Dusty Books and the New World Order

Here is an interesting article which speaks volumes about the state of the climate change narrative.

Arctic explorers' logs shed light on climate change

U.K. historians to examine logbooks of whaling, navy, Hudson Bay Co. ships

British researchers are hoping to glean new information about Arctic climate change by digging through the historical records of polar explorers.

Historians will be looking for Arctic weather data in the logbooks of whaling ships, British Navy vessels and Hudson Bay Company ships from the 18th and 19th centuries, said Dennis Wheeler, a researcher with the University of Sunderland.

"It's not until you begin to look at these documents that you can really get an appreciation of exactly how much information there actually is," Wheeler told CBC News.

He said the logbooks, most of which are stored in London, contain a wealth of meticulously recorded data about daily weather conditions, wind readings, snow and ice cover. The data could help scientists better understand climate change today, he said.

Of course all these records have been there ready to be studied for the past couple decades as the scientific community has told us how much warmer it is than it was. Meanwhile our meticulous scientific community has basically ignored the best evidence they have on an important component of the debate. But when you know the truth you don't need the facts to back it up, as becomes apparent with the next paragraph.

"We know it was colder then, and we've got to check the temperature records to confirm that, and there isn't any clear evidence that the ice was any more advanced than it is today," Wheeler said.

The wealth of information in that sentence is staggering. Read that again in case the narrative has you blinded to the absurdity "We know it was colder then, and we've got to check the temperature records to confirm that  How can a scientist know what they claim not to have confirmed? Isn't that like "being a real scientist" course 101. So now our scientist are going to confirm what they already know.

 The narrative is so ingrained into their mind set they have absolutely no idea how far from objectivity they have strayed. But it is even better,"there isn't any clear evidence that the ice was any more advanced than it is today" Uh, what? I thought we were losing the ice cap at a perilous rate and he is saying that when it was colder (yet to be confirmed) the ice was not "any more advanced than it is today" Kind of throws that whole melting ice caps due to warming Arctic thingy a bit under the bus doesn't it? Fortunately Dr Wheeler does recognize that his statements are a bit at odds with the hype.

"That raises all sorts of questions about how Arctic ice responds to global temperature changes. So, we do need to know more about this, in both the warming and the cooling point of view, to see how it changes."

Yes I couldn't agree more.....I think. Excuse me professor, I have a question too. Doesn't ice grow when it gets colder and melt when it is warmer? Or maybe I have been listening to climate scientist for too long, Carry on.

Emerging research field

Wheeler said it's amazing how little research has been done on historic weather data, but he said the three-year research project is attracting a lot of interest now.

Yes indeed it is amazing "how little research has been done" since literally trillions of dollars are being spent based on a theory and the records which might prove or disprove have been sitting in a dusty basement in London. Of course when you know something which you don't need to confirm, well you know, you know? Billions of research dollars to fund climate models which can not hind cast climate, and the most accurate past records we have are sitting around ignored, makes sense.

"The only way we know about climate change or environmental change anyway is by knowing the past temperatures, what the past environment was like," said Alan MacEachern, a historian and director of the Network in Canadian History and Environment.

Unless of course you know in which case you do not have to dig around in old records to confirm what you know.

MacEachern said the field of historical climatology is still in its infancy in Canada, despite its obvious relevance in understanding modern climate change.

"Why isn't it happening more? I'm not sure," he said.

"I think the sources are kind of everywhere, and I think it's taking a while for people to figure out exactly where they should start looking or even where they should stop looking."

MacEachern said there is growing support for research into Canada's environmental history, so he is encouraging students to start digging.

I can tell you why it is not happening more, cause it might just disprove some things that you know. Plus they had to spend the last twenty years fudging the records, indoctrinating the population and manipulating the politicians so that when somebody actually looked at the books everybody would already know, you know?

I can tell you when you are going to stop looking too, when you find out something that you know is not confirmed by what you find. Then the books will be put away or burned or discredited. So enjoy the dusty basements because this is probably the most we are going to hear about your little project.