False-Face Claims To Save Humanity Are Invariably About Ruling Over It

“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. Power is what all messiahs really seek: not the chance to serve.” – H. L. Mencken ⁃ TN Editor

I have been attacked by the left and the right and almost without exception, the left is ten times nastier. They don’t hesitate to lie, make personal attacks, or completely destroy a person. They do whatever is necessary to achieve the goal; the end justifies the means.  I suspect it is partly due to the right having at least a vestige of a Christian conscience. For the anti-religious left, it is about ideology and too often that becomes their religion. As H. L. Mencken said,

The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. Power is what all messiahs really seek: not the chance to serve.

It works just as well if you replace “humanity” with the planet. Environmentalism became the new religion in the sense it is a blind faith. You don’t have to understand, in fact, it is better if you don’t.

Few typify this blind faith more than Timothy Wirth. He organized the 1988 Senate Hearing that put the entire false claim of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) on the world stage. The New York Times reported,

Until now, scientists have been cautious about attributing rising global temperatures of recent years to the predicted global warming caused by pollutants in the atmosphere, known as the ”greenhouse effect.” But today Dr. James E. Hansen of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration told a Congressional committee that it was 99 percent certain that the warming trend was not a natural variation but was caused by a buildup of carbon dioxide and other artificial gases in the atmosphere.

The 99 percent claim is simply false and one that no intelligent scientist would make. That didn’t matter, the political objective was to start the big lie. Two facts give the lie to the claim.

  1. In every record for any time period the temperature increases before the CO2 the opposite to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assumption.
  2. Approximately 95 percent of the last 10,000 years the world was warmer than today. A recent study shows it was 6°C warmer 9000 years ago with lower levels of CO2.

Later Senator Timothy Wirth was interviewed on PBS Frontline. He responded to questions about his role in the orchestrated charade.

“How did you know about Jim Hansen? 

… I don’t remember exactly where the data came from, but we knew there was this scientist at NASA who had really identified the human impact before anybody else had done so and was very certain about it. So we called him up and asked him if he would testify. Now, this is a tough thing for a scientist to do when you’re going to make such an outspoken statement as this and you’re (sic) part of the federal bureaucracy. Jim Hansen has always been a very brave and outspoken individual.”

What else was happening that summer? What was the weather like that summer? 

Believe it or not, we called the Weather Bureau and found out what historically was the hottest day of the summer. Well, it was June 6 or June 9 or whatever it was, so we scheduled the hearing that day, and bingo: It was the hottest day on record in Washington, or close to it. It was stiflingly hot that summer. [At] the same time you had this drought all across the country, so the linkage between the Hansen hearing and the drought became very intense.

And did you also alter the temperature in the hearing room that day? 

… What we did it was went in the night before and opened all the windows, I will admit, right? So that the air conditioning wasn’t working inside the room and so when the, when the hearing occurred there was not only bliss, which is television cameras in double figures, but it was really hot. …

So Hansen’s giving this testimony, you’ve got these television cameras back there heating up the room, and the air conditioning in the room didn’t appear to work. So it was sort of a perfect collection of events that happened that day, with the wonderful Jim Hansen, who was wiping his brow at the witness table and giving this remarkable testimony. …

These are devastating admissions of manipulation of a congressional hearing that go beyond the ordinary sleaze. It is precisely why, the swamp exists, people despise politicians, and Donald Trump was elected. However, that is just the start of the story.

Wirth served one term and resigned to become Vice Chair of the United Nations Foundation and the Better World Fund.  This organization was established with a $1 billion donation from Ted Turner. Here is a major objective of the Foundation derived from Turner’s connection with the Club of Rome (CoR).

Global Leadership for Climate Action is a joint initiative of the United Nations Foundation and the Club of Madrid which “aims to design a framework for a new enforceable international agreement on climate change.” The GLCA has editorial input into reports and assessments produced by the IPCC and provides “technical expertise on the implications and communication of climate change science.” By my count more than two-thirds of the GCLA members are also members of the CoR including: George Soros, Ted Turner, Timothy Wirth, Gro Harlem Brundtland, Mary Robinson, Sir Crispin Tickell, Kim Campbell, Wangari Maathai, Petre Roman and Richard Lagos. Now I have to wonder what qualifies George Soros and Ted Turner to provide technical advice on climate change science!!

On March 30, 2015, the Washington Post printed a story headlined, “Setting the record straight: The real story of a pivotal climate-change hearing.” This is Timothy Wirth claiming it didn’t happen as PBS reported.

Over the years, the testimony presented at that hearing has been identified as a key turning point in public understanding of the climate issue. Some myths about the hearing also have circulated over the years, including the idea that windows were left open or the air conditioning was not working. While I’ve heard that version of events in the past, and repeated it myself, I’ve since learned it didn’t happen. So let’s put those stories to rest and instead focus on the substance of the hearing — the brave and prescient testimony of Dr. Jim Hansen. Twenty-five years later we know he was absolutely correct, and that policymakers in the United States and around the world need to initiate far-reaching actions to address this enormous challenge.

Why would PBS report the story with clear indications that these are Wirth’s words? More important, why did Wirth wait until now to contradict a story that is odious but rings true? Wirth confirmed the original story as true by repeating it.  The Washington Post story is vague, mealy-mouthed, and unconvincing. Now Wirth has decided that admitting he lied is less damage than allowing the story to remain alive. No, it isn’t! All it confirms is he knew the information Hansen was providing was not true, but he wraps it in the cloak of bravery – he is heroic because he is saving the planet. Wirth lied about everything all the way through. There are a few significant reasons why he is lying once again. They are all driven by panic as the AGW story collapses.

The Trump election, notably the withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement is exposing the entire fiasco. More people are looking at what was involved and asking questions. Scott Pruitt began the process of dismantling the EPA, especially the regulations. Now his replacement, Andrew Wheeler, formerly a lobbyist for the coal industry, is digging deeper and rooting out more. Look for attacks on Wheeler from the deep state within EPA that pushed Pruitt out.

Another story claims that public concern is waning,

A lot of work on climate change these days is trying to address what seems to be a major part of the problem; people don’t care all that much. 

This is occurring in large numbers despite the alarms. One source of those alarms throughout was the Guardian newspaper.  Their survey of 18,000 people in 17 different countries found that,

Overall, climate change achieved a 12.8 percent share of concern, ranking behind only international terrorism and the threat of poverty as the most concerning issues globally.

This, as expressed, sounds innocuous until you realize it means that 87.2% are not concerned, a devastating number.

Obama made sure the Paris Agreement was not a Treaty because he knew the Senate would not ratify it. The organizers also had to make it non-binding in order to get ratification by all nations. As a result, emboldened by the US withdrawal of funding the Green Climate Fund that replaced the Kyoto Protocol is failing. Few nations are paying up, and  Executive Director Howard Bamsey resigned because no new projects were approved at a recent meeting.

The fact that a leftist would lie to achieve a political goal is now, sadly, normal to the point of complacency. Now, with the Wirth story, we have a leftist and extreme environmentalist willing to admit lying to a media outlet sympathetic to his views. He lied about the orchestration of the story in 1988, but the bigger lie is in the last line of the Washington Post story. Twenty-five years later, we know Hansen was absolutely wrong. Several articles identify and quantify the degree of his error. For example, one article is titled, “James Hansen’s Climate forecast of 1988: a whopping 150% wrong. Moreover, that should be the final nail in the coffin of anthropogenic global warming. Hansen’s predictions were wrong, but so were all the other predictions of the IPCC. They, including the political lies told to create and maintain them, are likely the most extensive collection of prevarications in history.

 

 

 

 

 




Breakthrough In AI Learning May Lead To Human-Level Performance

New AI can mimic human movement after seeing it just one time, which is how humans learn from infancy. Of course, there is no measure of intent as to why the human movement was performed in the first place. This is typical Technocrat thinking that ‘why’ is not as important as ‘what’. ⁃ TN Editor

A new breed of AI-powered robots could soon mimic almost any action after watching a human do them just once.

Scientists have developed a clawed machine that can learn new tasks, such as dropping a ball into a bowl or picking up a cup, simply by viewing a person perform them first.

Researchers said the trick allows the android to master new skills much faster than other robots, and could one day lead to machines capable of learning complex tasks purely through observation – much like humans and animals do.

Project lead scientist scientist Tianhe Yu wrote in a blog post: ‘Learning a new skill by observing another individual, the ability to imitate, is a key part of intelligence in human and animals.

‘Such a capability would make it dramatically easier for us to communicate new goals to robots – we could simply show robots what we want them to do.’

Developed by engineers at the University of California at Berkeley, the robot quickly learns new actions by watching a person do it on video.

Clips of the android show it picking up fruit and putting it into a bowl, as well as carefully moving around an obstacle following the same path demonstrated by a scientist.

Most machines, such as the robots in car factories, are programmed to complete tasks via computer code – a rigid and often time-consuming process.

More recently, androids have been developed that can learn by watching another robot complete the action, though they typically need to mimic the task thousands of times before perfecting it.

In the new paper, the UC team outline the technique which allowed them to teach a robot actions with just one demonstration – vastly speeding up the learning process.

They combined two different learning algorithms into a single super-AI.

One of these – a meta-learning algorithm – helps a robot to learn by incorporating the movements used in prior tasks rather than master each skill from scratch.

The other, an imitation algorithm, allows the machine to pick up a new skill by watching something else perform it.

Combining the two allowed scientists to build an AI that draws on both prior experience as well as mimicry to build new skills in a process the researchers call model-agnostic meta-learning (Maml).

This means it can learn to manipulate an object it has never seen before by watching a single video – a breakthrough that could accelerate machine learning.

Read full story here…




DARPA: Neural Interfaces will Tie Soldiers Into Battlefield Systems

DARPA is a hotbed of Technocrats who are dedicated to pushing science beyond even science fiction to solve all battlefield problems. The neural interface it envisions will work in both directions, meaning that control over the soldiers’s own brain is possible. ⁃ TN Editor

Today, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is selecting teams to develop a “neural interface” that would both allow troops to connect to military systems using their brainwaves and let those systems transmit back information directly to users’ brains.

The Next-Generation Non-Surgical Neurotechnology, or N3, program aims to combine the speed and processing power of computers with humans’ ability to adapt to complex situations, DARPA said. In other words, the technology would let people control, feel and interact with a remote machine as though it were a part of their own body.

“From the first time a human carved a rock into a blade or formed a spear, humans have been creating tools to help them interact with the world around them,” said Al Emondi, the program manager at DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office. “The tools we use have grown more sophisticated over time … but these still require some form of physical control interface—touch, motion or voice. What neural interfaces promise is a richer, more powerful and more natural experience in which our brains effectively become the tool.”

DARPA began studying interactions between humans and machines in the 1960s, and while technology that merges the two may sound far-fetched, the organization already proved it’s possible.

Through its Revolutionizing Prosthetics program, DARPA created a prosthetic limb that disabled veterans can control using an electrode implanted in their brain. The system gives users “near-natural” arm and hand motion while transmitting signals that mirror a sense of touch back to their brain.

Now the agency wants to create a similar apparatus for able-bodied service men and women that doesn’t require surgical implants.

The N3 program is divided into two tracks: non-invasive interfaces that sit completely outside the body, and minutely invasive interfaces that could require users to ingest different chemical compounds to help external sensors read their brain activity. In both tracks, technologies must be “bidirectional,” meaning they can read brain activity and also write new information back to the user.

While those capabilities might fuel conspiracy theories about government mind-reading and mind-control, Emondi told Nextgov that won’t be the case—scientists are only beginning to figure out how the brain’s 100 billion neurons interact, so controlling those interactions is next to impossible. Instead, he said it’s better to think of N3 technology as means to use to a computer or smartphone without a mouse, keyboard or touch screen.

The program is solely focused on designing an interface for humans to connect with technology, not the technology itself, but according to Emondi, the use cases will likely be more high stakes than controlling prosthetic limbs.

He theorized the interface could be used to help a pilot coordinate a fleet of drones with their thoughts or troops to control a remotely deployed robot by using their brain’s motor signals. He added cybersecurity specialists could even connect to the system to monitor different parts of a computer network with their physical bodies.

Read full story here…