Please do your own research. The information I share is only a catalyst to expanding ones confined consciousness. I have NO desire for anyone to blindly believe or agree with what I share. Seek the truth for yourself and put your own puzzle together that has been presented to you. I'm not here to teach, preach or lead, but rather assist in awakening the consciousness of the collective from its temporary dormancy.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Wednesday in Boston, his family’s longtime base of power, announcing his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.
NY Times: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Makes His White House Run Official Robert Kennedy Jr. was nearly 10 years old when his uncle, President John F. Kennedy, had his head blown off by CIA-Mossad snipers on November 22, 1963. He was 14 1/2 years old when his father, Robert Kennedy Sr. was murdered by the same Cabal (framing a Palestinian) while on his way to the US presidency in 1968. So, for RFK Jr. — much like his cousin JFK Jr. (murdered by Killary Clinton’s Mafia in 1999) — this struggle against The Cabal is deeply personal. Because we have long believed that RFK Jr. is in league with Trump and the Q team, the announcement of his presidential campaign for 2024 ought not be taken seriously. Instead, it should be interpreted as a strategic flanking attack upon the “bad guys” coming from within the ranks of well-meaning, semi-sane but deluded Democrat voters.
Naturally, this type of historical context would be omitted from a Slimes article. After all, JFK and RFK were each killed by a “lone nut gunman,” and John-John was a reckless pilot, dontcha’ know? (rolling eyes) But the Slimes’ lies of omission — the most effective type of lie there is — don’t end there. The juiciest parts of RFK Jr.’s announcement speech were completely ignored. Here’s an example of the media template controlled crap fed to the readers:
“Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced a presidential campaign on Wednesday built on re-litigating Covid-19 shutdowns and shaking Americans’ faith in science.
In a rambling speech lasting nearly two hours, Mr. Kennedy, 69, …. aimed criticisms at the pharmaceutical industry. … For Mr. Kennedy, the cause is vaccine skepticism, which he cloaked in terms of truth-seeking and free speech, a crusade that in the past led him to falsely link childhood vaccines to autism. At the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, he sought to undermine public trust in vaccines…. Both Facebook and Instagram took down accounts of a group he runs for spreading medical misinformation.
Family members have accused Mr. Kennedy of sowing distrust in the science behind vaccines. His campaign has appalled members of his famous Democratic clan.” *
Crazy, single-issue, anti-vax, “conspiracy theorist” Uncle Bobby who doesn’t understand science. But is that really all there was to his “rambling speech” and to his campaign?
Robert Kennedy Jr. was nearly 10 years old when his uncle, President John F. Kennedy, had his head blown off by CIA-Mossad snipers on November 22, 1963. He was 14 1/2 years old when his father, Robert Kennedy Sr. was murdered by the same Cabal (framing a Palestinian) while on his way to the US presidency in 1968. So, for RFK Jr. — much like his cousin JFK Jr. (murdered by Killary Clinton’s Mafia in 1999) — this struggle against The Cabal is deeply personal. Because we have long believed that RFK Jr. is in league with Trump and the Q team, the announcement of his presidential campaign for 2024 ought not be taken seriously. Instead, it should be interpreted as a strategic flanking attack upon the “bad guys” coming from within the ranks of well-meaning, semi-sane but deluded Democrat voters.
Naturally, this type of historical context would be omitted from a Slimes article. After all, JFK and RFK were each killed by a “lone nut gunman,” and John-John was a reckless pilot, dontcha’ know? (rolling eyes) But the Slimes’ lies of omission — the most effective type of lie there is — don’t end there. The juiciest parts of RFK Jr.’s announcement speech were completely ignored. Here’s an example of the media template controlled crap fed to the readers:
“Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced a presidential campaign on Wednesday built on re-litigating Covid-19 shutdowns and shaking Americans’ faith in science.
In a rambling speech lasting nearly two hours, Mr. Kennedy, 69, …. aimed criticisms at the pharmaceutical industry. … For Mr. Kennedy, the cause is vaccine skepticism, which he cloaked in terms of truth-seeking and free speech, a crusade that in the past led him to falsely link childhood vaccines to autism. At the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, he sought to undermine public trust in vaccines…. Both Facebook and Instagram took down accounts of a group he runs for spreading medical misinformation.
Family members have accused Mr. Kennedy of sowing distrust in the science behind vaccines. His campaign has appalled members of his famous Democratic clan.” *
Crazy, single-issue, anti-vax, “conspiracy theorist” Uncle Bobby who doesn’t understand science. But is that really all there was to his “rambling speech” and to his campaign?
President John F. Kennedy with his nephew, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.RFK Sr. & Jr.They killed his uncle and his father — and Bobby Jr. knows it.
I went to the original source (imagine that!) and listened to RFK’s entire speech. Surprise surprise — it was NOT just a nearly 2-hour rant about “anti-vax” — which he only touched upon for a few minutes. There were many other truth bombs dropped by RFK that “they” evidently don’t want you to know about. Though not mentioned in this particular speech, RFK has stated that the CIA killed both his uncle and father; and that the CIA, Johns Hopkins University, the WHO and the Bill Gates Foundation conspired to stage “Covid” as a pretext for establishing totalitarian control over the population.
The key points of RFK’s ‘rambling speech’ (which, in spite of a few liberal bromides here and there, was actually quite impressive) are summarized below:
* The government lies. * The media lies. * Everyone now knows that the government and media lie. * The media-government complex attacks alternative media sources because they feel threatened by them. * The government and many large corporations now conspire together. * JFK and RFK were opposed to involvement in the Vietnam War. * The New York Times was opposed to RFK’s campaign in 1968. * Politicians divide people by class and race. * The Covid lockdowns were unnecessary and deadly. * Economic distress causes 30,000 excess deaths per 1 point of increased unemployment. * Lockdown-related weight gain and suicide also increased the death rate. * Deep State operatives lied to JFK about the Bay of Pigs (Cuba) and nearly triggered World War III. * JFK wanted to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces.” * The US should not support “regime change” in Russia, and should seek to end the war in Ukraine. * Is Ukraine being used as a pawn in a proxy war? (asked rhetorically) * War, bailouts and lockdowns were paid for with money-printing, which caused the current inflation. * Inflation is a government tax on the poor and middle class. * The US killed 1 million Iraqis. * The US destabilized Syria and drove refugees into Europe. * The Democrats are becoming the party of warmongering “neocons with woke bobble-heads” — not JFK Democrats.
Tell it, Bobby. Tell it! —- because Sulzberger’s seditious censoring Times sure as hell won’t.
*note: It was very interesting (and very telling) to observe that RFK Jr. barely laid a glove on Trump (only a few obligatory but vague soft shots) while savaging the neo-cons, the CIA and the Democrats.
RFK Jr. and Trump operative Tucker Carlson get along very well.Trump and JFK Jr. were friends.Q suggests that HRC (Hillary Rodham Clinton) killed JFK Jr., and the 1999 plane crash was, for Trump, “the start.”
Welcome to my prophetic nightmare — the one that didn’t come true.
Like most of “you guys,” I shall never forget Election Night, November 8th, 2016 — albeit for a different reason. It was memorable not for the unexpected excitement over the unforeseen unfolding and shocking final defeat of Satanic Witch Killary Clinton (not a metaphor, seriously, the bitch worships Satan). I didn’t even stay up to watch the historic event. No, the permanent memory was the sense of foreboding, despair and despondence I keenly felt when going to bed early that night. You see, none of us knew about Q and the White Hats acting as Trump’s invisible “guardian angels” back then.
My partner at the time was surprised to see me turn in so early and asked why I wasn’t going to stay up to watch some of the results. I told her that both the polls and the vote itself were rigged, and that there was no way that (((the powers that be))) would ever allow her to lose. Imagine my shock the following morning!
I had truly believed that it was over before it began, and that publication on my Blog and articles would in due time be branded as illegal “hate speech” by Killary’s wicked regime. Indeed, months prior to the election, Killary herself openly spoke about the importance of working with “our friends in the technology world” to “deny online space“ to “terrorists.”
Killary:
“You’re going to hear all of the usual complaints—you know, ‘freedom of speech,’ etc., but if we truly are in a war against terrorism and we are truly looking for ways to shut off their funding, shut off the flow of foreign fighters, then we’ve got to shut off their means of communicating.”
Now, once one understands that “Islamic Terrorism” was created and controlled by the very same “usual suspects” who created and controlled the Clinton Crime Syndicate, the question arises: Who would be the real targets of Killary’s internet censorship proposal? Hmmm? Look in mirror. Hell’s Bells of “terrorist” censorship were tolling for thee, boys and girls! No doubt about it, the horrible harridan, the loony lesbian, the crooked communist was fixin’ to close down the “digital army” of truthers once and for all.
But even such a personal disappointment I could bear because it would have been nothing compared to the Hell-on-Earth that she — in service to her dark lord — was plotting to visit upon humanity. For the benefit of the “black-pilled” holdouts who still refuse to acknowledge what the rise of Trump saved us all from, let us pretend that ‘Madam President” is now in the 7th year of her 24/7 glorified crisis-presidency, and review her “accomplishments.” As you go through these points, understand that very little, if any, of this is conjecture or retroactive “prophecy.” This is basic “if-then” flowchart stuff.
1. Me on Election Night, 2016 — expecting Killary to win and being declared a “far right terrorist” in the near future. // 2. Trump “Ditched the Witch” and shocked the world. // 3. Simple flowchart logic reveals where we’d all be by now in the 7th year of our sainted and untouchable “Madam President.”
A basic knowledge the power players behind that Satanic Witch and an understanding of the history of the Clinton Crime Family are all one needs to logically infer the points of this “what if” scenario with near certainty. If Killary was in Year 7, then most or all of the following would likely have happened by now:
As of 2020, American ATM’s would have been churning out the $20 bill with Harriet Tubman face on them — not Andrew Jackson’s. All of the other bills were set for “diversity” modification on the backs as well. In your face, White Man! But it was Trump who ignored the pressure and reversed Obama’s order.
Race tension and riots, stirred up by Al Charlatan and the BLM operatives — with Killary tacitly encouraging the mayhem and capitalizing upon it.
The ISIS proxy war with Syria would either have toppled Assad or led to war with Russia, Iran and China in the Middle East.
The Korean Cold War — with potential to bring the US into war against China — would still be a trigger point.
Ukraine would have been a member of NATO by now — another World War 3 trigger point.
The Supreme Court would have a young 6 out of 9 Marxist majority, with one compromised “centrist” and isolated conservative justices Thomas and Alito both in their 70’s.
The record number of satisfactory to excellent Federal judges appointed by Trump would not be there today — their positions held by vicious Marxist Jews and nasty lesbians instead.
The U.S. would be fully implementing the economically destructive policies of the Paris Climate Accords — including the colossal carbon credit scam and both seen and hidden taxes.
The U.S. would have joined the sovereignty-killing TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership)
The enormous blackmail operation that was Epstein-Maxwell-Wexner Mossad Island would still be in business with no end in sight. Bill Clinton himself was a regular at Epstein-Mossad Island!
With Epstein Island still in business and the US still fully engaged in the Middle East, Israeli warmongering toward Lebanon and Iran would have reached new levels of intensity and insanity.
The US would still be in Afghanistan.
Murderous drone bombings would still be happening all over the Central Asia and Africa.
The CIA-Mossad international proxy army known as ISIS would still be stirring up chaos in as many as 30 different nations.
CIA “Color Revolutions” would still be destabilizing nationalist governments the world over.
“Obama Care” — which was planned to fail — would have been replaced by the total communistic system which Killary, as First Lady, wanted to impose (along with a European-style 22% VAT tax) on the United States in 1993.
Roe vs Wade / unlimited abortion would still be in effect.
“Hate Speech” and “Holocaust Denial” laws — prompted by false flag vandalism attacks — would have been imposed by now along with total Internet censorship.
There would be no border wall (Trump’s was mostly completed and will be totally completed upon his return).
The EPA would be exercising its authority to control CO2 “emissions” and cripple the energy sector.
The Demonrats would have rigged permanent majority control of the House and Senate by now.
The GOP “opposition” would be led by weak traitors such as Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, the Cheneys, the Bushes et al. (all of whom were publicly humiliated and then disempowered by Trump).
People like Harvey Weinstein, Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, Andrew Cuomo and so many other Deep State villains who “fell into the Trump Quicksand” would still be prominent.
The Killary administration would have been packed with angry abusive lesbians at all levels.
The Communist John Brennan — or someone even worse — would still be heading the CIA.
The Congressional Freedom Caucus would have remained marginalized as “far right kooks” — instead of now running Congress.
There would NOT currently be an unfolding investigation into Hunter and Joe Biden’s corruption — a trail of fraud that is ultimately going to lead to Obama, Clinton herself and above.
Voter fraud would have been expanded and protected to such an extent that any challenge to the Establishment would have been mathematically impossible by now.
The vast, secret, international child abduction, torture, rape and murder industry would have expanded massively with one of its chief practitioners in the White House.
School shootings (which were all CIA hoaxes) would still be going on and semi-automatic rifles probably banned by now.
The Covid Hoax would still have been launched(probably after 2020). The lockdowns, I-phone “contact tracing,” “stimulus” payments, “variants” and mandatory “self quarantines” would have lasted up to 5 years as the broken world anxiously waited for the magic vaccine.
The Killary-Gates vaccine would have been MANDATORY, genocidal for 10-15% of humanity, and contained tracking chips to monitor and control us in Orwellian fashion.
Covid dissenters would have been subjected to forced isolation in detention camps which Killary once joked about as “fun camps for adults.” (Satanists love to telegraph their evil intentions by joking about them.)
Total demoralization and neutralizing of conservatives with no means of communicating or spreading truth online — Jack Dorsey still at Twitter and no Gab, BitChute, Rumble, Minds, Sovren, Q posts or Truth Social either.
The epic mass misery, war, death, disease, poverty, pessimism, fear and hunger would have positioned the normies of the world up for an easy and accepted transition into “The Great Reset” — a glorious One World Order in which we would “own nothing” and “be happy” packed into storage-unit-sized apartments in herded urban areas and eating fried insects.
And there are more, many more, horrors that we can add to the list — as well as the ‘X-factor” nasty surprises we would not have been able to foresee.
The hate-filled nasty witch glows in the presence of evil Globalist billionaires — all of whom have been attacked and taken down under Trump. (Weinstein is in prison and I believe that Soros and Gates are also in Gitmo — Killary as well.)
1. Totally in league with Klaus Schwab. // 2. The wretched race-hustler / vote fraudster Al Charlatan would have had the ear of “Madam President.” // 3. Imagine the Queen of child-sex-trafficking in the White House!
Do the points of the retroactive forecast not constitute an accurate and objective picture of where the world would be right now with that Satanic, child killing, blood-drinking, lesbian bitch from Hell lording over us and, by extension, the world? Is this in any way an exaggeration of the scope of this Hellish Hag’s evil intent, or that of her NWO bosses?
Did not her first reign as co-president (1993-2001) — during which she and her tranny Attorney General, Janet Reno, roasted and suffocated 76 innocent American men, women and children alive at Waco, Texas — reveal what she was capable of? Did not the likes of George Soros, Mike Bloomberg and Klaus Schwab, in essence, say — both in spoken word and in writing for the consumption of their fellow “elites” — that this was their plan for the world? Is this not what that infamous mural image at the creepy Denver Airport depicts? Do any of the “never-Trumpers” of the “far right” care to dispute the “if-then” validity of the points from the above-listed retroactive forecast?
Donald Trump — who also speaks in code — was NOT exaggerating when he talked about “saving the world” from an “invisible enemy” and “saving 100 million lives.” Actually, his tireless peacemaking and early Covid-lockdown-busting may have saved BILLIONS of lives.
And yet, hearing some of the “black-pilled” among our ranks continue to make inadvertently careless common cause with the Council on Foreign Relations, the US Communist party, the Church of Satan, Soros, Rothschild, the New York Slimes, Hollyweird and Jewish Quackademia by viciously dumping on Trump — whose epic, extremely difficult, dangerous, strategic and time-consuming task isn’t even finished yet — is as astonishing as it is disappointing.
1. Very early in Satanist Killary’s first term as co-president, in 1993, the Feds attacked a harmlessly eccentric Christian sect with tanks and mass-murdered 76 of them (17 of them little children) for no reason at all. // 2. Long before Big Mike Obama, 6′ 2″ strong-jawed, broad-shouldered AG Janet Reno stood eye to eye with Al Gore and Bill Clinton, both 6′ 2″ as well.
Madam President’s Program(thwarted by Donald Trump) World War III + widespread fear and poverty + MANDATORY Gates vaccine (after 5-year lockdown) with pure poison and injected microchips = New World Order.
But but Batman… I read online that Trump is a Globalist. Why didn’t he get rid of the Deep State when he was president? And what about muh bump stocks, and muh Israel, and…… SMACK! — “A vast, deeply-rooted, centuries-old global Mafia is not legally dismantled, by the letter of the law, in a day!”
Many people worldwide are concerned about climate change and believe there is a climate emergency. For decades we have been told by the United Nations that Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from human activity are causing disastrous climate change. In 2018, a UN IPCC report even warned that ‘we have 12 years to save the Earth’, thus sending millions of people worldwide into a frenzy.
Thirty-five years ago, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the (World Meteorological Organization) WMO established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to provide scientific advice on the complex topic of climate change. The panel was asked to prepare, based on available scientific information, a report on all aspects relevant to climate change and its impacts and to formulate realistic response strategies. The first assessment report of the IPCC served as the basis for negotiating the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Governments worldwide have signed this convention, thereby, significantly impacting the lives of the people of the world.
However, many scientists dispute with the UN-promoted man-made climate change theory, and many people worldwide are confused by the subject, or are unaware of the full facts. Please allow me to provide some information you may not be aware of.
1. Very few people actually dig into the data, they simply accept the UN IPPC reports. Yet many highly respectable and distinguished scientists have done exactly that and found that the UN-promoted manmade climate change theory is seriously flawed. Are you aware that 1500 of the world’s leading climate scientists and professionals in over 30 countries have signed a declaration that there is no climate emergency and have refuted the United Nations claims in relation to man-made climate change? See this
2. I have also signed this declaration. How can I make such an assertion? I have experience in the field as a former scientist at the Department of Energy and Climate Change, UK Government; and as former staff member at the United Nations Environment Division, where I was responsible for servicing the Pollution Release and Transfer Register Protocol, a Multinational Environmental Agreement, involving the monitoring of pollutants to land, air, and water worldwide. Real pollution exists, but the problem is not CO2. Industrial globalisation has produced many substances that are registered as pollutants, including thousands of new man-made chemical compounds, toxins, nano-particles and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that are in violation of the scientific pre-cautionary principle.
A book I published recently also provides ample evidence and testimony from renowned scientists that there is no Climate emergency. The book titled ‘Transcending the Climate Change Deception Toward Real Sustainability’ is available here on amazon.COM
3. Next, I will mention the Irish Climate Science Forum (ICSF) website, a valuable resource founded by Jim O’Brien. I am grateful to the ICSF for their excellent work in highlighting the scientific flaws in the UN climate narrative. The ICSF provides a comprehensive lecture series from renowned international scientists providing much evidence, analysis, and data that contradicts the UN assertions. The lectures are available here.
The ICSF scientific view coincides with those of the Climate Intelligence (CLINTEL) foundation that operates in the fields of climate change and climate policy. CLINTEL was founded in 2019 by emeritus professor of geophysics Guus Berkhout and science journalist Marcel Crok. Based on this common conviction, 20 Irish scientists and several ICSF members have co-signed the CLINTEL World Climate Declaration “There is No Climate Emergency” (see this).
4. The reality is that the climate changes naturally and slowly in its own cycle, and solar activity is the dominant factor in climate and not Co2. We can conclude that carbon emissions or methane from livestock, such as cows, are not the dominant factors in climate change. In essence, therefore, the incessant UN, government, and corporate-media-produced climate hysteria in relation to carbon emissions and methane from cows has no scientific basis.
Please note that I have no commercial interest in stating that climate change is not caused by CO2. In truth I am against ‘real’ pollution, and the reality is that the CO2 component is not a pollutant. Unfortunately, many misinformed environmentalists are driving around in electric cars, the battery production for which has caused vast amounts of ‘real’ pollution via the industrial mining and processing of rare earth metals, and the consequent pollution to land, air and water systems. Note that the UN does not focus on the thousands of real pollutants that corporate industrial globalisation creates.
5. The conclusions of the Climate Intelligence foundation include the following
There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm.
Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming: The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.
Warming is far slower than predicted: The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.
Climate policy relies on inadequate models: Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools. They blow up the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.
CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth: CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
Global warming has not increased natural disasters: There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent.
6. In the above book I reference the relevant work and scientific presentations of some of the world’s leading climate scientists. Let us examine some of the work and testimonies of these scientists:
“deeply flawed logic, obscured by shrewd and unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that Co2 from human industry was a dangerous plant destroying toxin. It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world – that Co2 the life of plants was considered for a time to be a deadly poison.” – Professor Richard Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences at MIT.
Dr Nils-Axel Mörner was a former Committee Chairman at the UN International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He was an expert involved in reviewing the first IPPC documents. He says the UN IPPC is misleading humanity about climate change. He tried to warn that the IPPC were publishing lies and false information that would inevitably be discredited. In an interview, he stated: “This is the most dangerous and frightening part of it. How a lobbyist group, such as the IPPC, has been able to fool the whole world. These organised and deceitful forces are dangerous” and expressed shock “that the UN and governments would parade children around the place at UN Climate summits as propaganda props”. The following is his testimony as detailed
“solar activity is the dominant factor in climate and not Co2… something is basically sick in the blame Co2 hypothesis… It was launched more than 100 years ago and almost immediately excellent physicists demonstrated that the hypothesis did not work.
I was the chairman of the only international committee on sea levels changes and as such a person I was elected to be the expert reviewer on the (UN IPPC) sea levels chapter. It was written by 38 persons and not a single one was a sea level specialist… I was shocked by the low quality it was like a student paper… I went through it and showed them that it was wrong and wrong and wrong…
The scientific truth is on the side of the sceptics… I have thousands of high ranked scientists all over the world who agree that NO, CO2 is not the driving mechanism and that everything is exaggerated. In the field of physics 80 to 90% of physicists know that the Co2 hypothesis is wrong… Of course, metrologists they believe in this because that is their own profession – they live on it.… I suspect that behind-the-scenes promoters… have an ulterior motive… It’s a wonderful way of controlling taxation controlling people” – Dr Nils-Axel Mörner, a former Committee Chairman at the UN IPPC, and former head of the Paleo Geo-physics and Geo-dynamics department in Stockholm
Another climate scientist with impeccable credentials that has broken rank is Dr Mototaka Nakamura. He asserts: “Our models are mickey-mouse mockeries of the real world”. Dr Nakamura received a Doctorate of Science from MIT, and for nearly 25 years specialized in abnormal weather and climate change at prestigious institutions that included MIT, Georgia Institute of Technology, NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, JAMSTEC and Duke University. Dr Nakamura explains why the data foundation underpinning global warming science is “untrustworthy” and cannot be relied on and that:“Global mean temperatures before 1980 are based on untrustworthy data”.
Professor John R. Christy, Director of Atmospheric and Earth Sciences, University of Alabama, has provided detailed analysis of climate data, see Endnote [i]. I summarise the main points from his analysis below:
“The established global warming theory significantly misrepresents the impact of extra greenhouse gases; the weather that affects people the most is not becoming more extreme or more dangerous; temperatures were higher in the 1930s than today; between 1895 and 2015, 14 of the top 15 years with the highest heat records occurred before 1960; the temperatures we are experiencing now in 2021 were the same as 120 years ago…
the number of major tornadoes between 1954 and 1986 averaged 56/year, but between 1987 and 2020 the average was only 34/year; between 1895 and 2015 on average there has been no change in the number of very wet days per month, and no change in the number of very dry days per month, and the 20 driest months were before 1988. Between 1950 and 2019 the percentage of land area experiencing droughts has not increased globally – the trend is flat; the incidence of wildfires in North America between 1600 and 2000 has decreased substantially. Sea levels rose 12.5 cm per decade for 8,000 years and then it levelled off, now it rising only 2.5 cm per decade… worrying about 30 cm rise in sea level in a decade is ridiculous, in a hurricane the east coast of the U.S. gets a 20 foot rise in 6 hours, so a 30 cm rise will be easily handled!”
In a lecture titled The imaginary climate crisis – how can we change the message? Available on the Irish Climate Science Forum website, see Endnote [ii]. Richard L Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences at MIT summarises the battle against the climate hysteria as follows:
“in the long history of the earth there has been almost no correlation between climate and co2… the paleoclimate record shows unambiguously that Co2 is not a control knob… the narrative is absurd… it gives governments the power to control the energy sector… for about 33 years, many of us have been battling against the climate hysteria… There were more important leading people who were objecting to it, they were unfortunately older and by now most of them dead…
Elites are always searching for ways to advertise their virtue and assert their authority. They believe they are entitled to view science as a source of authority rather than a process, and they try to appropriate science, suitably and incorrectly simplified, as the basis for their movement.”
“CO2… it’s not a pollutant… it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis… if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality.” – Prof. Richard Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences at MIT
Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, and President of Greenpeace in Canada for seven years, states:
“the whole climate crisis is not only fake news its fake science… of course climate change is real it’s been happening since the beginning of time, but it’s not dangerous and it’s not caused by people… climate change is a perfectly natural phenomenon and this modern warming period actually began about 300 years ago when the little ice age began to come to an end. There is nothing to be afraid of and all they are doing is instilling fear. Most of the scientists who are saying it’s a crisis are on perpetual government grants.
I was one of the (Greenpeace) founders… by the mid-80s… we were hijacked by the extreme left who basically took Greenpeace from a science-based organisation to an organisation based on sensationalism, misinformation and fear… you don’t have a plan to feed 8 billion people without fossils fuels or get the food into the cities…” – Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace
Professor William Happer, Princeton University, Former Director of Science at the US Department of Energy, is also a strong voice against the myth of man-made global warming. He states: “More CO2 benefits the Earth”.
7. The UN IPCC cherry picks data, uses flawed modelling and scenarios not remotely related to the real world
The UN climate crisis predictions are not based on physical evidence, rather they are based on complex computer modelling. One has to decode and analyse the modelling process to ascertain whether or not the models are valid and accurate or whether they have obvious flaws. The vast majority of scientists, economists, politicians and the general public have simply assumed that the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) models are accurate. Very few people have the time or skills to analyse these models, not to mention actually dispute them. Nonetheless, there were many senior and highly distinguished scientists that did exactly that – they claimed the UN narrative was incorrect and that there was no climate emergency. Their voices have been drowned out by a vast money-driven political and media establishment of the globalised ‘system’. The vitally important work of some of these renowned scientists is referenced in the above book.
“The computer models are making systematic dramatic errors… they are all parametrised… fudged… the models really don’t work” – Patrick J. Michaels, Director, Cato Institute Center for the Study of Science
Dr Roger Pielke Jr, University of Colorado, has conducted a detailed scientific review and analysis of the UN IPCC AR6 report, see Endnote [iii]. He describes that in relation to climate modelling, the IPCC detached the models from socio-economic plausibility. In creating the models, instead of first completing integrative assessment models (IAMs), the IPCC skipped this essential step and jumped straight to radiative forcing scenarios and thus these scenarios are not based on competed IAMs. This led much of climate modelling down the wrong track. I quote points from Dr Pielke’s analysis as follows:
“The four IPCC scenarios came from a large family of models so instead of splitting modelling from socio-economic assumptions the models already had the assumptions faked and baked in to them, because they had to have those assumptions to produce the required radiative forcing (to produce a desired climate ‘crisis scenario’ outcome).
In another fateful decision the 4 representative concentration pathways (RCPs) came from 4 different IAMs, which was a huge mistake. These models are completely unrelated to each other, but the impression has been given that they are of a common set, only differing in their radiative forcing, this was a huge mistake. Furthermore, no-one has responsibility for determining whether these scenarios are plausible. The climate community decided which scenario to prioritise and they chose the two most implausible scenarios! There are thousands of climate assumptions, but only 8 to 12 of them are available currently for climate research. The IPCC report even states that “no likelihood is attached to the scenarios in this report”. The likelihood is considered low they admit – This is an incredible admission by the IPCC.
These extreme unlikely scenarios dominate the literature and the IPCC report; therefore, the IPCC report is biased. Bottom line is that there is massive confusion. The IPCCs’ Richard Moss warned that RCP 8.5 was not to be used as a reference for the other RCPs, but 5,800 scientific papers worldwide misuse it like that… The whole process is seriously flawed… Nothing close to the real world is represented by the IPCC scenarios. Climate science has a huge problem! The IPCC currently uses RCP 8.5 as the ‘business as usual’ scenario, but RCP 8.5 is wild fantasy land and not remotely related to current reality at all… climate science has a scientific integrity crisis.” – Dr Roger Pielke Jr, University of Colorado,
8. Financialization of the entire world economy is now based on a life-killing ‘net-zero’ greenhouse gas emissions strategy.
The UN Agenda 2030 plan and the Paris Agreement goal to reduce CO2 emissions by 7% per annum until 2030 is in effect a plan that would disable the current resource mechanisms of the industrial economy for the food, energy and goods that enable human life and survival. This is being implemented before humanity has transitioned away from the flawed polluting trans-national industrial economy toward self-sufficient local/regional economies.
Zero carbon emissions, in essence, means pulling the plug on current systems of industrial agriculture, transport, goods production, electricity production, etc., and many millions of people reliant on these systems worldwide could be faced with a lack of electricity, food, goods, etc. This could have terrible consequences, particularly in locations and countries, that are currently unable to produce much food.
It should be noted that for decades, these same political, government, and corporate powers have rampantly promoted corporate economic globalization and fossil fuel dependency. Whilst, at the same time actively hindering the funding, creation, or government support of, more self-sufficient local communities/regions, and local co-operatives. Most of the world population thus became reliant on the globalized fossil-fuel dependent system.
9. Central bankers are entirely funding / controlling the advancement of the worldwide climate change ‘project’
The decision to drastically reduce CO2, one of the most essential compounds to sustain all life, is no co-incidence. It should be noted that it is the world’s central bankers that are behind this decision and are entirely funding and controlling the advancement of the worldwide project of combatting man-made climate-change.
This project involves an attempt to de-carbonise the activities of the entire world population. In December 2015, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) created the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure (TCFD), which represents $118 trillion of assets globally, see Endnote [iv]. In essence this means that the financialization of the entire world economy is based on meeting nonsensical aims such as “net-zero greenhouse gas emissions”. The TCFD includes key people from the world’s mega-banks and asset management companies, including JP Morgan Chase; BlackRock; Barclays Bank; HSBC; China’s ICBC bank; Tata Steel, ENI oil, Dow Chemical, and more.
The fact that the world’s largest banks and asset management corporations, including BlackRock, Goldman Sachs, the UN, the World Bank, the Bank of England and other central banks of the BIS, have all linked to push a vague, mathematically nonsensical ‘green’ economy, is no coincidence. There is another agenda at play that has nothing to do with environmentalism. The green economy along with UN Agenda 2030 is an agenda of world control, and will also develop trillions of dollars for the behind-the-scenes mega-banks. When the world largest banks, corporations, and institutions, all align to push a climate change agenda that has zero evidence, one can see there is another major agenda going on behind the scenes. This agenda tries to convince the common people of the world to make huge sacrifices under the emotive guise of “saving our planet.”. While all the time the corporations and banks make vast profits, and political institutions implement worldwide technocratic control systems under the banner of combatting, and adapting to, so-called man-made climate change.
“The links between the world’s largest financial groups, central banks and global corporations to the current push for a radical climate strategy to abandon the fossil fuel economy in favor of a vague, unexplained Green economy, it seems, is less about genuine concern to make our planet a clean and healthy environment to live. Rather it is an agenda, intimately tied to the UN Agenda 2030 for “sustainable” economy, and to developing literally trillions of dollars in new wealth for the global banks and financial giants who constitute the real powers that be… “ – F. William Engdahl, strategic risk consultant and lecturer
Back in 2010, the head of Working Group 3 of the UN IPCC, Dr Otmar Edenhofer, told an interviewer,
“…one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.”
To better perceive what is ‘behind the curtain’ of the Climate hoax and the UN/WEF agenda it also helps to examine what has happened in the decades beforehand. It is important to perceive the implications of the worldwide fractional-reserve debt-money banking scam and the subtle system of debt-slavery that has existed for decades. If you look at the World Bank website you will see that virtually every nation on Earth is in vast debt. In debt to who you may ask? The answer is to privately owned mega-banks. For many decades the so-called banking and corporate elites have had full control of the source of money creation and its allocation, via the debt-money system, and have therefore, by default, been able to fund, and increasingly control and manipulate the entire world spectrum of industry, media, government, education, ideological supremacy and war to their own design, agenda and benefit. Mayer Amschel Rothschild (banker) is widely reported to have said:
“Give me control of a nation’s money supply and I care not who makes its laws.”
10. Central bankers hijacked the real environmental movement in 1992 creating the fake climate change agenda
Psychopaths can utilise any ideology and, change it from within to something that may eventually be entirely different to its original purpose. Meanwhile, the original followers and advocates continue to pursue what they believe is the original ideology, but gradually become mere pawns in the agenda of a self-serving elite. Unfortunately, over the past decades, this is exactly what has happened in the environmental movement.
Whistleblower George Hunt served as an official host at a key environmental meeting in Denver, Colorado in 1987, and states that David Rockefeller; Baron Edmund De Rothschild; US Secretary of State Baker; Maurice Strong, a UN official and an employee of the Rockefeller and Rothschild trusts; EPA administrator William Ruccleshaus; UN Secretary General in Geneva MacNeill, along with World Bank and IMF officials were at this meeting. Hunt was surprised to see all these rich elite bankers at the meeting and questioned what they were doing there at an environmental congress.
In a video recording, Hunt later provided important evidence from the documents of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3-14 June 1992. This conference was the well-known UN ’92 Earth Summit and was run by UNCED. According to Hunt, via the Earth summit, the UN was setting a net, an agenda, to place the power over the Earth and its peoples into their own hands. The world private banking cartel are the same ultra-rich banking families that had been instrumental in the setting up of the World Bank, the UN, and other international institutions, after WW2. Their political cohorts included Stalin (the leader of a brutal communist regime in the USSR that committed genocide of millions of people), UK Prime minister Churchill, and US President Roosevelt. Hunt refers to these banking families and their financial and international institutional networks as:
“The same world order that tricked third world countries to borrow funds and rack up enormous debts… and purposely creating war and debt to bring societies into their control. The world order crowd are not a nice group of people…”– George Hunt, Whistleblower speaking about the UN Earth summit of 1992
As a consequence of the UN Earth Summit, the honest, genuine environment movement that actually cared about real pollution to land, air and water, was politically hi-jacked by powerful political and financial interests with a different agenda.
Maurice Strong, a UN official and an employee of the Rockefeller and Rothschild trusts, had convened the first UNCED congress in Stockholm, Sweden, in 1972. Then, 20 years later he was the convenor and secretary general of UNCED. Hunt also provided video evidence from the Fourth UNCED World Congress meeting in 1987 of an international investment banker, stating that:
“I suggest therefore that this be sold not through a democratic process that would take too long and require far too much funds to educate the cannon-fodder, unfortunately, which populates the Earth. We have to take almost an elitist program…”
Thus, the decrees leading to the 1992 UN Earth summit were dictated without debate or opportunity for dissent and would supersede national laws. The decrees were dictated into existence by the banker Edmund de Rothschild, who got these major decrees into the ’92 UN resolutions without debate or challenge. Hunt asserts that he was denied the opportunity to openly challenge Rothschild’s remarks by the meeting Chairman.
Is it any surprise that the Rothschild bank of Geneva is the nucleus of the World Conservation bank and the wealthy elite are integrated into the bank via the Rothschilds private offering of shares. The banks assumes control of world conservation and decides and controls how these resources are allocated or utilized.
11. Despite the deceptive and fake environmental facade, it has adopted, the vast institutional entity of the UN has fully endorsed environmentally destructive industrial globalisation for the past 70 years. The UN climate change, sustainable development and green economy policies over the past 30 years are little more than worldwide marketing tricks that have tragically brainwashed two generations of young people who do not understand what the UN actually is, and who is it is really designed to serve.
This current globalised system involves the promotion of beliefs and fake science that claim to be unchallengeable truths, but are, in fact, ideologies in which evidence is manipulated, twisted, and distorted to prove the ‘governing idea’, and thus promote its worldwide dissemination. They start with the conclusion they want and then wrench and manipulate what scant evidence they can to fit that conclusion. Man-made climate change due to anthropogenic carbon emission is a major example of this.
Institutions, including the UN, the World Economic Forum (WEF), and the World Health Organisation (WHO), are privately-motivated unelected unaccountable organisations controlled by the source of debt-money creation, i.e., the world private-banking cartel; and are just clever marketing tools and political mechanisms for implementing and maintaining a corrupt worldwide system, under the clever guise of ‘fixing the problems of the world’.
These powerful special interests have been promoting certain ‘ideologies’ for decades to advance their corporate and political aims. The word “sustainable” was hijacked decades ago, and it is now deceptively used to advance the agendas of globalist mega-corporate interests who couldn’t care less about the environment. The aim is to catapult humanity into the arms of UN Agenda 2030 and the WEF ‘reset’ plan, which are clever marketing plans entirely designed by the so-called elite mega-corporate interests of the WEF Davos group.
12. Furthermore, the current green energy/renewable technologies being promoted by the UN and WEF, are not a viable solution for the world’s energy supply. Although these technologies have some limited viability in certain locations and scenarios, the fact remains that the Energy Returned on Energy Invested is much too low – in essence the entire process is mathematically flawed. This is evidenced by the work of scientists, including Professor David MacKay, former Regius Professor of Engineering at Cambridge University and former Chief Scientific Advisor at the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change.
Conclusion
In summary, CO2 reduction is the main focus of the UN-promoted climate-change-hysteria that has been rampant among the world’s population. However, the proclaimed climate crisis exists in computer models only. The cult of ‘manmade climate change’ is a media and UN politically-promoted ‘ideology’, that is used for a wider political and corporate agenda. Manmade climate change is not based in fact, and has hijacked real environmental concerns.
The world’s central bankers are fully funding the worldwide climate change ‘project’. The truism ‘follow the money’ springs to mind – and by doing so, one quickly discovers who runs the corporate, political, and media world.
Due to incessant UN, government, and corporate-promoted climate change propaganda, many people are, thus, in a media-induced state of confusion, and, thus, blindly assume their pre-determined role in society under this ‘dictatorship of words’ without even being aware of it. For example, we now have millions of so-called climate change warriors blind to the fact that climate change is not actually caused by carbon emissions. This is all to scare people into accepting totalitarian authority and limitations to their freedom and personal wellbeing.
The unpalatable reality is that people’s access to energy and resources is being intentionally reduced via bogus climate change policies, high inflation, ongoing geo-political theatre and intentionally instigated war.
We cannot understand how to create a truly resilient society unless we correctly perceive the current society we live in and how it came to exist. So, who are the architects of the current paradigm. The above book is designed to help in that regard. Unless we recognize the untruths of the current paradigm, even if it is not ‘politically correct’ to do so, then we will not be able to make the correct adjustments to our current communities and local/regional networks, or create a truly resilient thriving society in Ireland. In this spirit of truth, new networks are emerging worldwide.
Notes
[i] Source: Irish Climate Science Forum lecture titled Testing Climate Claims 2021 Update available at http://www.icsf.ie
With ice coverage for July and August remaining above the ten-year average of 2010–20, the extent of summer sea ice in the Arctic has surprised experts who once predicted that such levels would be impossible.
This stands in stark contrast to the dominant climate narrative that predicts the dwindling of summer ice in the Arctic. Some politicians had even claimed that parts of the Arctic would be ice-free by now.
With the seasonal Arctic melt technically over, it is fair to conclude that the extent of ice in the summer of 2022 has been greater than the ten-year average. On most days in July and August, sea ice levels were above the ten-year average and significantly more than the previous few years.
The Japanese National Institute of Polar Research provides a useful visualization in the graph below. This year’s Arctic sea ice — shown in red — is compared with the ten-year average and the levels of the previous few years, including that of 2012, when ice had reached its lowest of the period tracked.
Data of sea-ice extent in square kilometers in the Arctic Ocean from June 2002 to the present and decadal averages of 1980’s, 1990’s, 2000’s, and 2010’s are included. Source: National Institute of Polar Research, https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent.
According to the Danish Meteorological Institute, the extent of Arctic sea ice was much greater than the last five years, as shown in the below graph.
Summer temperatures in the Arctic remained at levels similar to the 44-year average of 1958–2002, with no marked increase in warming. In the graph, temperature is shown in the Kelvin scale; the horizontal blue line is freezing, or zero degrees Celsius and 32 degrees Fahrenheit.
Daily mean temperature and climate north of the 80th northern parallel as a function of the day of year. Source: Danish Meteorological Institute, http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php.
Now, here’s the big question: why were internationally acclaimed climate scientists unable to predict this marked increase in the extent of summer sea ice? Is it because their overall approach is biased toward supporting the theory that carbon dioxide is warming the planet to dangerous levels? Or is it because their models are incapable of predicting future temperatures?
The answers must come from the doomsayers themselves. They need to explain why Arctic summer temperatures have been not at all different from the 44-year average and why summer sea ice is above decadal averages.
Acknowledging that we have yet to understand the complex climate system will undermine the credibility of scientists and political institutions advancing destructive energy policies to address a fantasy of climate catastrophe.
Melting of Arctic ice has been used as a major data point in the justification of restrictive energy policies adopted by many countries. It is ironic — and infuriating — that millions across the world are suffering from high energy prices and blackouts at the same time that Arctic sea ice has been at its greatest extent in five years!
Europe is facing rapidly rising electricity prices and a natural gas shortage. Citizens in the U.S. are experiencing high energy prices as their access to cheap fossil fuels is restricted by government’s infatuation with solar and wind power. China is scampering to reduce blackouts. All this could have been avoided if political leaders had not promoted a false climate emergency.
It makes no sense to force people to live in darkness in the name of climate policy when the policy-makers themselves have so little understanding of the planet’s mechanisms of warming and cooling. Acknowledge the infancy of climate science and liberate people from energy tyranny.
Vijay Jayaraj is a research associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, VA. He holds a Master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, U.K. and resides in India.
NY Times: Pace of Climate Change Sends Economists Back to Drawing Board
They underestimated the impact of global warming, and their preferred policy solution floundered in the United States.
What’s this? The Globalist “paper of record” admitting that the infallible models of warmist Fake Economists were actually wrong? Well, of course they are wrong because the whole Climate Con is a HOAX — but that’s not the context of this particular propaganda piece. According to the Times, they got it wrong in the opposite way, meaning — “climate change” is affecting the world to an even worse extent that had been previously modeled and more aggressive solutions are needed.
A bit of undecipherable dung, from the article:
“The Yale economist William Nordhaus began constructing a model meant to gauge the effect of warming on economic growth. The work, first published in 1992, gave rise to a field of scholarship assessing the cost to society of each ton of emitted carbon offset by the benefits of cheap power — and thus how much it was worth paying to avert it.
Robert Kopp, a climate scientist at Rutgers University, worked on developing carbon pricing methods at the Department of Energy. He thinks the relentless focus on prices, with little attention paid to direct investments, lasted too long.
There was an idealization and simplification of the problem that started in the economics literature,” Dr. Kopp said. “And things that start out in the economics literature have half-lives in the applied policy world that are longer than the time period during which they’re the frontier of the field.
At the same time, Dr. Nordhaus’s model was drawing criticism for underestimating the havoc that climate change would wreak.”
In short, the young commie crackpot economist Professor Robert Kopp says that the punitive tax hike models of the old commie crackpot scientist Professor William Nordhaus are outdated and not aggressive enough — an assertion to which Comrade Nordhaus takes umbrage against. Kopp wants more direct “investment” in “green energy” scams. You see, that’s what the “academic debate” on this issue is all about — how best to punish, control and degrade the goyim.
Under. Every. Rock.
1. The Star of Moloch comes in green too. // 2. Nordhaus of Yale wants to focus on mass behavioral control by punishing us with higher taxes for using “fossil fuels.” // 3. Beaked Bolshevik Kopp of Rutgers & NASA (or is that NASAL?) advocates for a far more aggressive “investment regime” in wind & solar scams instead.
These types of “models” are the paid-for product of a quackademic marriage between Fake Science and Fake Economics — a match made in Hell! With the exception of Fake History, no other fields of academic research are more prone to reckless conjecture and malevolent manipulation than Fake (theoretical) Science and Fake Economics. A skilled mathematician / wordsmith sophist with “PhD.” after his name can easily wow the “educated” normies with technical verbosity, cherry-picked data and ponderous mathematical equations with no relation to reality. Plug it all into what are essentially cartoons and video game “models” — throw in some “peer reviews”from fellow Oy Vey League whores — threaten the “deniers”with ridicule, publishing lockouts and defunding — amplify it all with ample amounts of Fake News hype and voilà — “the science is settled!”
Indeed, the entirety of the “science” underpinning the Climate Con amounts to a giant Fallacy of Verbosity & Complexity, aka Argumentum Verbosium, which is textbook defined as:
“… when a conclusion is supported with an argument too complex and verbose to reasonably deal with in all its intimate details. This fallacy is similar to the fallacy of information overload. Sometimes, verbosity can be a means of intimidation, especially when insider jargon is used to confuse and overwhelm the listener/reader.”
Truth tellers simplify — liars complicate with blah blah blah and lots of numbers. The closing line of the Slimes article — when read with a “third eye” –reveals the bamboozle for us:
“The larger lesson is that modern climate policy is a complex endeavor that calls for large, interdisciplinary teams — which is not historically how the economics field has operated.
You can only do so much by writing things down on a single sheet of paper from your office at Yale,” said Dr. Kopp, of Rutgers. “That’s not how science gets done. That’s how a lot of economics gets done. But you run into limits.”
These Climate Con crackpots are not only wicked wordsmiths — but to the extent which they eventually start to, in due time, actually believe their own bullshit (and many of them will)— are also insane.
Sophisticated blah blah blah + complex math equations = BULLSHIT! — not “science.”
NY Times: Climate Politics Are Worse Than You Think
By PAUL KRUGMAN
The despicable Nobel Prize Winning Fake Economist Paul Krugman is one of the most senior propagandists at the “paper of record” and a ubiquitous TV gadfly. The odious little rodent’s subtle condescending scorn and veiled hatred for White people. In this propaganda piece, the sneaky sniveling specimen of Satanic scum attempts to prop up the weakening Climate Con by utilizing every commie cliché and logical fallacy in his arsenal of asininity.
Rather than repeating my usual rebuttals to the usual lies of “climate science,” let’s focus on the deliberately deceptive logical fallacies / rhetorical devices which this master of mendacity — this juvenile joker — this heckling hyena vomits out for his legions of stupid and vapid groupies to gulp down like mother’s milk.
1. Rat-faced lying greaseball. // 2. Nobel Prizes for the hard sciences tend to be valid, but in the realms of foreign affairs and economics, the million dollar award is an indicator of high level criminality. // 3. Putrid Paulie will often scamper out of his rat’s nest to give “expert opinion” by TV Fake News.
Krugman: Texas is often hot, but not like this. Analysis: This is Recency Bias. With far less asphalt than there is today — Waco, Texas reached 104 degrees in 1917, 1935 and 1978. During the heat wave of 1980, the Dallas/Fort Worth area recorded 42 consecutive days with temperatures above 100 ° F — with temperatures reaching 117 °F at Wichita Falls, Texas.
Krugman: Current forecasts have the temperature in Dallas hitting 109 degrees Tuesday, with highs in triple digits well into next week. Analysis: This is the Fallacy of Incomplete Evidence, aka “Cherry-Picking” data. On any given day, one can just as easily pick out places on Earth that are experiencing normal temps, or having an unusual cool spell.
Krugman: You have to be willfully blind — unfortunately, a fairly common ailment among politicians, not to see that — Analysis: This is the ad Hominem Attack Fallacy. He is essentially calling anyone who disputes the Climate Con stupid, dishonest, or both — without presenting any hard evidence to support his own case.
Krugman: — global warming has stopped being a debatable threat. Analysis: This is “The Science is Settled Fallacy“ — a variation of what I like to refer to as the “Case Closed Fallacy” — in which a fool or a liar (in this case, a liar) will declare in an authoritative tone that “There is no longer any debate.” — as if such pathetic posturing actually proves anything!
Krugman: Climate scientists — whose warnings …. Analysis: This is the Appeal to Authority Fallacy. It is intended to intimidate us mere mortals into bowing before the bought & paid for whore “scientists” without so much as even attempting to do our own research and use our own reasoning. This device also ignores the fact that there are many other scientists (all censored) who refute this garbage.
Krugman: …have been overwhelmingly vindicated … Analysis: They will often say that the evidence for this or that “latest thing” is “overwhelming” — yet they never actually produce any. The powerful-sounding word itself is intended to substitute for the lack of evidence. This is salesmanship, not scholarship. Let’s just call this trick “The Evidence is Overwhelming Trick.” (no link)
God gave us the capacity to reason. The world would be a much brighter place if only people learned to recognize the fundamental fallacies which deceivers (and innocent dupes) utilize to spread dangerous falsehoods and errors.
Krugman: (West Virginia Senator) Joe Manchin just pulled the plug on what may have been the Biden administration’s last chance to do something — anything — meaningful about climate change. Manchin represents a state that still thinks of itself as coal country. He gets more political contributions from the energy industry than any other member of Congress …. He has a large financial conflict of interest arising from his family’s ownership of a coal business. Analysis: This is the Appeal to Motive Fallacy. Senator Manchin’s perceived motives for opposing the Climate Con (from a coal state, donations from energy companies) is not at all relevant for establishing the veracity of the fundamental theory that man-made CO2 will cause catastrophic “Global Warming.”
Krugman: My guess is that Manchin’s act has as much to do with vanity as with money. His act has, after all, kept him in the political limelight month after month. Analysis: Let’s call this one the “Little Paulie is a Nasty Slandering Piece of Shit Human Being Fallacy.“(no link)
Krugman: Scientific consensus in favor of such policies doesn’t help. Analysis: This is theAppeal to the Popular Fallacy — truth is arrived at by research and analysis of facts and patterns — not by the “overwhelming consensus” of whore “scientists.”
Krugman: Emission taxes are the Econ 101 solution to pollution. Analysis: The unspoken reference to “emissions” (CO2) as “pollution” is an Assumptive Fallacybecause the casual mention of it as such leads the reader to accepting something that it actually false as being true. CO2 is no more of a “pollutant” than oxygen or water vapor are!
Krugman: The modern G.O.P. is hostile to science and scientists. Analysis: Not sure whether to file this doozie underad Hominem Attack Fallacy or escalate it to “Little Paulie is a Nasty Slandering Piece of Shit Human Being Fallacy.“ Probably the latter.
Krugman: Death rates since vaccines became widely available have been far higher in strongly Republican areas than in Democratic areas. Analysis: This is False Equivalence Fallacy and also Red Herring (Diversion) Fallacy. Even if we were to accept, purely for argument’s sake, that the Stupid-19 scamdemic was real; that vaccines saved millions of lives; and that anti-science Republicans got it all wrong — that would not prove the ludicrous theory which holds that manmade CO2 “emissions” will melt Antarctica and wash away our heavily populated coastal regions.
Krugman: Overwhelming scientific consensus…. Analysis: Wow! A “three-fer” of high-school-level debate team fallacies back-to-back-back — “overwhelming” (“The Overwhelming Trick,” again) “scientific” (Appeal to Authority, again) and “consensus”(Appeal to the Popular, again)
Krugman: That hostility is the fundamental reason we appear set to do nothing while the planet burns. Analysis: “While the planet burns, eh?” With that bit of drama, Paulie Propagandists closes with a classic example of the Appeal to Fear Fallacy.
********* So there it is. As usual, not one iota of hard data to support the Climate Con. Just one classic fallacy (lie) heaped upon another upon another. One could actually teach a college course on logic just by analyzing the seditious scribbling of this demented little “Nobel Prize winning” ™ demon.
Once one learns the tricks of the “intellectual” deceiver, his diversionary tactics become very easy to spot. For that reason, critical thinking skills are NOT something that Krugman’s quackademic comrades want their normie students to develop.
1. The “usual suspects” at the Manhattan Mendacity Machine manufacture lies like an auto factory assembly line churns out Fords. // 2. Climate Bogeyman — an entertaining and comprehensive debunk of the Climate Con (in paperback or pdf) // 3. Paul Krugman is a deceitful, slandering, anti-White / America-hating COMMUNIST in the mold of “Russian” Red Leon Trotsky — a creature so vile that even Joe Stalin hated him (and had him murdered).In 2020, Krugman claimed that the child porn on his computer may have been put there by Q Anon hackers.
Still gated up — Is the Supreme Court really in session?
JUNE 30, 2022
NY Times Headlines:
Supreme Court Decision Leaves Biden With Few Tools to Combat Climate Change * Supreme Court Strips Federal Government of Crucial Tool to Control Pollution * The Climate Math Just Got Harder * The Ruling’s Implications May Extend Beyond the Climate Fight
Oh the butt-hurt among the deranged denizens of Libtardia! Another day, and yet another delightful and revolutionary strike-down of a Marxist dictate previously thought to have been permanently engraved in stone. On guns, on abortion, on prayer — the fresh air of justice and liberty emanating from the military junta posing as “Clarence and the Supremes” is sending “the usual suspects” into a mental meltdown.
Now — and this is all just over the course of 8 days, mind you — comes a ruling on “West Virginia vs EPA” which is even more consequential than those recent shock 6-3 rulings. The Global Warming / Climate Change HOAX is dead. Perhaps not the religious belief itself, but for all practical purposes, the de-balling of the tyrannical EPA has put an end to the dangerous Globalist agenda which — in and of itself — had the potential to grind society down into mass poverty and force us into world government. Do “you guys” understand just how BIG this is – hence, the multiple scary stories in “the paper of record” today?
From one of the articles:
“The Supreme Court has issued one of the most important environmental rulings ever, which will make the battle against global warming even more difficult. It is a major setback to the U.S.’s ability to keep its promises to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The court was asked to consider whether the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to issue broad, aggressive regulations on climate-warming pollution from power plants that would force many of those plants to close. In a 6-to-3 decision, the justices ruled that the agency has no such authority.”
* So goes the USA, so goes the rest of the “international community”— in due time. Hail Clarence! Hail Trump!
1. The “Climate Bogeyman” just had his balls ripped out. // 2. Thank you, Clarence, Clarence, Clarence, Clarence, Clarence & Clarence. That miserable little Swedish she-devil has been very quiet lately. Did the military White Hats ship this Marxist monster to Gitmo for trial and execution too?
Just imagine the demoralization of the New World Order bosses (if they are even still alive at this point). With tremendous wall-to-wall “flood-the-zone” fanfare, they had kicked-off the Green Scheme with the first “Earth Day” in 1970. It was an intense Covid-like event which was used to bully the Nixon administration into adding, on a small scale, a new department to the Executive Branch of government — the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) and also signing “The Clean Air Act”(which was somewhat needed at the time) into law. About a decade later, in 1979 to be precise, came the first whispers of a “Greenhouse Effect” caused by CO2. If left uncontrolled, the hoaxsters claimed, “emissions” would so heat the planet that Antarctica’s 1-mile deep ice cover would melt and wipe us out.
By the mid-1980’s, the hideous HOAX – by then rebranded as “Global Warming”— had been declared to be “settled science.” By the time the criminal Clinton-Gore gang left office in 2001, the again rebranded crisis — now “Climate Change” — was subject to unilateral “regulation” by the super-powered EPA. In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA could “regulate” CO2. And by the time Obongo and his cross-dressing fag-hag were done raping the country in 2017, the EPA was aggressively hobbling industry and even killing coal companies at will.
That’s how long the Globalists have been at this dangerous game; and how vast the Green Power had become. But now, just like the striking down of the 49-year old Roe vs Wade ruling — and the striking down of the 21-year old ban on prayer at High School football games — the enforcement mechanism of the Climate Con has been deactivated. Wow.
Let us close today’s piece with the same words as we closed the one from just three days ago, and the one just three days before that:
“Let’s see what the next pleasant surprise from Papa Clarence and the “Supremes” will be.”
*Editor’s Note: The ongoing January 6th circus is having the effect of diverting the big guns of the Jurisprudence Armada to such an extent that the juiced-up “outrage” over these recent SC decisions has been significantly blunted. I wonder if Trump planned it that way?
All that effort — all those years — all that scheming, manipulation and brainwashing — ALL FOR NAUGHT NOW!
NY Times Caption: Elon Musk has not helped Tesla’s stock price by turning his bid to buy Twitter into a financial soap opera.
May 22, 2022
NY Times:
Tesla’s Aura Dims as Its Plunging Stock Highlights the Risks It Faces *
How Elon Musk Winged It With Twitter, and Everything Else
*
Elon Musk Left a South Africa That Was Rife With Misinformation and White Privilege
*
The Problem With Elon Musk’s Vision of Tesla’s Autopilot Future
*
Piecing Together the Messages of Elon Musk
*
The Allegations Against Musk
Elon Musk — that mysterious mogul who owes his entire “richest-man-in-the-world” fortune to —
1. Exploitation of the Global Warming / Climate Change HOAX 2. Unlimited positive free publicity from the Globalist media 3. Never-ending government contracts, mandates and subsidies associated with his companies (SpaceX, Tesla, Solar City, Boring, Neuralink)
— is now at war with the “elites” who made him and the activist radicals who once admired him. His tweets — amplified by countless millions of fanboys — are rocking the foundations of Libtardia even more so than Trump’s ever did because, in Musk’s case, his brutal and unremitting attacks on the Left are coming from a politically left-leaning “moderate” — not a “far right extremist.”
Musk — though probably hurting his business in the process — is making it safe for the mushy middle to turn against the Demonrat Party; and the sudden vicious counter attacks by pinko press against Musk and his Tesla company only serve to expose their “mainstream media” bias even more. This is truly a delightful development that we could never have anticipated.
The questions remain, on Musk:
“Is Musk a “White Hat” now? Was he a sleeper all along? Is he faking it? Or is he a “Gray Hat” now — meaning, someone who — either for money or under duress — was flipped from Black to White by the White Hats?
The Mystery of Musk just gets murkier and murkier.”
Let’s examine this matter further.
Musk’s “tweets” are even mightier than Trump’s used to be — and he is killing the Democrats with them on many different issues. (((They))) never saw this one coming either.
In November & December of 2021 — at a time when Tesla stocks were still rising and rising — Musk — or shall we say “Musk” — sold off an eye-popping $16 Billion worth of Tesla shares. In April of this year, an additional $8.5 billion was sold — ostensibly to help buy Twitter. Just before Elon began his late 2021 selling spree, his equally shady younger brother, Kimbal Musk, sold off $109 Million. Eight months earlier, Kimbal had sold $25,000,000 worth. Since the 2021 sell-offs, Tesla stock has plunged from its November high of $1,208 down to $663 as of today! Nice “pump & dump” there, Elon — or “Elon.”
Not only did the Musk boys avert big personal losses, but Elon’s shift to the “far right” — a move that has already killed the favorable free publicity which created him and is now hammering down Tesla stock even further — is sure to hurt sales as many goofy global warmists will now buy their electric cars from BMW or Mercedes. What’s going on here?
We should all reject, out of hand, any consideration of the possibility that Murky Musk, or “Musk,” is now a morally motivated adopted American patriot for whom “noblesse oblige“ outweighs profits. That characterization may work for his fawning fanboys, but to a seasoned analyst of these slimy characters, any such naive notion is laughable. And we may also now rule out the aforementioned option that he is faking his sudden rightward tilt as part of a Deep State psyop. He’s gone waaay too “far right” on too many issues by now. He’s even mentioning “red pills” and promoting the John Durham investigation of Q fame! Deductively speaking, that leaves us with only three options:
1. Musk is a self-serving, money & fame addicted, long term sleeper recruited by the White Hats a long time ago and secretly working for them all along. 2. The White Hats, in recent years, made crooked Musk an offer he couldn’t refuse — specifically this: “Work for us and let us access some of your billions — or die in Gitmo!” 3. The real Musk — like the real Biden, the real Killary, the real Fauci et al. — was disappeared & deep faked, his fortune commandeered, and his mighty twitter account taken over.
* Editor’s Note: Musk isn’t the only character to suddenly and surprisingly start attacking liberals and/or sounding conciliatory toward Trump. In recent months, we have noticed examples of this growing phenomenon with extreme Left TV hosts Bill Maher & Trevor Noah, race-baiter extraordinaire Al Sharpton, and ultra-libtard “intellectual” guru, Noam Chomksy.
It’s a vexing riddle — with each of the three possibilities sounding “crazier” than the other; and yet, it must be one of those options. But whichever way one leans as to the answer, the multiple-choice question itself represents a win-win-win for our side — a BIG win. Hence, the hateful Fake News barrage now being unloaded against “the world’s richest man” — a now out-of-control Frankenstein monster (or Frankenstein Ghost?) which (((they))) created.
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.
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.”
This guy was my friend. He meditated with our sangha. This act is not suicide. This is a deeply fearless act of compassion to bring attention to climate crisis. We are piecing together info but he had been planning it for atleast one year. #wynnbruce I am so moved. https://t.co/bHoRaLK6Fr
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 Guardianrecently 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.
According to the latest report from the EU’s Earth observation programme, Arctic sea ice is just 3 per cent below its 30 year average.
Whoops, narrative fail!
The Daily Sceptic’s environmental editor Chris Morrison explains the data:
The red line on the graph on the left plots the 2021 record and it can be seen that it is an improvement on recent years. Deviations from the average in March and September shown on the right have both eased in recent years.
Of course in historical and geological terms these changes are insignificant, but they are likely to put a dampener on the generally hysterical tone about polar weather encountered in most climate change debate. This tone was set back in 2009 when former US vice president Al Gore reported there was a high chance that the North Pole would be summer ice free by 2013.
So far as climate catastrophism is concerned, the Arctic is the gift that keeps on giving. Discussing a crackpot scheme to ‘save the Arctic ice’ by sprinkling it with glass, the BBC Future Planet site noted in 2020 that the area was in a “self-destructive feedback loop”. Much of the ice was said to be “rapidly vanishing”.
Morrison goes on to document how Arctic sea ice has grown and abated for hundreds of years of historical records and well before man started emitting carbon dioxide to any significant degree.
As we highlighted last year, one of the authors of the United Nations IPCC report who focused on “extreme” consequences of man-made global warming lauded the fact that “people are starting to get scared” about climate change and that this would “affect the way they vote.”
However, doomsday climate change prophecies have been proven spectacularly wrong time and time again.
According to a much heralded 2004 report, man-made climate change would cause “millions” of deaths, major European cities being sunken, nuclear war and global environmental riots… all by 2020.
Remember guys, it's just 5 days until the UK is "plunged into a Siberian climate."
From the same trustworthy people who gave you mass starvation of humanity by the 80's, "ice free" Arctic summers by 2013 and Greta Thunberg.
As we highlighted back in January 2020, Montana’s Glacier National Park was forced to remove all signs that read “glaciers will all be gone by 2020,” after the doomsday scenario didn’t happen.
So-called “climate experts” have got it wrong time and time again on absolutely everything, from Paul Ehrlich’s prediction of millions of deaths from famine by the 80’s, to Al Gore’s absurd claim that the Arctic would have “ice free” summers by 2013.
At the end of the 70’s, climate experts said that a new ice age was coming. It didn’t happen.
None of it ever happens, yet the same “experts” are still given platforms and vast funding to insist we reduce our living standards, while voices of dissent are silenced by government decree, Big Tech censorship and social media algorithms.
The World We Live In 