My Photo
Mobilise this Blog





New Zealand Conservative


AmCam News Tips

  • Have you got mobile camera pix of breaking news, or a first-hand account you've written?
    email Investigate now on publicity [at] and we'll get you online
Blog powered by Typepad

« NZ temps in 2009 plunge 0.2C BELOW 30 year average | Main | Obama admin sidelines UN globalists over climate change debacle »



You got me CM.


Ian won't like to see you talking about Air Con like that Leon.


Ha ha ha.

Radio Kaos

>>> is a Rockefeller organization which has stated that we must get C02 down to 350 parts per(hence the name 350) million<<<

So what? Bill Gates wants to eradicate AIDS. That's what philanthropists do - put money into what they consider to be worthwhile causes. Whether they are realistic is another story.

You don't have to be Maxwell Smart to realise the fact that mainstream media isn't doing investigative journalism any more so not for profits funded by philanthropists like Rockefeller have had to take up the slack. It's not ideal but that's the state of the MSM at the moment.

>>>If you want favourable media coverage, you buy off journalists.<<<

So the journalists working for the Centre for Public Integrity are being "bought off"?

Give me a break - most of them could earn much more as Government spin doctors or lobbyists.

If they are being bought off, it is odd that they do it with such transparently. In their annual report they publish everything, including the names of the dozens of philanthropic organisations that sponsor them.


I had better go swat up on my grandma.


That's the funny thing - Ian 'knows' so much about Soros because Soros effectively tells him.

The right is just pissed because they don't really have a Soros. They have energy companies and Rupert Murdoch.


Break the left right paradigm CM.


Bill gates wants to sterilize Africans.


Rockefeller a philanthropist?
I must do some more homework.


excerpt from reflections and warnings a film by Aaron Russo.
During one conversation, Rockefeller asked Russo if he was interested in joining the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) but Russo rejected the invitation, saying he had no interest in "enslaving the people" to which Rockefeller coldly questioned why he cared about the "serfs."

"I used to say to him what's the point of all this," said Russo, "you have all the money in the world you need, you have all the power you need, what's the point, what's the end goal?" to which Rockefeller replied (paraphrasing), "The end goal is to get everybody chipped, to control the whole society, to have the bankers and the elite people control the world."

Rockefeller also told Russo that his family's foundation had created and bankrolled the woman's liberation movement in order to destroy the family and that population reduction was a fundamental aim of the global elite.

Ian Wishart

Kaos, as a journalist with nearly three decades under the belt, I've seen a lot of changes in the news biz.

I've seen the insidious creep of sponsorship into the news, and the even more insidious way agenda-driven organisations have wormed their way into newsrooms by funding initiatives like those mentioned above.

My former editors would be spinning in their graves to see what journalists have become, and Peter Griffin is a prime example.

The journalism schools were recently pushing entries in the Diversity Awards for heavens sake. Since when should journalists earn financial prizes or awards for doing 'diversity' or 'peace' stories.

Our job used to be simply reporting the news, not parroting a social engineering agenda.

Soros etc are in this up to their necks. Purely by coincidence, the lead story in the next Investigate involves a Soros puppet in NZ...


Quotes from other fine Philanthropists.

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
David Rockefeller, Baden-Baden, Germany 1991

"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
- David Rockefeller

A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal."
Ted Turner, in an interview with Audubon magazine.

"You know the one thing that is wrong in this country? Everyone gets a chance to have their fair say."
President Bill Clinton

"I reject the idea that humans are superior to other life forms. . . Man is just an ape with an overly developed sense of superiority."
-- Paul Watson, director of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and a founder of Greenpeace
"No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation."
David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government."
Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991


>>>I've seen the insidious creep of sponsorship into the news, and the even more insidious way agenda-driven organisations have wormed their way into newsrooms by funding initiatives like those mentioned above.<<<

Ian, would you consider that you are an agenda-driven journalist?


Note: there is a VERY important article HERE.
A Hungarian scientist reckons he has discovered a 'constant' in the equation of how CO2 is made up that means it can NEVER get as high as the IPCC reckon - just as one can never go faster than the speed of light. They reckon this discovery is history-making and that the constant will probably be named after him.

Before Miskolczi, it was generally thought that the greenhouse effect could be increased infinitely by adding more and more CO2 molecules into the air. Under the conditions prevailing on Earth, Miskolczi has proved that there is a limit to the greenhouse temperature that cannot be raised. Why is that? The IPCC has been telling us the exact opposite for years. Simple, because just as with Einstein’s E=MC2, there is a strict energetic limit as the Miskolczi Law proves.

Go to the link to read more.


More -

the detailed mathematics can be found [on the site] in "The Saturated Greenhouse Effect Theory of Ferenc Miskolczi").[...] our planetary climate system is at equilibrium, and the Miskolczi Constant allows science to completely describe that equilibrium. For the first time, we can do so accurately with raw data, and match observed data with the results. No “hide the decline” needed when simply describing reality.

Fletch, it appears this is similar to what Miskolczi was trying to argue in his 2007 paper. See

Doesn't sound like the scientific community fell for his new law of physics then either.

"The paper does have some value as a teaching tool in undergraduate physics or climate classes. It's like those puzzles in kids' books our Swedish friends call "Finn Fem Fel." I ran the paper past a guest class I was teaching at Bowdoin and with a little encouragement the students were able to find and understand the two elementary mistakes Miskolczi made in the first 9 pages, which invalidate the rest of the paper."


CM, if that is true then why has no scientist publicly refuted it through the peer review process? Why did NASA stop the paper being published in another journal (see the letter on the site at the end of my link).

The co-author of the article was his boss at NASA (Martin Mlynczak). Mlynczak put his name to the paper but did no work on it. He thought that it was an important paper, but only in a technical way.

When Miskolczi later informed the group at NASA there that he had more important results, they finally understood the whole story, and tried to withhold Miskolczi’s further material from publication. His boss for example, sat at Ferenc’s computer, logged in with Ferenc`s password, and canceled a recently submitted paper from a high-reputation journal as if Ferenc had withdrawn it himself. That was the reason that Ferenc finally resigned from his ($US 90.000 /year) job.

I want to make it clear: NASA never falsified or even tried to falsify Ferenc`s results, on the contrary, they fully understand it. They know that it is correct and see how important it is. To make sense of their actions, they probably see a national security issue in it. Perhaps they think that AGW is the only way to stop, or to slow, the coal-based growth of China.

It always makes me suspicious when people lose their jobs for no good reason (as the writer of the above letter did)

First, they tried to frighten me, and then when that did not work, they kicked me out from my job. So now I am turning to the wider internet to publicise Miskolczi`s work, as I know that his results are valid and true. There is no way and no need to hold them back for the world to understand them.

He claims the results are 'provable and repeatable' the world over and it is up to other scientists to prove or disprove it through peer review, not a bunch of students who are not qualified to do so anyway.
I'm betting a class of students would have poo-pooed Einstein's work at the time and not understood it either.


It always makes me suspicious when people claim 'conspiracy' as the most obvious explanation. Almost without exception, it's something else.

As far as I can tell, Miskolczi's application of the Virial Theorem is flawed. As is his application of Kirchoff's Law of Radiation.

The paper was also published in an obscure Hungarian meteorological journal.

As far as I can tell, it hasn't been refuted in a published paper because scientists don't consider it even warrants serious consideration (it's so flawed on basic inspection). The fact that it's passed out for critique as a graduate assignment supports that (as well as pretty much invalidating any suggestion that it's being 'hidden' or 'ignored').



Fletch I think you will find that Pope Benedict XVI is sounding a warning about the reality of global warming.

This extreme right wing propaganda is beating the anti-Helen Clark rhetoric when Labour was in power.

By the way how many abortions have been performed in NZ since National took over?

How many child abuse smacking cases have gone to the court room?

How many same sex marriages have there been?

Denial is a wonderful thing.


Although misguided theologically, I believe Pope Benedict XVI has a conscience on matters like global warming and the environment. He has been dubbed the "green pope".

Fletch - not this wise leaders teachings!!!

Ha Ha HA !!!

The comments to this entry are closed.