The Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow.
By Thierry Meyssan; Original French version: Reseau Voltaire
The theory that global warming is observable across the planet and is caused by human activity was popularized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); a United Nations commission.
I have no expertise in climate matters and I do not allow myself to judge whether this theory is true or false, but I am an expert in international politics and I can assess the work of this United Nations commission.
About ten years ago, I wrote that, as its name suggests, the IPCC is absolutely not a scholarly academy, but an intergovernmental group [1]. Its conclusions are therefore not the fruit of a scientific approach, but of a political debate.
The IPCC was created on the initiative of the British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, in order to support his fight against miners’ unions. Unsurprisingly, he concluded that using coal is bad for the environment, while nuclear is desirable. This is not a scientific theorem, but a political position.
Furthermore, I pointed out that the creation of greenhouse gas emission rights is not an intergovernmental initiative, but an idea of the Joyce Foundation, implemented by the Climate Exchange Ldt. [2]. Each state drafts its own legislation in this regard. He receives a certain quantity of emission rights which he distributes as he sees fit to companies. Those who use them only partially can resell the unused rights on a specialized stock exchange in Chicago.
The statutes of this Fellowship were written by a lawyer from the then unknown Joyce Foundation, a certain Barack Obama (future President of the United States). The call for investors for the launch of this Stock Exchange was organized by Al Gore (future vice-president of the United States), and by David Blood (former director of the Goldman Sachs bank). You can consider these people as bona fide environmental activists or high-flying crooks, it’s a matter of perspective.
Over time, this political device has taken on a scientific veneer and good intentions so that it has become difficult to question it. However, there is an alternative scientific theory to explain global warming. It was stated by the Croatian geophysicist Milutin Milanković during the interwar period.
The Earth’s orbit varies according to three natural cycles: its eccentricity, its obliquity and the precession of the equinoxes. Each of these variations follows a perfectly calculable cycle, between 20,000 and 100,000 years. These three variations combined influence the Earth’s insolation and therefore its climate. This theory was confirmed in 1976 by the study of ice cores during the drilling of Vostok (Antarctica). But it does not explain everything.
The Russian Academy of Sciences has just announced a third theory, also based on the observation of nature. According to her, “The main cause of local climatic disasters is the increasing emission of natural hydrogen due to the alternating gravitational forces of the moon and thesun, which cause holes in the ozone layer. The resulting rise in temperature and the mixing of ozone and hydrogen are the main causes of forest and steppe fires.3].
The Academy of Sciences is not content to question the dogma of the IPCC, it also challenges the device aimed at reducing the holes in the ozone layer. Namely the Vienna Convention and the Montreal Protocol “whose implementation wiped out entire sub-industries of the chemical industry without affecting the size of the ozone holes, which only increased”.
The theory of the Russian Academy of Sciences is also based on the idea that global warming is not a comparable phenomenon depending on the regions of the world. However, we have just measured that, contrary to a widespread cliché, the temperature of the Pacific Ocean is cooling [4]The work of the Russian Academy of Sciences will be presented at the end of November-beginning of December at COP-28 in Dubai. Already, a political battle has begun to silence the scientists. It relates to the designation of the chairman of the meeting who can give the floor to the intruders or, on the contrary, reduce them to silence. It is up to Mohammed bin Zayed, the ruler of the United Arab Emirates, to choose it. He appointed Sultan al-Jaber as his Minister of Industry. Immediately, parliamentarians from the United States and the European Union wrote to the Secretary General of the United Nations,
António Guterres, asking him to oppose it. Their argument, as always, is irrelevant to their objective. They argue that Sultan al-Jaber is also chairman of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (Adnoc). He would therefore be judge and judged. They recommend, on the contrary, to appoint a lobbyist for non-fossil fuels. He would also be judge and party, but for the opposing camp.
If Russian scientists speak at COP-28, it is likely that the assembly will split in two, not on scientific criteria, but on political ones. The supporters of the Anglo-Saxons against those of Russia (the rest of the world). Undoubtedly, the dogma of the IPCC will soon become the fixed idea of Westerners and the laughingstock of the rest of the world.
Thierry Meyssan: French journalist and political activist. In 1994 he founded the Voltaire Network.
