WORLD NEWS STORIES
December 6th, 2009 by Barry Eaton
2010 APEP imaging of Apollo 11 Moon photos discloses possible 1969 ET UFOs Buzz Aldrin says he saw
February 24, 
Alfred Lambremont Webre
FIG. 1: APEP: Spacecraft in Apollo 11 Earthrise photo, seen by astronauts
In an early extraterrestrial discovery of 2010, more than 40 years after the July 20, 1969 Apollo 11 lunar landing, NASA Earthrise photos taken on the Moon by Apollo 11 U.S. astronauts and enhanced by the Advanced Photo Extraction Process (APEP) have disclosed striking images of an apparent extraterrestrial base and 3 extraterrestrial UFO spacecraft idling above the extraterrestrial base, just a few miles from the alleged Apollo 11 landing site “in the southern Sea of Tranquility (Mare Tranquillitatis) about 20 kilometers (12 mi) southwest of the crater Sabine D (0.67408N, 23.47297E).”
These APEP enhanced images of Earthrise photos taken by the Apollo 11 astronauts were made available for this exclusive Examiner.com article by this reporter.
Ron Stewart, developer of the APEP process, confirmed in an exclusive ExopoliticsRadio.org interview with Alfred Lambremont Webre that the three extraterrestrial UFO spacecraft identified in the 2010 APEP report (Fig. 1 above) were most probably the same extraterrestrial UFO spacecraft that Apollo 11 astronauts reported to NASA in July 1969 were watching them on the Moon.
One source has reported, “According to a former NASA employee Otto Binder, unnamed radio hams with their own VHF receiving facilities that bypassed NASA’s broadcasting outlets picked up the following exchange:
“NASA: What’s there? Mission Control calling Apollo 11…
“Apollo: These ‘Babies’ are huge, Sir! Enormous! OH MY GOD! You wouldn’t believe it! I’m telling you there are other spacecraft out there, lined up on the far side of the crater edge! They’re on the Moon watching us!”
Ron Stewart, developer of the APEP process for the Ron Stewart/Ron Nussbeck firm, has reported these new Apollo 11 extraterrestrial disclosures in an exclusive 27 page APEP report entitled, “Apollo11: What was discovered? The untold story!” containing the enhanced images that may be accessed below in this Examiner.com article along with an exclusive slide show of images.
In his ExopoliticsRadio.org interview, Mr. Stewart was of the opinion that the NASA Apollo 11 photographs he examined were not produced by a front screen (“green screen”) projection process as some Apollo 11 hoax analysts have claimed.
The 2010 APEP enhanced images of the Earthrise taken by Apollo 11 may be an evidentiary smoking gun that confirms both the Apollo astronauts recorded statements of seeing extraterrestrial UFO spacecraft on the Moon, and ultimately the reality of the Apollo 11 moon landing itself.
Click here to listen to ExopoliticsRadio.org interview with Ron Stewart and Alfred Lambremont Webre on the Apollo 11 Moon landing and extraterrestrial base and spacecraft: “Apollo11: What was discovered? The untold story!”
This exclusive radio interview contains the analysis and background to the APEP Apollo 11 report on the possible extraterrestrial base and spacecraft within a few miles of the Apollo11 landing site.
Drug firms ‘drove swine flu pandemic warning to
recoup £billions spent on research’
January 27, 2010, Daily Mail (One of the UK’s largest-circulation newspapers)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246370/Drug-firms-drove-swine-flu-pandemic…
Drug companies manipulated the World Health Organisation into downgrading its definition of a pandemic so they could cash in on a swine flu outbreak, it is claimed.
An inquiry heard yesterday that the WHO allegedly softened its criteria for declaring a H1N1 flu pandemic last spring - just weeks before announcing there was a worldwide outbreak.
Critics said the decision was driven by pharmaceutical companies desperate to recoup the billions of pounds they had invested in researching and developing pandemic vaccines after the bird flu scares in 2006 and 2007. As a result, millions of people have been vaccinated against a mild illness, and money that could have been used to prevent and treat major killers such as heart disease has been squandered. The claims, which emerged during the first of several Council of Europe hearings into the handling of the swine flu pandemic, were strongly rejected by the WHO.
Following the organisation’s declaration of a pandemic, the Department of Health warned of 65,000 deaths, set up a special advice line and website, and suspended normal rules so anti-flu drugs could be given without prescription. But with just 250 or so deaths in Britain and 14,000 worldwide, the WHO is being asked to account for its actions.
U.S. households struggle to afford food: survey
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Nearly one in five U.S. households ran out of money to buy enough food at least once during 2009, said an antihunger group on Tuesday, urging more federal action to help Americans get enough to eat.
“There are no hunger-free areas of America,” said Jim Weill of the Food Research and Action Center. Weill said he hoped President Barack Obama would exempt public nutrition programs from a proposed three-year freeze on domestic spending.
Obama has a goal to end childhood hunger by 2015. He backed a $1 billion a year increase in school lunch and other child nutrition programs a year ago.
Nationwide polling found 18.2 percent of households reported “food hardship” — lacking money to buy enough food — in 2009, according to the group. That is higher than the government’s “food insecurity” rating of 14.6 percent of households, or 49 million people, for 2008.
Households with children had a “food hardship” rate of 24.1 percent for 2009 compared with 14.9 percent among households without children. Twenty states had rates of 20 percent or higher. Seven Southern states led the list.
The figures were based on responses to the question, “Have there been times in the past 12 months when you did not have enough money to buy the food that you or your family needed?” The question is similar to one asked by the Census Bureau in collecting data for the annual food-insecurity report.
**********************
United Nations’ Blunder on Glaciers Exposed
The Australian January 18, 2010
THE peak UN body on climate change has been dealt another humiliating blow to its credibility after it was revealed a central claim of one of its benchmark reports - that most of the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 because of global warming - was based on a “speculative” claim by an obscure Indian scientist.
The 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming, appears to have simply adopted the untested opinions of the Indian glaciologist from a magazine article published in 1999.
The IPCC report claimed that the world’s glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish inside 30 years.
But the scientists behind the warning have now admitted it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC’s report.
It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.
Mr Hasnain, who was then the chairman of the International Commission on Snow and Ice’s working group on Himalayan glaciology, has since admitted that the claim was “speculation” and was not supported by any formal research.
The revelation represents another embarrassing blow to the credibility of the IPCC, less than two months after the emergence of leaked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, which raised questions about the legitimacy of data published by the IPCC about global warming.
One email written by a scientist referred to ways of ensuring information that doubted the veracity of man-made climate change science did not appear in IPCC reports.
Several emails also revealed that some scientists at East Anglia tried to bully colleagues who challenged the theory of man-made climate change.
Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on Himalayan glaciers in the 2007 IPCC report, said on the weekend he was considering recommending that the claim about glaciers be dropped.
“If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, then I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments,” Professor Lal said.
The IPCC’s reliance on Mr Hasnain’s 1999 interview has been highlighted by Fred Pearce, the journalist who carried out the original interview for New Scientist. Pearce said he rang Mr Hasnain in India in 1999 after spotting his claims in an Indian magazine.
“Hasnain told me then that he was bringing a report containing those numbers to Britain,” Pearce said. “The report had not been peer reviewed or formally published in a scientific journal and it had no formal status so I reported his work on that basis.
“Since then I have obtained a copy and it does not say what Hasnain said. In other words, it does not mention 2035 as a date by which any Himalayan glaciers will melt.
“However, he did make clear that his comments related only to part of the Himalayan glaciers, not the whole massif.”
The New Scientist report was apparently forgotten until 2005 when environmental group WWF cited it in a report called An Overview of Glaciers, Glacier Retreat, and Subsequent Impacts in Nepal, India and China. The report credited Hasnain’s 1999 interview with New Scientist. But it was a campaigning report rather than an academic paper.
Despite this it rapidly became a key source for the IPCC when Professor Lal and his colleagues came to write the section on the Himalayas.
When published, the IPCC report gave its source as the WWF study but went further, suggesting the melting of the glaciers was “very likely”. The IPCC defines “very likely” as having a probability of greater than 90 per cent.
Glaciologists find such figures inherently ludicrous, pointing out that most Himalayan glaciers are hundreds of metres thick and could not melt fast enough to vanish by 2035 unless there was a huge global temperature rise.
Julian Dowdeswell, director of the Scott Polar Research Institute at Cambridge University, said: “A small glacier such as the Dokriani glacier is up to 120m thick. A big one would be several hundred metres thick and tens of kilometres long. The average is 300m thick so to melt one at 5m a year would take 60 years.”
Some scientists have questioned how the IPCC could have allowed such a mistake into print. Professor Lal admits he knows little about glaciers.