Welcome To 2030: I Own Land, Live Among Like Minded People, And Life Has Never Been Better

It’s time for the people to envision what our 2030 will look like.

On Friday November 11th, 2016, the World Economic Forum and Forbes magazine published a short essay titled “Welcome to 2030. I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better”. Written by Ida Auken, Denmark’s former Minister for the Environment imagines what life might be like in 2030.

welcome to 2030 i own land, live among like minded people, and life has never been better

The year 2030 was chosen because of its importance to the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDGs are a collection of 17 interlinked objectives adopted by the United Nations in 2015 with the ostensible goal of ending poverty, protecting the planet, and spreading peace and prosperity to all people by 2030. Their actions, however, regularly belie their stated intentions.

The SDGs were part of a larger resolution known as the 2030 Agenda, or Agenda 2030, with the stated purpose of fighting climate change. While the United Nations SDGs and Agenda 2030 are often touted as a tool for establishing healthy multilateral relationships between nations, in truth, they are based in a deeper agenda to monitor, control, and direct all life on the planet.

Here’s How the WEF Wants to Achieve This: The Great Reset Will Render All Products As Services, to Implement ‘You Will Own Nothing’ by 2030.

Although the essay is nearly 6 years old, most people have become aware of it — and the phrase “You Will Own Nothing and Be Happy” — since the World Economic Forum announced The Great Reset agenda in June 2020. Over the last 2 years, countless researchers, podcasters, and journalists have shared their concerns with the public in an attempt to avert the world described by Ida Auken.

The efforts to reach the masses appear to have been successful to some degree based on the corporate media attempting to fact check the story, Ida Auken releasing a statement in response to the public concerns, and the WEF taking the essay down from their website. In Auken’s 2020 statement she says:

“Some people have read this blog as my utopia or dream of the future. It is not. It is a scenario showing where we could be heading – for better and for worse. I wrote this piece to start a discussion about some of the pros and cons of the current technological development. When we are dealing with the future, it is not enough to work with reports. We should start discussions in many new ways. This is the intention with this piece.”

Interestingly enough, Ida Auken is listed as an “Agenda Contributor” for the WEF and was the first Danish politician chosen for the Young Global Leaders Program. Auken has also released 3 other blogs (123) imagining the world of 2030. Upon reading these 4 essays you come away with the understanding that some of what Auken and the WEF describes actually sounds beneficial. After all, who wouldn’t want a more walkable and bikeable town or city? Who doesn’t appreciate more trails and trees?

Of course, when you get past the buzzwords and promises of utopia you recognize that the world of 2030 described by Auken and the WEF is a world where Technocrats centrally plan every aspect of society. It is a world with no privacy, no personal property ownership, with compulsory digital IDs, digital currencies, and social credit scores. In short, you will own nothing and be happy.

Auken makes these points clear in her 2016 essay when she notes that “everything you considered a product, has now become a service”, or “in our city we don’t pay any rent, because someone else is using our free space whenever we do not need it. My living room is used for business meetings when I am not there”. She also notes that shopping has turned into “choosing things to use” and that sometimes she lets “the algorithm” do it for her because “it knows my taste better than I do by now”.

Finally, Auken laments the people “who do not live in our city, those we lost on the way”, referring to the people who opted out of the Smart Cities and social credit scores to exit the cities and build “self-supplying communities”. What Ms. Auken may fail to understand is that millions of people are choosing to exit the cities already, and build outside the digital dystopia planned for 2030. Even those who cannot or will not leave the cities are beginning to question what their future holds if they remain in the tightly controlled metroplexes.

While most readers likely do not agree with the vision put forth by the WEF, the UN, and their cartels, we cannot deny that these institutions are working night and day to achieve their 2030 Agenda. They are working with hundreds of multinational corporations, nearly every major world government, and spending trillions of dollars to manifest The Great Reset.

It’s time for the people to envision what our 2030 will look like. If we know we reject the new normal and the Great Reset, we must understand what exactly we are seeking to create. Will it be “You Will Own Nothing and Be Happy”? Or, perhaps, You Will Be Thriving and You Will Be Fulfilled. The answer completely depends on every single one of us. The future generations are depending on us to build an alternative to the Technocratic vision.

Here is one alternative vision of 2030. This is my simple attempt at outlining what 2030 could be like. I call it Liberation 2030 and I work everyday to help others see the importance of envisioning our future. Maybe your vision is slightly different. Whatever it is, write it down, see it in your mind, and do what you can to bring it to reality.

Let’s reject Agenda 2030 and the Great Reset, and let’s build The People’s Reset.

Welcome To 2030: I Own Land, Live Among Like Minded People, And Life Has Never Been Better

Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my home. I own a couple of acres in an intentional community just outside a major city. I live in an Earthship with my family and our pets.

Together we live amongst dozens of other families and individuals who decided to get out of the concrete jungle and head for greener pastures. Every family owns their own land and home. The founders of our community bought the land and began recruiting members in the late 2010’s as the surveillance grids become more obvious.

Our community has built our own homes, roads, a network of trails, and a community center where we host educational workshops to teach other communities how to become independent from the grid.

Speaking of the grid, some of our neighbors have been experimenting with “free energy” devices, while others are focused on solar, hydro, and wind power. We are determined to be energy independent, especially after some governments began disconnecting the unvaccinated from the electric grid in 2026.

Once food prices and inflation began to rise in 2022 we realized we needed to cut our dependence on the grocery stores. Most of the corporate stores require a digital ID to enter anyways and most of our community members have opted out of that system.

So now all of our homes are nestled within food forests producing fruits from around the world. The hundreds of trees we have planted the last few years shield our homes from the elements and allow for privacy.

As you walk down the pathways you also see many permaculture gardens producing veggies and herbs for cooking and medicine. Free range kids are running in every direction, laughing and playing in the sun.

The best part of our lives now is that we are not alone. In fact, we are one of thousands of communities which form an international network outside of the big cities and control grid.

Our community is surrounded by several other like-minded communities, each with their own governance models, traditions, and norms. We often trade goods and services with our local neighbors, and some communities have begun establishing long distance trade networks.

Thankfully, in the late 2010’s, a handful of forward thinking individuals began establishing local cells and circles, helping people network and find the community they were looking for. These groups laid the foundation for a People’s Reset which saw millions of people exiting from the grid and disobeying authoritarian mandates.

Those cells eventually morphed into intentional communities and ecovillages united by respect for self-ownership and bodily autonomy. Together they form a decentralized network of networks which gives the people an option outside of the smart cities.

I’ve even heard rumors that some of these communities help people escaping from the cities.

“They Live Different Kinds Of Lives Inside The City”

Sometimes I think about the people we left behind. The people who became consumed with the benefits and conveniences of technology and couldn’t see the dangers. The people who were propagandized to hate their neighbor if they belong to a different political party. Even worse, the people who knew what was coming but failed to act.

They live different kinds of lives inside the city. They are only allowed to go outside their apartments when the Climate Warning System is listed as green and when the Gates’ World Health Foundation says the Pandemic Threat Level is below a 70.

No one is allowed to drive a vehicle anymore or own land. You can’t rent an appliance without showing a digital ID card or scanning your retinas.

Actually, no one is even allowed in the city without being sanitized, scanned, tagged, and assigned a social credit rating which determines your class and access to public services.

We know there are labor camps and quarantine camps but they are hard to find because the ruling Democratic-Republican Alliance moves the prisoners often.

We pray everyday for our brothers and sisters in the city, and we work towards a day when all our people are free to join us in creating the lives of their dreams.

Destroying Food To Fight Climate Change Is MADNESS

What is happening in Northern Ireland is part of a larger push to wean humans off red meat, particularly beef, which humans consume to the tune of 350 millions tons each year.

destroying food to fight climate change is madness

On Earth Day, a 50-year-old environmentalist and photographer from Colorado named Wynn Alan Bruce lit himself on fire outside the US Supreme Court.

Friends of Bruce, who subsequently died, said he was worried about climate change.

“This guy was my friend,” said Kritee Kanko, a senior scientist at the Environmental Defense Fund. “This was not an act of suicide. This is a deeply fearless act of compassion to bring attention to [the] climate crisis.”

Bruce’s act of immolation is one example of increasing fear of climate change, a fear that is damaging humans in various ways, including a surge in so-called “climate anxiety.”

This fear is also manifesting itself in other ways, including the realm of public policy.

Many countries around the world are aggressively pursuing net-zero carbon emission plans designed to mitigate the effects of global warming.

‘Losing’ A Million Sheep And Cattle

While people tend to think reducing emissions involves shutting down coal plants, driving more electric vehicles, and relying more on solar and wind power — each of which comes with environmental and economic costs — these are not the only policies on the table.

Increasingly governments are targeting a different emission source: food (livestock specifically). The reasons for this are not hard to find.

No less an authority than the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) notes that about one third of climate warming from greenhouse gasses stems from human-caused emissions of methane. While CO2 gets more attention, the EPA notes that methane is actually a more potent greenhouse gas, trapping about 30 times as much heat as CO2 over a century.

A new law in Northern Ireland sets a target of zero net emissions by 2050, and the BBC reports the legislation includes a proposed 46 percent reduction in methane emissions.

Since about a third of human-caused methane gasses come from livestock, Northern Ireland is looking at a huge reduction of farm animals — especially sheep and cattle — to meet that goal.

“Northern Ireland will need to lose more than 1 million sheep and cattle to meet its new legally binding climate emissions targets,” The Guardian recently reported.

Specifically, according to estimates from the Ulster Farmers’ Union, some 500,000 cattle and roughly 700,000 sheep would have to “be lost in order for Northern Ireland to meet the new climate targets.”

While the pig and poultry sectors also will need to be cut to meet emission targets, climate officials said these sectors are less harmful to the environment than “red meat” livestock.

“If you look at the evidence on the lifecycle of greenhouse gas emissions, the red meat livestock sources – beef, dairy, sheep – have the highest emissions because they’re ruminant and they have high methane emissions,” Ewa Kmietowicz, head of the land use mitigations team at the Climate Change Committee told the paper.

Chris Stark, CCC chief executive, told The Guardian that a switch to arable farming would likely be necessary to maintain food production levels.

Let Them Eat Synthetic Beef

What is happening in Northern Ireland is part of a much larger push to wean humans off red meat, particularly beef, which humans consume to the tune of 350 millions tons each year.

Many people, including Microsoft founder Billy Boy, have argued nations have a responsibility to transition off beef for environmental reasons.

“I do think all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef,” Gates remarked in an interview with MIT Technology Review last year. “You can get used to the taste difference, and the claim is they’re going to make it taste even better over time.”

Gates doesn’t really explain how this transition should occur, but we’re beginning to see.

While there’s no question that global temperatures are rising — 14 percent per decade, on average — people should find the efforts by central planners to curb climate change more alarming than rising temps.

Such policies have the earmarks of failed collectivist programs of the past, such as FDR’s “porcine slaughter of the innocents,” which saw millions of pigs and sows destroyed while people were going hungry — all in an attempt to keep prices high.

FDR’s mad program was child’s play, however, compared to Chairman Mao, who had plans to revolutionize China’s agricultural sector with his Great Leap Forward.

Things didn’t go as planned. It turned out food production was more complex than Mao anticipated. Via Britannica Online:

“The inefficiency of the communes and the large-scale diversion of farm labour into small-scale industry disrupted China’s agriculture seriously, and three consecutive years of natural calamities added to what quickly turned into a national disaster; in all, about 20 million people were estimated to have died of starvation between 1959 and 1962.”

Did you catch that? Twenty million people died under Mao’s collectivist effort.

Nor was this the first man-made famine created by socialists. In 1932 and 1933, millions of Ukraininans died in a famine engineered by the Soviet Union.

“In the case of the Holodomor, this was the first genocide that was methodically planned out and perpetrated by depriving the very people who were producers of food of their nourishment (for survival),” wrote historian Andrea Graziosi, a professor at the University of Naples.

The genocide, Graziosi notes, was not just tragic but ironic in that it took place in a region globally recognzed as the “breadbasket of Europe.”

These accounts remind us of a dark and disturbing reality highlighted by economist Thomas Sowell.

“Many of the greatest disasters of our time have been created by experts,” Sowell has observed.

In his Nobel Prize acceptance speech, the economist F.A. Hayek explained that such disasters stem from the lack of humility among central planners about the knowledge (or lack thereof) they possess in their “fatal striving to control society.”

Above all else, Hayek said, the role of economics is to temper such grand plans.

“The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to [humans] how little they really know about what they imagine they can design,” Hayek observed in The Fatal Conceit.

Attempting to curb climate change by destroying food supplies may not appear quite as crazy as lighting oneself on fire in front of the Supreme Court to protest a lack of government action on climate change.

But it may ultimately prove to be even more deadly.

Source: FEE.org

UN Warning: The “Global Wildfire Crisis”

For those of us who understand how the illusionists behind this fallen world of ours operate, and are able to “read between the lines” with our third eye, the opening lines of this Slimes article amount to a confession to serial arson coming from the Globalists at the UN, and published in “the paper of record.”

“A landmark United Nations report has concluded that the risk of devastating wildfires around the world will surge in coming decades as climate change further intensifies what the report described as a “global wildfire crisis.

The scientific assessment is the first by the organization’s environmental authority to evaluate wildfire risks worldwide. It was inspired by a string of deadly blazes around the globe in recent years, burning the American West, vast stretches of Australia and even the Arctic.

The heating of the planet is turning landscapes into tinderboxes,” said the report, which was published on Wednesday by the United Nations Environment Program.” (emphasis added)
*

Problem — reaction — solution. TEXTBOOK!

Who needs to wait around for the mile-thick ice-caps of the deep Antarctic and Greenland interiors to melt and drown us within the span of the ever-moving-up timeline of “20-25 years from now” when a few gas cans — or, better yet, some aerial or space-based lasers — can whip up made-for-TV infernos now and in the near future. Oh yes, it was (((the usual suspects))) who were behind the rash of mysterious hell-on-earth fires of these past few years now dubbed as “the global wildfire crisis.” Bet on it.

The report attributes the “the global wildfire crisis” to increased temperatures and dryness caused by decreased rainfall and humidity. This is truly an astonishing example of Orwellian double-think coming from the very same United Nations which, in another “scientific” report published only six months ago, had this to say about precipitation:

“As air temperatures increase, the atmosphere can hold more moisture and thus produce heavier rainfall. As a result, heavy precipitation events have increased in both frequency and intensity since 1950.” (emphasis added)

*

Too much rain and more flooding? Blame it on CO2 (plant food).
Not enough rain and more wildfires? Blame it on CO2.
Droughts and floods at “normal” levels? Don’t confuse weather and climate, dammit!

No matter which predictable or unpredictable, short term or long term course nature takes, the well-paid high priests of the Communist Climate Con and their true-believing “lesser brethren” have got a manufactured explanation for it — one which their co-conspirators in Fake News will always publish and extol as “settled science.”

The article closes out with some “educational” links for the demented boobs who worship the Slimes to “learn more.”

Learn More About Climate Change

  • If you struggle to understand the science behind climate change, let us walk you through the basics.
  • Get your children invested, by talking to them about our warming planet, and what we can all do about it.
  • In the climate debate, the science is clear, and the language is anything but.  These are the buzzwords to know.

Fake News has come a long way since the very first casually mentioned “trial balloon” claims of 1979 about how “Some scientists speculate that we may be experiencing a CO2-caused Greenhouse Effect” — to: “Shut up, you imbecile! the science is settled! Learn more!” And all throughout that 43-year period, all of the real observable science points to the theory of man-made CO2-based “Global Warming” as being a well-financed joke on humanity — just like its cousin, the Stupid-19 scamdemic.

Ending Mandates Does NOT Strip Government Of The Ability To Do This Again

Source: JuliusRuechel.com

The ongoing Truckers for Freedom convoy in Ottawa has triggered a shock-wave that is reaching all around the world. Even as our authoritarian federal regime continues to double down on measures and threatens to use brute force tactics against peaceful protesters, many provinces are nervously beginning to lay out a timeline for ending mandates.

But there is something important missing from the conversation surrounding the end of mandates:

If the mandates are simply dropped today without calling out the underlying legal and ethical fallacy that was used to justify them, government overreach will have become normalized. We will be left without the legal protections to stop them from doing this to us again after the truckers go home.

All it will take to put us back in a cage is for the government to point at the next wave, the next virus variant, or the next non-Covid emergency.

We will have normalized that our rights, our freedoms, our bodily autonomy, and even access to our lives are conditional privileges, subject to opinion polls and technocratic impulses, and that they can be withdrawn again at any time, “for our safety.”

In March of 2020, in violation of the principles embedded in our constitutions, governments around the world convinced citizens to give their leaders and public institutions the authority to overrule individual rights in order to “flatten the curve.”

That impulse went unchallenged under the false assumption that human rights violations could be justified as long as the benefits to the majority outweighed the costs to the minority.

By accepting this excuse for overriding unconditional rights, we transformed ourselves into an authoritarian police state where “might makes right”. That is the moment when all the checks and balances in our scientific and democratic institutions stopped functioning.

Liberal democracy was built around the principle that individual rights must be unconditional. In other words, they are meant to supersede the authority of government.

Consequently, individual rights (such as bodily autonomy) were meant to serve as checks and balances on government power. They were meant to provide a hard limit to what our government can do to us without our individual consent.

If the government cannot override your rights to bend you to its will, then it will be forced to try to convince you by talking with you. That forces government to be transparent and to engage in meaningful debate with critics. Your ability to say NO, and to have your choice respected, is the difference between a functioning liberal democracy and an authoritarian regime.

The natural instinct of fearful people is to control those around them. Unconditional rights force people to negotiate voluntary participation in collective solutions. Thus, unconditional rights prevent the formation of echo chambers and provide an important counter-weight to rein in uncontrolled panic.

When no-one has the option to use the brute force of State power to force others to submit to what they think is “the right thing to do”, then the only path forward is to keep talking to everyone, including to “fringe minorities” with “unacceptable views”. When we allow rights to become conditional, it is virtually a certainty that during a crisis, panicked citizens and opportunistic politicians will give in to their worst impulses and trample those who disagree with them.

Unconditional individual rights prevent governments from taking unwilling citizens on crusades. They prevent scientific institutions from transforming themselves into unchallengeable “Ministries of Truth” that can double down on their mistakes to avoid accountability. They ensure that the checks and balances that make science and democracy work do not break down in the chaos of a crisis.

In the heat of an emergency when policy decisions are often made on the fly, unconditional rights are often the only safeguards to protect minorities from panicked mobs and self-anointed kings.

If we allow our leaders to normalize the idea that rights can be switched off during emergencies or when political leaders decide that “the science is settled”, then we are giving the government terrifying and unlimited power over us.

It gives those who control the levers of power the authority to turn off access to your life. That turns the competition for power into a zero-sum game: the winners become masters, the losers become serfs.

It means you can no longer afford to allow the other side to win an election, at any cost, nor agree to a peaceful transfer of power, because if you lose the winning team becomes the master of your destiny. And so, a zero-sum game of brutal power politics is set in motion. Unconditional individual rights are the antidote to civil war. Liberal democracy collapses without them.

Withdrawing mandates because “the Omicron variant is mild” or because “the costs of continuing the measures outweigh the benefits” does not undo what has been normalized and legitimized.

If the legitimacy of mandates is not overturned, you will not be going back to your normal life. It may superficially look similar to your life before Covid, but in reality you will be living in a Brave New World where governments temporarily grant privileges to those who conform with the government’s vision of how we should live.

You will no longer be celebrating your differences, cultivating your individuality, or making your own free choices. Only conformity will enable you to exist. You will be living under a regime in which any new “crisis” can serve as justification to impose restrictions on those who don’t “get with the program” as long as mobs and technocrats think the restrictions are “reasonable”. You will no longer be the master of your own life. A golden cage is still a cage if someone else controls the lock on the door.

Politicians and public health authorities MUST be forced to acknowledge that mandates are a violation of civil liberties. The public MUST be confronted by the fact that liberal democracy ceases to exist without the unconditional (inalienable) safeguards of individual rights and freedoms.

The public MUST recognize that science ceases to function when mandates can be used to cut off scientific debates. Our governments and our fellow citizens MUST be made to understand that unconditional rights are especially important during a crisis.

If the legal and ethical fallacies that were used to justify mandates are not called out as inexcusable violations of our constitutional rights, we will have inadvertently normalized the illiberal idea that, as long as someone in a lab coat says it’s okay, this can be done to us again, at any time, whether to fight the next wave of Covid, to take away freedoms to fight “climate change”, to seize assets to solve a government debt crisis, or simply to socially engineer outcomes according to whatever our leaders define as a “fairer and more equitable world.”

How we navigate the end of mandates determines whether we win our freedom or whether we allow our leaders to normalize a Brave New World with conditional rights that can be turned off again during the next “emergency”.

WHO’s Terrorist-Connected Director General Now Claims Climate Change Is The ‘Single Biggest Health Threat Facing Humanity’

After grossly inflating COVID death rates, the WHO’s terrorist-connected Director General Tedros now claims climate change is the ‘single biggest health threat facing humanity.’

by Joe Hoft

who’s terrorist connected director general now claims climate change is the ‘single biggest health threat facing humanity’

The World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) Director General, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, now claims that climate change is the ‘single biggest health threat facing humanity’. This proves again this man should never lead a worldwide organization of any kind.

We first noticed Dr. Tedros shortly after the COVID outbreak in China was first reported in the press. Tedros claimed COVID had a mortality rate for those who caught the virus of 3.4%, scaring the entire world. This proved to be a faulty estimate based on faulty calculations we soon discovered.

We then uncovered that Tedros was a member of the terrorist regime that controls the African country of Ethiopia, where China has invested heavily. This we suspected was the reason he appeared to always promote a pro-China narrative.

tedros and china

Now the WHO under Tedros has released a publication claiming climate change is the world’s most pressing issue. Breitbart reports:

In its report titled “The Health Argument for Climate Action,” the W.H.O. calls climate change the “single biggest health threat facing humanity” and calls on governments to “act to tackle the climate crisis, restore biodiversity, and protect health.”

“While no one is safe from the health impacts of climate change, they are disproportionately felt by the most vulnerable and disadvantaged,” the report asserts.

To “avert catastrophic health impacts and prevent millions of climate change-related deaths,” the world must limit temperature rise to 1.5°C, the report states, referencing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

“The climate crisis is upon us, powered by our addiction to fossil fuels,” writes Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, W.H.O. Director-General in his foreword to the report. “The consequences for our health are real and often devastating.”

Breitbart writes:

It is remarkable that given the magnitude of the negative impact of air pollution on human health, the United Nations is spending its efforts trying to convince first-world countries to curb the emission of carbon dioxide (a colorless, odorless, non-toxic gas) rather than focusing on cleaning the air in third-world countries where people are dying daily from the pollution.

In an October 7 essay in the Wall Street Journal, climate expert Bjorn Lomborg declared that working to end global warming “could hurt the poor more than help” because of its negative impact on economic development.

Malnutrition deaths “have declined dramatically over the past three decades and will continue to drop rapidly over the next three,” Lomborg noted, a phenomenon overwhelmingly driven by economic growth…

…It does not take a conspiracy theorist to wonder whether the U.N.’s exclusive interest in climate change — which has not been convincingly tied to a single death — and its relative disregard for the established killer air pollution is not tied to geopolitical and economic interests unrelated to human health.

[The Western world is being destroyed by the climate agenda, which is based on the lie that humans are responsible for global warming. Meanwhile, China is unaffected by the anti-human climate agenda in the West and stands to profit massively as a result. They are already the world’s biggest producers of almost everything.]

Tedros and his WHO are at it again. Promoting devastating and erroneous information that helps China, perhaps the biggest killer these past few years when accounting for COVID and air pollution, and harms the West.

Are You Going To Take It? Establishment Now Advocating Lock-downs — Not To Save You From Covid, But From Climate Change

According to her bio on her website, Mariana Francesca Mazzucato is an economist with dual Italian – US citizenship. She is a professor at University College London in Economics of Innovation and Public Value and she is the founder and director of their Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose. However, according to her recent essay, she’s also a tyrannical advocate of economic lock-downs. Unlike the crippling corona-virus lock-downs that sent overdoses into record breaking territory and childhood suicides through the roof, these lock-downs are for climate change. Unfortunately, she is not alone in her views either.

establishment now advocating lockdowns — not to save you from covid, but from climate change

In her essay, which was endorsed by many in the establishment media, Mazzucato pushes for draconian measures to curb what she refers to as a tipping point on climate change. If we don’t take “dramatic interventions” immediately, human civilization as we know it will come to an end and so will the planet, according to Mazzucato. These interventions are not child’s play either.

According to Mazzucato’s paper, which was reprinted in mainstream media outlets across the planet:

“Under a ‘climate lock-down,’ governments would limit private-vehicle use, ban consumption of red meat, and impose extreme energy-saving measures, while fossil-fuel companies would have to stop drilling. To avoid such a scenario, we must overhaul our economic structures and do capitalism differently.”

Given what we know about the covid lock-downs, the effects of such a system would likely have devastating consequences for every country and send shock-waves throughout every socioeconomic arena. So why on Earth would politicians and media be chomping at the bit to get on board?

Earlier this month, President Joe Biden used the recent hurricanes as “proof” we’re in a “climate crisis” and issued a “code red” for the world. He was backed up by House climate adviser Gina McCarthy, who added that the climate crisis is now a “health emergency.”

A recent Nature journal piece followed suit, claiming that COVID-19 lock-downs have prepared people for “personal carbon allowances.” Restrictions on individual freedoms “that were unthinkable only one year before” have us “more prepared to accept the tracking and limitations” to “achieve a safer climate,” the piece notes.

World Meteorological Organization Secretary-General Professor Petteri Taalas agrees and held no punches when he declared that the covid lock-downs provided a blueprint for how we should proceed with climate lock-downs.

“The COVID-19 pandemic is not a solution for climate change. However, it does provide us with a platform for more sustained and ambitious climate action to reduce emissions to net zero through a complete transformation of our industrial, energy and transport systems. The needed changes are economically affordable and technically possible and would affect our everyday life only marginally. It is to be welcomed that a growing number of countries and companies have committed themselves to carbon neutrality,” he said. “There is no time to lose.”

It is important to note that the Free Thought Project is not advocating for the existence or the non-existence of climate change — we are not climate scientists. However, we most certainly think that it is a topic worthy of discussion and research but never government force.

Of course, drastic government mandates and sweeping bans on items is no way to handle any situation. However, that is becoming more and more unnecessary given the market’s reaction to fossil fuels and their potential to contribute to global warming.

The U.S. Dept. of Energy’s second annual report found that solar employment was almost double that of fossil fuel employment in the Electric Power Generation sector.

“Proportionally, solar employment accounts for the largest share of workers in the Electric Power Generation sector. This is largely due to the construction related to the significant buildout of new solar generation capacity. Solar technologies, both photovoltaic and concentrating, employ almost 374,000 workers, or 43 percent of the Electric Power Generation workforce. This is followed by fossil fuel generation employment, which accounts for 22 percent of total Electric Power Generation employment and supports 187,117 workers across coal, oil, and natural gas generation technologies.”

No one here is advocating we immediately halt the use of fossil fuels. Without them, humanity would still be in the stone ages and much of the renewable energy products that exist today would’ve been and still would be impossible to make.

However, only humanity loses when outdated technology is propped up by taxpayer dollars and the fossil fuel industry is a perfect example of this practice. When we remove corporate welfare, we find that the market acts as a far better motivator for cleaner energy.

It has been reported that unsubsidized solar is cheaper than fossil fuels in many countries for large-scale electricity generation.

The tools exist right now to move humanity into a better more sustainable place, and, as the numbers illustrate, we are getting there — without sacrificing freedom. As TFTP’s Don Via Jr. writes:

“Now more than ever, finding viable alternatives to opt out from this broken abusive system is vital for our civilization to take its next step in evolution. The solutions for humanity to begin moving towards a freer, more peaceful, prosperous and sustainable world exist. But we have to act on developing these strategies and creating new ones; as individuals, and in doing so encouraging the togetherness to voluntarily do so collectively as a society. The possibilities for change are abundant. But it starts with us. We must act on it, and be the change we wish to see in the world.”

Source: TheFreeThoughtProject.com

Let’s Debunk the “Melting Arctic Ice” Hoax

Picture
A polar bear on an ice floe near the Franz Josef Land archipelago, off the northern coast of Russia, in August

SEPTEMBER 20, 2021

NY Times: Arctic Sea Ice Hits Annual Low, but It’s Not as Low as Recent Years

Cool conditions north of Alaska in August reduced melting, scientists say, but the overall is still downward.

Greta Gloomberg can’t be too happy about this news. Actually, even when that demonic front-child for the Globalists is happy, she’s still miserable. According to this limited hangout piece — based on analysis from crooked crackpot “scientists” at the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado  — Arctic sea-ice coverage is 25% greater than it was at this time last year. Given the propensity of these whore-scientists to lie and lie and lie (cha ching and cha ching and cha ching) — we can probably infer that the true increase year-over-year may even be closer to 50%. But gloom up, Greta — the distinguished PhDs. assure us that “the overall trend remains downward.”

Let’s melt down this Fake Science / Fake News article, starting with the “heart-breaking” image and caption of a Polar Bear, “stranded” on a piece of ice. Parkas and snow boots on, boys and girls. Into the Slimes’ thin ice of “logic” we go for some easy debunking of the Climate Con.

Picture
Aw shut up you miserable script-reading little Marxist monster.
Picture
The Ice Man is back in business
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
The poor helpless “stranded” Polar Bear is the cover boy of the worldwide Climate Con.
Picture

Times Photo Caption: A polar bear on an ice floe….
Rebuttal: These emotionally manipulative images of the “stranded” lovable giant fur-balls are calculated to induce the teary-eyed boobs into “do something” mode. The pictures are real, but what (((they))) omit is the fact that these blubbery buoyant beasts can swim for days at a time over tremendous distances. One polar bear was monitored as it swam for nine days straight — traversing 426 miles  — which is about the distance between Washington, D.C. and Boston (here). And when one of these super-marathon swimmers stops to take a break on an ice floe — CLICK! The felons of Fake News take their made-for-Normiedom photograph and use it for scare content.

Times: The (ice) total is a reminder that the climate is naturally variable, and that variability can sometimes outweigh the effects of climate change.
Rebuttal: Sea ice retreats: “Aha! You see! You see! It’s Global Warming !”  — Sea ice spreads by 25%: “Don’t confuse weather and climate. These are natural variations.” See the rhetorical trick?

Times: But the overall downward trend of Arctic sea ice continues,
Rebuttal: First of all, these greasy characters have been caught fudging data so many times, that no rational person ought to even believe that there is a “downward trend,” at all. But why would researchers rely upon something as vast, as vague and as variable as Arctic ice observation to support the Climate Con when we have the capacity to accurately measure — hour by hour — the exact temperature of every square mile of Earth? That’s about as ass-backwards as estimating the temperature inside of a refrigerator by touching the milk bottle, when all one has to do is read the digital temp monitor!

Times: … as the region warms more than twice as fast as other parts of the world.
Rebuttal: You see, it’s easy to make such bold claims about rising Arctic temps because nobody lives there. Whereas Boobus Normie, on the basis of his own experience and observation, might be skeptical of claims that Anytown, USA is now hotter than ever; he would have no basis to raise any questions about the “twice as fast” warming of the Arctic. Trickery, trickery, trickery.

Picture
Buoyant Polar bears (cubs too) can swim for miles and miles and miles (hundreds of miles!) without difficulty
Picture
he state-of-the-art RSS (Remote Sensing Systems) (FAKE “there are NO satellites in space”) readings don’t give the warmists the fake numbers they need
Picture
So they must resort to the woefully inexact (and easily manipulated) “science” of observing variable ice coverage instead
Picture
It’s easy for the paid whores of Fake News and Fake Science to lie about what’s going on at the Arctic Circle / Ocean because nobody lives there.

Times: But thinning or complete melting of thicker Arctic sea ice (there is now about one-fourth as much as there was four decades ago) is troubling.
Rebuttal: Why exactly would that be “troubling?” Ice that sits on top of water (Arctic Ocean) doesn’t raise sea-levels (another scare hoax) when it melts. Only ice that is packed a mile deep on land (such as Antarctica) could do that.

Times: The thinner sea ice gets, the more sunlight it lets through to the water underneath, which can generate even more warmth as more of the sun’s energy is absorbed and re-emitted as heat.
Rebuttal: Oh. I see. Then perhaps we can spread giant floating white tarps over the Arctic? (Better watch my jokes here. These psychopaths might actually do such a thing.)

Times: And since first-year ice, being thinner, is more prone to melting completely, as it replaces older ice the region overall becomes more susceptible to melting.
Rebuttal: The alleged decades-old melting of old ice will have a synergistic effect as it combines with the warming atmosphere — thus leading to the melting of even more old ice. So then — why is ice up 25% this year? — Oh, that’s right. Weather is not to be confused with climate — unless the weather gets warmer. Then it’s one and the same.

Times: Many scientists expect the Arctic may become ice-free in summers …..
Rebuttal: No doubt the same crooked ass-clowns whose “computer models” predicted that our winters to have become snow-free by now — or that lower Manhattan would have been underwater by Year 2000.

Times: … within a decade or two.
Analysis: Ever notice how the gloom & doom forecasts are ALWAYS “within a decade or two?” The reason for this is simple. You see, if the crooked scientists set doomsday too close, then the normies will start to question their expertise when the doom fails to materialize. But if the date is set too far in the future — like say, 50 years or more — then normie won’t feel any sense of urgency. Therefore, “a decade or two” (always adjusted to remain at “a decade or two”) is just about right. Trickery. Trickery. Trickery.

The deceptions are easy to spot once you know (((their))) playbook. The real problem now is that so many children are getting brainwashed with this, starting in the first grade.

Picture
Picture
1. & 2. Headlines about Arctic melting from 1922! 
Picture
Picture
The oh-so-serious-looking “scientists” promoting the 74-year-old Globalist “Doomsday Clock” have since replaced the “we-are-a-decade-away-from-nuclear-war-unless-we-have-world-government” scare with the “we-are-a-decade-away-from-Global-ice-meltdown-unless-we-have-world-government” scare (*with a Stupid-19 twist added for 2021)

Warning! The CO2 Monitoring Credit Card Will Cut You Off At Your Carbon Max

Doconomy is a CO2 monitoring credit card backed by the UN (United Nations), WEF (World Economic Forum) and Mastercard which promises to track your carbon spending – and cut you off once you reach your permitted carbon maximum. Welcome to the impending green dystopia of Agenda 2030.

welcome to the co2 monitoring credit card that cuts you off at your carbon max

As I mentioned in my previous article New Study Analyzes Implementation of Agenda 2030 Personal Carbon Allowances, the manmade climate change agenda is still being rapidly pushed forward while the NWO (New World Order) controllers see how much mileage they can squeeze out of the COVID Cult craziness. It is a strong possibility they will pivot at some point from the fake COVID emergency to the fake climate emergency and try to convince the population to go along with equally strict rules in some sort of climate lock-down scenario.

Regardless of if and when that happens, the objective of both operations is the same: segregation (punishing those who refuse to acquiesce) and control. The long term Agenda 2030 technocratic plan is to introduce a social credit system in all Western nations, then the whole world, based on carbon credits and modeled after the authoritarian sesame credit system in China, which already locks dissenters out of full economic participation. Exactly the same thing, just on a smaller scale, was recently proposed by Victorian Premier Dan Andrews when he advocated a vaccinated economy.

Doconomy, The CO2 Monitoring Credit Card And Climate 13

Doconomy (abbreviated DO) is a company registered in Sweden however they have the full backing and support of NWO organizations such as the UN. The card is available in Sweden right now. They are in a partnership with Mastercard, an entrenched company of the Corporatocracy. Here’s what the WEF (the same globalist organization whose head Klaus Schwab promotes the Internet of Bodies) writes in support of their CO2 monitoring credit card in the Doconomy.com website:

“While many of us are aware that we need to reduce our carbon footprint, adviceon doing so can seem nebulous and keeping a tab is difficult. DO monitors and cutsoff spending, when we hit our carbon max.“

The card features the slogan “DO. Everyday Climate Action” and also has a piece of propaganda on the back side which states “I am taking responsibility for every transaction I make to help protect the planet” which reads like 2nd grade brainwashing. Note the symbolism of the all-seeing eye on the back side of the card in the image above, taking from the UN’s SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals), specifically goal #13, which states: “Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.”

Great Reset Meets The Green Agenda: Technocrats Want ‘Mandatory’ Carbon Credit Cards

un quote new

CO2 Monitoring Credit Card To Entrench The Carbon Lie Even Further

The aim of Doconomy is to entrench the demonization of carbon even further. It’s to trick you into associating every purchase – literally every single one of your economic transactions – with an alleged carbon cost according to the faulty manmade climate change science.

By imposing an artificial limit on how many transactions you can make, such a synthetic system would be greatly divorced from the biological reality of the carbon cycle, the necessity of carbon in all forms of life here and the life-giving nature of carbon dioxide.

The Doconomy website asks:

“With fat, sugar and salt levels labeled on food we buy, why shouldn’t our CO2 emissions be just as visible?” It continues: “This type of information shouldn’t be a premium or luxury that consumers pay for, but rather an essential part of every shopping journey.”

They want you to swallow the entire propagandistic idea of a carbon footprint, feel guilty for consuming energy and services, and acquiesce to arbitrary restrictions under the delusion it will somehow help the Earth.

Carbon Sucking Operations Begin – Part Of Terraforming The Earth?

If you think the whole demonization of carbon is insane, it gets worse. Take a look at this. NWO frontman Bill Gates – who only “had dinners” with pedophile and Mossad agent Jeffrey Epstein, even though Gates is on the flight logs of the Lolita Express – has talked in interviews about the carbon sequestration or carbon sucking technology that he is funding. The technology is also referred to as direct air capture.

Companies are popping up around the world, such as this one in Canada and this one in Iceland, who are actively taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, then pumping it into stones, the ground or the ocean in order to permanently remove it from the atmosphere.

As with the NWO in general, there are many levels to this. On one level, carbon sucking is being promoted by the oil companies because it’s an easy out; it’s a way they can alleviate their guilt by trying to counterbalance or offset their incredibly dirty and polluted product (crude oil) with claims they are caring for the environment.

It’s not quite clear, however, that reducing CO2 has any connection at all with how polluting oil and petroleum products can be.

On another level, carbon sucking reinforces the construction of a synthetic economy – a carbon economy – where carbon is the new currency and measurement of economic activity.

On still another level, I think it is wise to be highly skeptical of carbon sucking in terms of how it will affect the atmosphere.

Given that plants need and thrive from CO2, and we humans in turn thrive from the greenification of the planet, what kind of world are we creating by deliberately removing this gas of life carbon dioxide from the natural O2-CO2 cycle of respiration and photosynthesis?

Experts and studies have shown that plants do best with high carbon ppm (parts per million) concentrations – here is one study of many showing how plants grew optimally at concentrations between 915-1151 ppm, far above the target of 300 ppm set by climate change organizations.

Is there an ulterior motive which involves the terraforming of the planet to make it less suitable for human life and more suitable for other lifeforms? This question needs more investigation, but for now, I regard any attempts to remove CO2 from the atmosphere with deep suspicion.

Final Thoughts

CO2 monitoring credit cards and carbon sucking are both part of the same initiative to invent a new enemy – this time the element carbon, an indispensable element of human life. It diverts attention away from genuine forms of pollution.

It creates a new form of measurement and a new artificial economy based on that which is already controlled by the NWO, who can arbitrarily decide what a person’s maxium carbon limit or carbon allowance will be.

This is yet more insidious propaganda, which, if enough people fall for it, will become another pretext for the widspread removal of our rights and freedom. Stay alert and aware.

By Makia Freeman, the author of “Cancer: The Lies, the Truth and the Solutions.”