by Gruffydd Meredith
The crisis according to many is that the climate is changing and that this ‘needs to be stopped’. When considering the true meaning of these words and sentiments every reasonably sensible person should at least be able to consider that such a statement is meaningless nonsense.
The climate has always changed and changes in temperature are a natural part of this change. Trying to stop that is like trying to stop rain from falling or dogs from barking.
And history shows that the world has been much hotter and colder than it is at this point, and that these climate changes come and go in different times and cycles over time.
Of course the narrative behind all this is that it’s the effects of CO2 (Carbon Dioxide) output from human activities that are causing the world temperature to change. Or at least that was the narrative.
The script was changed after this narrative was challenged and defeated by a huge number of scientists who have argued effectively that there is no credible evidence that man or nature’s CO2 increases temperature. In fact, most evidence shows that the temperature first rises and that CO2 levels then follow that temperature rise.
So the narrative that global warming was caused by man’s (and woman’s) CO2 output was stopped some years ago. In its place came the even more bizarre narrative that ‘climate change needs to be stopped’. This is the latest non sensical narrative to be pushed on us non-stop, especially on children.
And anyone who doesn’t see sense in the senseless statement is a horrible fascist who needs to be burned at the stake it seems. Yes, guilty of fascism and of being a ‘climate denier’, whatever on earth that means. Monty Python used to make great satirical sketches of this sort of thing. Now many pronounce such sentiments without any irony or parody – something that is both truly comical and disturbing to see at the same time.
I’m not a trained scientist but consider myself an environmentalist and would like to think that I can also keep an open and empirical mind regarding such issues in order to try and find the truth. So what are the basic facts and the main arguments? What exactly is the evidence regarding climate change and mankind’s impact on it? Below are hopefully a few helpful pointers:
1. Of all the gases in the environment as a whole, the total amount of CO2 is about 0.04%. Of this 0.04%, man’s output is thought to be around 4%. So, from this, it can be said that the percentage of man’s CO2 output out of all the total gases in the environment is about 0.0016%.
2. By now a huge cohort of scientists have stated that there is no credible evidence to show that the CO2 from man or nature is causing temperatures to rise. Indeed, most evidence shows that CO2 levels increase as a result of rising temperatures rather than causing temperatures to rise. One of the tests that attests to this are the Vostock ice tests which show that CO2 follows temperature rises and not the other way round.
3. The statement that ‘a consensus of 97% scientists agree with man made global warming has been discredited and shown to be incorrect. This misleading figure mostly comes from a major online investigation of 11,994 papers on the topic of global warming led by John Cook from the University of Queensland in 2013. Out of the 11,994 papers, only 32.6% supported the theory that global warming is due to CO2 from man. 0.7% rejected the theory and 0.3% said the cause of warming was uncertain. However, 66.4% did not express any opinion whatsoever on the subject. Very big questions have also been raised about the validity and methodology of the research in general. But even in the face of such information that dispels the myth of ‘97% of scientists’ consensus’ this is all still meaningless because science is not based on consensus or lack of consensus anyway but rather on presenting empirical evidence that is always open to challenge or correction.
Of all the gases in the environment as a whole, the total amount of CO2 is about 0.04%. Of this 0.04%, man’s output is thought to be around 4%. So, from this, it can be said that the percentage of man’s CO2 output out of all the total gases in the environment is about 0.0016%
4. It’s therefore thoroughly dishonest and misleading to state that there is a consensus among scientists that global temperatures are rising because of CO2. The mainstream press and media never mention the tens of thousands of scientists who have clearly stated that they do not believe in the narrative that man and CO2 are causing the temperature to rise. More than 31,487 scientists have signed a petition refusing this theory in the USA alone. Of these, 9,029 had a PhD. It’s claimed that this is 15 times more scientists of quality or qualification than those believed to be working seriously on the IPCC project. In Canada in 2007 68% of over 51,000 scientists surveyed stated that the science of global warming was not settled.
Similar results have been seen across the world, from Germany to Russia, India and more. These claims and petitions are often conveniently dismissed as the work of ‘the ol industry’ or other such bogeyman tropes. But the truth seems to be that the globalist conglomarates are only interested in power, profits and control, and will use any vehicle that can fulfill their own needs, whether they’re deemed ‘green’ or not. Regardless, real empirical science seems to have no place in this equation. What looks to be the overwhelming independent voices and findings of real scientists which fail to keep to the predeterminded script are seemingly ignored across the world.
The uncomfortable truth is that these great number of scientists shows that there is an overhwelming majority and consensus of scientists who do not believe that global warming/climate change is created by man’s CO2 output. Again, that is if consensus was relevant in science. As mentioned science is not based on consensus anyhow, but rather on evidence and empirical proof.
5. According to Piers Corbyn (UK Labour Jeremy Corbyn’s brother) – an astrophysicist, weather and climate expert and a very capable speaker against the ‘stop climate change’ cult, the main change in climate is due to the nature of the sun which has been affecting and causing climate and temperature changes since the beginning of time. Piers and many others also suggest that we may well be moving towards an ice age rather than the opposite.
6. Not only is there no credible evidence that CO2 causes global temperatures to rise, but CO2 is one of the essential gases of life. Without CO2, no plant or tree would grow and therefore there would be no food for us and we would all eventually die. It can be argued therefore that those calling for a zero carbon future are calling for an end to life – a form of a death cult perhaps?
7. For many years now the United Nation’s IPCC – the International Panel on Climate Change – has been facing increased scrutiny. An increasing number of genuine scientists are speaking out against the panel and challenging its credibility. In 2011, Michael Mann who is one of those responsible for the famous hockey stick graph – a highly prominent part of the UN/IPCC 2001 climate report and which claimed to show an unprecedented spike in global average temperature in the 20th Century, sued for defamation against Dr Tim Ball, a professor at the University of Winnipeg who contested the validity of Mr Mann’s graph. Ball applied to the court to dismiss the action for delay; this request was granted at a later hearing and court costs were awarded to Ball. (The actual defamation claims were not judged, but instead the case was dismissed due to delay, for which Mann and his legal team were held responsible.)
This follows numerous scandals such as the Climategate scandal where alleged hacked emails were claimed to show that man made global warming as we know it is a scientific conspiracy, that scientists manipulated climate data to suit their needs and attempted to suppress critics. The IPCC are now regularly judged as being a political body and not a scientific one. This does not come as a surprise to many considering that many of the scientists and related organisations involved are allegedly largely dependent on the grant money for their research from those who are alleged to exert political pressure on them to say and believe ‘the correct things’.
8. Recent groups are seen jumping on the bandwagon, parroting the same senseless slogans such as ‘stop climate change’. The latest of these is Extinction Rebellion, a group that has appeared like a mushroom overnight – a highly effective and rigorously organised group, well branded and marketed and which, in my view, is clearly supported by huge mainstream media coverage together with UK governmental and educational agencies. Some serious questions are being asked regarding its founder members including Gail Bradbrook and her significant connections to the telecoms industry and the government linked Digital Inclusion Strategy especially. This digital inclusion strategy seems to include the proposed roll out of the latest highly contentious 5G Technology.
Strangely, the Extinction Rebellion leadership does not yet seem to be accomodative to the idea of free and open debate on this subject or on 5G and the myriad of questions and concerns raised about its potential effects on human health and the natural environment. It is a little recorded fact that Lloyds of London, one of the world’s premier insurance groups, is refusing to insure health claims made against ‘wi-fi’, and EMF/Electomagnetic technologies which includes 5G and cell phone transmissions. There is also silence on published reports which claim that tens of thousands of trees will need to be cut down all over Britain in order to ensure better 5G coverage.
9. And of course every cult movement also needs its public leaders and High Priests. This is where people like David Attenborough, Greta Thunberg and Brian ‘star gazer’ Cox come in. I know Attenbourough has been smooching us with his velvety voice and safari trousers for decades but I fear that, whether they like it or not, these characters are merely the familiar, friendly faces used by the international corporations and their corprate led media to push their preferred narrative on we the people – like the flickering shadows on the wall of the cave in Plato’s allegory.
So what’s behind all this and why?
But what’s behind all of this and why I hear you eagerly asking. Let me try to expand a bit and hope it doesn’t all sound too far-reaching.
It can be seen that some of the most enthusiastic supporters of the green agenda to campaign against global warming and climate change are the companies and corporations that many would consider the most unlikely. The fossil fuel industry and their corporate allies are no strangers to the transnational green agenda. At all. And as alluded to in this Forbes article, ‘stopping global warming’ will cost at least $50 trillion by the year 2050.
The article explains how investment banking giant Morgan Stanley are recommending a basket of stocks in each area of zero-carbon tech where various large companies are expected to lead the transition and profit from increased climate change spending. These include General Electric, Bloom Energy, Exxon, Chevron and BP, Siemens, Neste, Shell and Valero Energy to name but a few – many of these the very companies blamed by environmetal campaigners for the alleged climate change crisis in the first place.
If you’ve read this far, please tell me you’re all starting to get the picture!?
Electricity suppliers will also benefit from the huge increase in demand predicted for powering the ‘Smart grid’, ‘Smart cities’ and the ‘Smart’ driverless electric cars that are being pushed on us increasingly. It’s been stated by National Grid itself that having all cars on the road running on electricity in the future would equate to the energy of ten new nuclear power stations, with these already passed by the UK State and have started to be built – something much more environmentally damaging than existing petrol or diesel cars, although these aren’t perfect either of course.
And of course all corporations, in partnership with this green agenda, will benefit dramatically from the carbon taxes that will be imposed on us via governments and ‘green’ products – all based on unfounded evidence that the 0.0016% of CO2 that man makes causes the world to warm up although most evidence suggests that CO2 follows a rise in temperature, and doesn’t cause it.
There is another equally odd twist in the tail of all this as well. These international corporate and affiliated military powers are also believed to own technology including weather modification and weather warfare/directed energy weapons which an increasing amount of researchers claim can manipulate and change the weather and climate in general depending on their whim or political demand. An examples of one such developed technolgy is alleged to be HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) which has been around since at least the 90s.
And for years if not decades now, governments or elements within governments are alleged to be injecting or spraying our air with a material or materials that we do not know exactly what they are or for what purpose. One term for this is Geo engineering. Other officially used names are Stratospheric aerosol injection or Solar Radiation Management.
Many argue that the increased extreme weather crises seen in recent years are mostly engineered by human technology – many adding that the purpose behind this ranges from geo politics and military advantage to following the Agenda 21/2030 commitments to try to, through drought, flood, fire or other crises, force rural populations out of the countryside and in to the mega ‘smart’ cities. So, nefarious elements within mankind and globalist powers may well be manipulating the weather and causing changes in the climate. But this is a totally different matter and debate to whether man and nature’s CO2 output causes the earth’s temeperatrures to rise or not.
Every sensible person is an environmentalist that wants to live in a pleasant world, and does not want to see pollution or the ruining of our environment and the natural world. And most of those who protest to protect our environment are decent, good people and all deserve praise for protesting to protect our environment.
But that’s not the real purpose of those big powers that sit at the top and lead the alleged green agenda. As mentioned, in my view they are mostly using the green agenda and their ‘sustainable development’ to claim control of the world and its resources whilst continuing to take away our rights and freedoms – all the while trying to move populations from rural areas in to the ‘Smart Cities’ where they can be more easily monitored and controlled by ‘Smart’ technolgy and by the ‘Smart Grid’. The official name for this umberella plan is Agenda 21 and now Agenda 2030 – a globalist plan agreed upon by 180 countries at the 1992 Rio conference.
Ironically, perversly so for many of the Extinction rebellion cannon fodder, they are correct in saying that time is running out and that our earth is under threat. It’s just that this isn’t because of man’s miniscule and harmless C02 output but rather because globalist forces are indeed wrecking our planet and its incredible environment and want to bring in their own dystopian technological and scientific control grid and act as the new god.
This they are doing through a myriad if ways including aerial spraying, through the electromagnetic smog of wi fi and mobile phone technology, through toxic food additives, pharmaceutical and industrial chemicals, genetically modified crops, seeds and foods, through herbicides and pesticides, through nuclear waste and radiation and through mass wars across the world to name but a few elements. Many if not most of the elements responsible for these things are pushing the so called green agenda. And the ‘we have ten years left’ is perhaps not that far off the mark in theory as this is when the globalist Agenda 2030 control grid is hoped to have been largely completed if these forces get their way. This is no tin foil hat conspiracy. These people and institutions have been telling us about their plans in reports, books and even films for many many years.
Again, these are globalist, draconian plans to incrementally take full control of all resources and people, taking away our freedoms and rights from us one by one under a duplicitous ‘green mask’. I believe that this is simply international communism painted green instead of red. Communism with a central corporatocratic politiburo on top, pushing us all down. I believe we the people of the world are being deceived and endangered. Academics, scientists, the press, you and I have a moral duty to increase awareness of this agenda, and it’s crucial that this subject is discussed, debated and scrutinised publicly so that real environmentalism is separated from this unaccountable UN sham.
Environmental issues are used to manipulate and drive people to pursue bespoke campaigns / causes that have already been prepared for them, while also restricting and taking away their rights and freedoms over time. The cult of Scientism and the ubiquitous use of technology and AI/Artificial Intelligence is also planned to be a major part of this attempt at globalist control. China’s worryingly dystopian Social Credit system is a very good example of where the big powers are going to try to lead us in the not too distant future if they get their way. Although we’re not too far off a similar system in the west already if we consider digitisation, Facebook, SMART phones, AI and facial recognition cameras already in existence in the west.
As mentioned, at the top of this globalist agenda are the global corporations and financiers with their crony monopoly capitalism and increasing influence on international governments and their policies. They often work with more seemingly innocent organizations to achieve their goals; through charities, NGO’s (Non Governmental Organizations) and through philanthropic bodies, organizations and campaign groups such as Extinction Rebellion. Not to mention through Public Private Partnerships – where public money is often used by private and unaccountable bodies.
There are often mentioned alleged links between the Rockefeller group who were believed to be a significant influence on the forming of the influential ‘think tank’ The Club of Rome in 1968. It seems that the ‘limits to growth’ and ‘zero growth’ plans of The Club of Rome (one of many such groups) include in particular the de-industrialization of the west and the movement of these industries to third world countries including China. According to many they also want want to ensure a lower world population in general. All this again under the green mask of ‘environmental issues’. This was discussed by some of the co-founders of The Club of Rome, Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider in the book ‘The First Global Revolution’ in which they made the following statement:
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill….. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” – From The First Global Revolution book (page 75) by the Club of Rome, premier environmental think-tank, consultants to the United Nations and the later created IPCC.
Key associates of the Rockefellers and the Club of Rome such as the highly successful businessman and oil and gas magnet, Maurice Strong – a United Nations stalwart – went on to play a key role in establishing the IPCC and to push the agenda that man’s output of CO2 in particular is creating global warming. Strong also went on to write the United Nations Earth Charter with Mikhail Gorbachev in 1992. Gorbachev clearly spelled out the importance of using climate alarmism to advance the globalist objectives in 1996 when he stated “The threat of an environmental crisis will unlock the New World Order.” – one of numerous statements he has made calling for a such a thing.
I realize that all of this may sound conspritorial to some – possibly to many. But that’s exactly what it is. Conspiracy, plans and agendas that are carried out covertly and overtly without our consent or awareness. Crackpots? Fruit cakes? Yes those responsible for all of this seem to be showing such signs.
“The threat of an environmental crisis will unlock the New World Order.” – Mikhail Gorbachev
But please don’t believe a word I say. In fact, I would love it if I was completely wrong – that would be a great relief. Nobody in their right mind wants any of this to be true. But time is short and we the people need to get truly informed and truly active.
So please do your own research, consider and use your reason to find out the truth. Truth fears no investigation, In the meantime, I declare without doubt that we, as a humanity and as a civilization, are under attack from those who want to subjugate us, or worse.
It’s always important to remember: there are more of us than them – much, much more.
Main picture by Gazamp under CC BY-SA 4.0 licence