawmakers and scientists routinely cite IPCC evidence when discussing climate change legislation, but Congress can hardly force the United Nations to halt spending on a program over which it has no jurisdiction.

Rather, Inhofe perhaps hopes to deal a symbolic blow to next month’s climate change conference, at which IPCC is likely to play a major role.

“The timing couldn’t be better,” said the Oklahoma Republican, who previously announced he would attend the December summit as a “one-man truth squad.” “Whoever is on the ball in Great Britain, their time was good.”

Here’s a Phil Jones email with the infamous “hide the decline”

Sunday, November 22, 2009

Robert Gaylon Ross Speaks at Brave New Books 11/18/2009

Born in Big Lake, Texas, Robert Gaylon Ross, Sr. holds a BS degree in Industrial Engineering from Texas A&M University. While active in engineering, he was a licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Texas, and a National Certified Manufacturing Engineer. After graduation, he accepted a commission as a 2nd Lieutenant (later promoted to 1st Lt.) in the Army Security Agency (ASA), a branch of the National Security Agency (NSA), which is a big brother to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Military training was in the field of cryptoanalysis (the breaking of codes), and served as a Company Commander with an Intelligence Unit on the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) in the Chorwan valley of South Korea, from 1956 to 1957 (after the fighting had ceased).

Upon leaving active duty, began his professional career in the petroleum industry. Served as an Industrial Engineer for ten years until being promoted into management, and was a manufacturing Plant Manager for over ten years. The past seventeen years he served as an International Management Consultant, working in the US, Japan, Mexico, Canada, England, and Iran.

After completing the manuscript to the first book, Who's Who of the Elite, he contacted a number of publishers to ascertain their interest in this material. They all declined because of the subject matter, so he formed his own publishing company, RIE, and published this first of fourteen books in progress. The author has devoted the rest of his life to exposing the real truth about those evil ones in this world who would like to make us all their slaves.

RIE is proud to announce the release of two new products:

Who's Who of the Elite DVD and What the Elite Have Done to America and How To Fix It, both by Robert Gaylon Ross, Sr.

Thursday, November 12, 2009

CoSM the Movie: Alex Grey & the Chapel of Sacred Mirrors

COSM: THE MOVIE is an invitation to personal reflection, growth, and harmony, leading spiritual adventurers on an enriching and sense-heightening journey into the visionary art cosmos of world-renowned painter, sculptor, and author Alex Grey. Grey is our guide on a cinematic pilgrimage through the Chapel of Sacred Mirrors gallery in New York City, where the artworks combine science and spiritual wisdom. Reflecting the human experience from birth to death and beyond, the vividly rendered depictions of human anatomy and transcendental imagery suggests the unity of all things. COSM: THE MOVIE reverently illuminates possibilities of enlightenment and the evolution of conscience and consciousness. Fusing the power of music with stunning cinematorgraphy, director Nick Krasnic and narrator Alex Grey channel the raw power of Grey’s art into a potent film odyssey that captures the essence of this unique sacred space, and offers rare, personal insight from one of the most significant artists of our time.

Sunday, November 08, 2009

V – Season 1 : Episode 1 (2009)

From the desk of Floyd Anderson:

V on ABC
Episode 1 aired on 11/3. 11x3=33
Just before the 29 motherships of reptilians arrive, a black and white masonic checkerboard floor is shown, a statue of Jesus falls to the floor and is destroyed, and a plane flies past skyscrapers and crashes, invoking 9/11.
This show aired 2 days before the 5th of November’s Fort Hood shootings, invoking a double emphasis of V for Vendetta that week.
The manipulation of gravity is demonstrated using apples.
Just before the interview, the V high commander tells the journalist, “we can’t be seen in a negative light.”
The V high commander says that they don’t divide themselves into countries.
They are world government reptilians who have actually been on Earth for years implementing a plan to exterminate mankind.
The Vs say they want to provide universal healthcare for humans.
One of the Vs tells the journalist, “Compromising one’s principles for the greater good is not a shameful act. It is a noble one.”
The female V gives the human boy what looks like a masonic handshake as she is recruiting him, she puts a Peace Ambassador jacket on him, and they all toast to “The Dawn of a New Day.”

Masonic Lodge in Blanco, Texas

I filmed this driving through Blanco, Texas yesterday.

Friday, November 06, 2009

The Zionist Story

A documentary by Berek Joselewicz that explores the ideology of Zionism and its impact on Israel and the Palestinians under occupation.

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

My “20 Minutes With The President” Video Contest Entry

Adaptation of a fictional meeting between Charlie Sheen and Barack Obama in which Charlie urges the president to investigate the many strange aspects of the 9/11 official story.

In this video Charlie Sheen is portrayed as a variety of his movie characters and Barack Obama is portrayed as Egyptian Pharaoh Akhenaten.

Please view Charlie’s 20 bullet points of concern regarding the official story as well as the rest of the script at