As the Obama administration creates policy based on the premise that the planet is warming, more and more scientists are concluding the real danger is global cooling.

One recently painted this scenario: Food shortages from crop failures brought on by cold weather during the summers will produce civil unrest, as in “huge civil unrest.”

“There’s no question of will it occur … but exactly when,” said David Dilley, a former NOAA meteorologist and the current senior research scientist at Global Weather Oscillations.

He gave a presentation recently on “Mind Your Own Business TV” with Debi Davis.

See the presentation:

Dilley predicts there will be years in which the mouth of Chesapeake Bay is frozen over and the “Great Lakes are ice-clogged.”

There will be “disruptions to commerce and the food supply,” he said. “This is coming.”

His forecasts are based on his research, peer-reviewed articles and evidence that the average temperatures on earth periodically have gone up and down in cycles that encompass hundreds or thousands of years.

He points out that temperature peaks always are followed by peaks in carbon dioxide levels, which would refute the modern global-warming theorists who insist that mankind’s production of carbon dioxide is causing global warming.

“Climategate” exposes the global warming scam. Get it now at the WND Superstore.

The coldest point in the coming cycle, he said, will be the years 2025 through about 2050.

Dilley’s conclusions in many ways echo those of former NASA scientist John L. Casey, who just last year recorded a warning on the issue.

See Casey’s warning:

Casey, who now is president of several climate organizations, is the author of “Cold Sun” and “Dark Winter.”

“The U.S. under President Obama has been eager to control industry and industrial output (of carbon dioxide),” he said.

The goal has been to shut down carbon dioxide emissions.

“That has been the main theme for many of the world’s governments for three decades,” he said.

However, “manmade carbon dioxide has very little to do with climate change.”

Casey said the cycles of warming and cooling periods generated by the sun are responsible for the changes.

Right now, he said, there are a number of hints, including volcanic and earthquake activity.

The last time such factors assembled, he said, was during a “cold era” during the late 1700s and early 1800s. In fact, he said, 1816 was known as the “year without a summer” when snow fell in the middle of August.

Problems this time, however, will be multiplied, because then the U.S. had a population of only 5 million, while now it’s about 320 million.

And then, too, “the vast majority of those people raised their own food and took care of themselves.”

“When tough times came along they chopped wood for their fire – [and used] stored food,” Casey said.

He suggests consumers should store a year’s worth of food, because once “we start to lose food and crops either at harvest time or at spring planting, things will get serious.”

At the same time, the U.S. government was “hyping meaningless records in a parameter that does not exist in order to frighten us about something that doesn’t matter,” according to Tom Harris of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition.

Harris, in a commentary Sunday in the Washington Times, said while NASA and NOAA announced last week that “according to their calculations, July 2015 was the hottest month since instrumental records began in 1880,” that isn’t the whole story.

“NOAA says that the record was set by eight one-hundredths of a degree Celsius over that set in July 1998. NASA calculates that July 2015 beat what they assert was the previous warmest month (July 2011) by two one-hundredths of a degree,” the report said.

“But government spokespeople rarely mention the inconvenient fact that these records are being set by less than the uncertainty in the statistics. NOAA claims an uncertainty of 14 one-hundredths of a degree in its temperature averages, or near seven times the amount by which they say the record was set. NASA says that their data is typically accurate to one tenth of a degree, five times the amount by which their new record was set.”

Harris said that makes the new temperature records “meaningless.”

“Neither agency knows whether a record was set,” he wrote.

“Such misrepresentations are now commonplace in NOAA and NASA announcements. They are regularly proclaiming monthly and yearly records set by less than the uncertainties in the measurements. Scientists within the agencies know that this is dishonest.”

Harris said that ultimately, it is “no more meaningful to calculate an average temperature for a whole planet than it is to calculate the average telephone number in the Washington, D.C., phone book.”

“Temperature, like viscosity and density, and of course phone numbers, is not something that can be meaningfully averaged. ‘Global temperature’ does not exist.”

There is evidence, according to Marc Morano of Climate Depot, a leading expert on the topic, that the “global warming” movement was never about the science behind the issue; it was always about creating a global system of controlling energy production and consumption.

And WND reported Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., has pointed out that for more than 100 years, “journalists have quoted scientists predicting the destruction of civilization by, in alternation, either runaway heat or a new Ice Age.”

The London Daily Mail noted that over the last century, America’s major media have predicted an impending global climate crisis four different times. Each prediction warned entire countries would be wiped out or that lower crop yields would mean “billions” would die.

In 1895, the panic was over an imminent ice age. In the late 1920s, when the earth’s surface warmed less than half a degree, the media jumped on a new threat – global warming, which continued into the late 1950s. Then in 1975, a New York Times headline blared “A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable.” In 1981, it was back to global warming, with the Times quoting seven government atmospheric scientists who predicted global warming of an “almost unprecedented magnitude.”

The term of choice later evolved to “climate change” to cover the changing predictions.

Morano told WND that the facts don’t seem to matter to the activists.

“They have an agenda,” he said.

“Climategate” exposes the global warming scam. Get it now at the WND Superstore.

Morano pointed to a number of statements from the global warming community that appeared to support that belief.

For example, he noted, EU Commissioner Connie Hedegaard once said, “Let’s say that science, some decades from now, said, ‘We were wrong; it was not about climate,’ would it not in any case have been good to do many of the things you have to do in order to combat climate change?”

Then there was ex-Democratic Sen. Tim Wirth of Colorado: “We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing, in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”

Morano, whose coming movie, “Climate Hustle,” will address the issue, said the global warming agenda isn’t about the science.

WND reported only weeks ago that GOP presidential hopeful Carly Fiorina, formerly the CEO of Hewlett-Packard, said the federal government itself is a bigger threat to America than so-called global warming.

In a recent interview with Katie Couric, Fiorina was responding to Couric’s question about whether she thinks climate change is a “serious issue.”

“I think it’s an issue,” she said. “I think we ought to be focusing our time, energy and resources on innovations. We need to keep it in perspective.”

Couric interrupted her to repeat the question, asking specifically how serious Fiorina believes the issue to be.

She said far more dangerous to America is the “web of dependencies” into which people fall, the issue of whether “people are getting a good education” and the “dangers we face around the world.”

Even, she said, the fact that “our government is a vast, bloated, unaccountable, corrupt bureaucracy.”

“Climategate” exposes the global warming scam. Get it now at the WND Superstore.

See the exchange”

WND has reported that from the other side of the political spectrum, Democratic presidential hopeful Martin O’Malley said ISIS got its start due to drought-fueled rage.

“One of the things that preceded the failure of the nation-state of Syria and the rise of ISIS was the effect of climate change and the mega-drought that affected that region, wiped out farmers, drove people to cities, created a humanitarian crisis that created the symptoms – or rather the conditions of extreme poverty – that has now led to the rise of ISIL and this extreme violence,” the former Maryland governor said, fielding a question about foreign policy from Bloomberg.

O’Malley is not alone in that thinking.

In May, President Obama told U.S. Coast Guard Academy graduates to be prepared for a shift in military strategy that would include a fight against global warming, because weather patterns figure into trends toward violence. And in early 2014, Secretary of State John Kerry called climate change “the greatest challenge of our generation,” more so than poverty, terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

And from a third party?

Ivar Giaever, a Nobel Prize-Winner for physics in 1973, said, “I would say that basically global warming is a non-problem.”

He’s a former professor at the School of Engineering and School of Science Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and received the 1973 physics Nobel for his work on quantum tunneling.

A year ago, WND reported scientists and others on a team assembled by the Chicago-based Heartland Institute, which focuses on free-market solutions to today’s problems, say the “scare” of global warming from the use of carbon fuels and other human activities “is over.”

It’s “past time” for the world to realize that and “stop the madness of wasting great sums of money on EPA’s imaginary threat,” contended Kenneth Haapala, the executive vice president of the Science and Environmental Policy Project in Virginia.

Institute experts said the Remote Sensing Systems, which provide data to NASA, NOAA and the National Science Foundation, have confirmed “the global mean surface temperature has not risen for 18 consecutive years.”

About that time, WND columnist Lord Monckton wrote: “Worldwide, the liarists – growing ever more desperate as the Great Pause grows ever longer – are taking up the cry that The Models Were Right All Along But The Warming Has Gone Into Hiding, Really And Truly It Has, With Knobs On, Cross My Heart And Hope To Die, So There.

“Just one problem with that. The catastrophist clique no longer entirely controls the scientific journals. It tried to, but it didn’t get away with it. In addition to ‘The ocean ate my global warming,’ the scientific journals contain a host of recent papers giving between them no less than 25 – yes, 25 – mutually incompatible explanations of the Great Pause.”

The holes in the theory have been documented. For example, London’s Independent newspaper declared at the turn of the millennium, “Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past.” The report quoted David Viner, senior research scientist at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, long considered an authoritative resource for global warming research, as saying snow would soon be “a very rare and exciting event” in Britain.

“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he claimed at the time.

But the authoritative reputation of East Anglia was seriously downgraded in 2009 when leaked emails proved researchers there were engaged in a major scheme to manipulate and suppress evidence against global warming, misconduct London’s Telegraph newspaper called “the worst scientific scandal of our generation.”

Well-known scientist Art Robinson has spearheaded The Petition Project, which to date has gathered the signatures of 31,487 scientists who agree that there is “no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

The scientists say, “Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.”

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.