Dane Wigington at GeoengineeringWatch.org has finally released his long-anticipated feature-length documentary film The Dimming.
Like everything Dane and his team do, this new documentary is a cut above. Featuring commentary from a plethora of top anti-geoengineering activists, it masterfully covers many aspects of today’s operations. It slices and dices the insidious claims (usually made by the shills) of the lines in the sky being harmless condensation trails. It deftly and effectively explains the manipulation of atmospheric particles with electromagnetic energy. It exposes the disinformation tactics of the mainstream media. It compiles the extensive evidence proving that the terrible wildfires of late are a direct result of massive aerial spraying.
In particular, the film focuses on biological impacts. You know, the area of study that is the most important and therefore roundly ignored by the geoengineers. The most extensive discussions here revolve around the Human health impacts of aluminum exposure. If you’re new to this topic, aluminum has been found to be the most common constituent of today’s geoengineering sprays, and guess what? It’s really bad for us – especially aluminum nanoparticles. The film also shows how the combination of aluminum in our bodies and our exposures to harmful electromagnetic energy (such as that produced by 5G cell towers) adds another layer of harmful complexity here.
The centerpiece of the film is documentation of the collection and analysis of particulate samples taken in flight. Dane and his team were able to collect air samples at altitude then have the samples professionally analyzed. The whole process is detailed in the film. Samples have been collected at ground level for many years, but these aerial samples eliminate the possibility of contamination. As one might expect, the dispersed particulate matter collected at altitude was found to consist of the same elements prevalent in samples collected at ground level.
In summation, The Dimming is a must see. At its core is a call to action against something that threatens all life on this planet. The last segment is particularly stirring. We have an awesome home, folks. It’s too bad that vigorously defending it is not something that most people do. Since we have our priorities straight, we must be the ones that keep pressing the issue. Thank you.
Perhaps the discussions, interviews, documentations in the movie whose link is listed below can start a conversation, can start you thinking. Go For It!
We are all aware of the environnmental crisis that humanity (and all life on Earth) faces, characterised by the term ‘climate change’. Much of the current thinking in the scientific community is promoting the idea that our planet is rapidly warming due to excess CO2 (carbon dioxide) gas produced by humans in the last few centuries, and the last 70 years in particular.
While there is a very strong and hard to deny case to suggest that human activity is the main cause of environmental destruction, the premise that it is due primarily to CO2 emissions is beginning to look somewhat flawed. I am well aware that the previous sentence is likely to draw a lot of negative attention and criticism, with accusations of ‘climate denier’ being thrown at me. However, the situation is not that simple as to be a case of ‘global warming’ being the main influence or no influence at all.
The reality of the situation is complex. In my opinion the main drivers of the environmental crisis are many, but put in simple terms – destruction of wild habitats, pollution due to industrialisation, over-use of soils, over-population, erosion of soils leading to desertification or barren, infertile landscapes, monoculture agriculture and climate fluctuations. Notice that I did not use the term ‘climate change’ which in the current scientific norm implies warming.
While the planet has undoubtedly warmed up, in part due to human activity and CO2 production, the current popular thinking completely ignores historical CO2 levels beyond the last millennium and also the primary input on temperatures on this planet and all eight of the planets in this solar system. That input, although largely ignored at the moment, is of course our sun, which on average generates 3.8 x 1026 Joules (energy) per second. Human energy usage per year is around 5 x 1020 Joules, which is about 1 million times less than the Sun produces during 1 second! In fact, in the whole of human history we have used less energy that the Sun produces in that 1 second.
So, given the above, it stand to reason that the energy of the Sun must have a significant effect on the energy available on this planet and the heat energy (temperature) that is captured by it, as it rotates around the Sun. If we look at the history of Earth, particularly through the use of ice-core samples, we can see that the temperatures on our planet follow a very distinct pattern. On a macro level this can be observed as a huge cycle of glacials (ice-ages) and interglacials, with the ice ages lasting many times longer than the interglacial (warm) periods. We are currently in an interglacial, which began approximately 11,500 years ago and it is estimated that it will end some time within the next 50,000 years.
On a micro level, the Sun undergoes cycles of around 11 years known as the solar magnetic activity cycle, which has been studied and recorded by humans for approximately 400 years. During each cycle the number of sunspots peaks and falls in a recognisable pattern. However, this pattern of approx. 11 years is itself part of a much longer solar pattern of solar minimums and solar maximums. For instance the Medieval maximum (grand solar maximum) lasted from 1100-1250 (warm period) and the famous Maunder Minimum (grand solar minimum) lasted from 1645-1715 (cold period). The later was known as a mini ice age due to the particularly drastic drop in global temperatures that affected crop-growth and led to bitter winters for a period of 70 years.
Scientists that study the sun are well aware of these periodic cycles both on the 11 year scale and on the larger scale of 70–100 years, known as the Gleissberg cycle. We have just finished a solar maximum cycle of around 70 years and are now heading into a both a new 11 year cycle and a new grand solar minimum cycle that will reach its lowest (coldest) point some time between 2030 and 2040. You don’t need to take my word for it – this has been confirmed by NASA and by the National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration (NOAA). NOAA predictions of sunspot and radio flux appears to show a ‘full-blown’ grand solar minimum (GSM) which will last from the late-2020s to at least the 2040s
This means that the coming solar minimum is going to be not only a grand solar minimum, but perhaps the worst one since the Maunder Minimum in the 1600s. One would expert this to have been front-page news, but outside of the scientific community this information is virtually unheard of and little understood. One must ask – why is this the case? The simple answer to this question is that the solar predictions destroy the current scientific and cultural narrative of ‘Climate Change’ in the form of warming.
There will indeed be climate change in the coming decades, but for the next 10 to 40 years it is going to get colder, not warmer! The same thing will happen on the 7 other planets in this solar system, because the main factor affecting planetary temperatures is the activity of the Sun. Given that so much time, effort and money has been invested in ‘global warming’ as a premise for change in how human society is run, it is very much an “inconvenient truth” that is beginning to arrive just at the time when we are beginning to take more affirmative action on environmental issues.
The controversial news that the Earth (and all 7 other planets) will cool down in the next 10-40 years is politically highly inconvenient and that is why it is being kept quiet. Getting rid of fossil fuels, caring for our environment, lowering industrial output, ending industrial farming and reducing livestock, plus a gradual reduction in the human population are all excellent goals. Unfortunately the rationale for doing this, that has been sold to the public, is most likely entirely misguided. The net effect of this false premise may well be that environmentalists and main-stream public scientists will look like fools by the end of this decade. The cooling of planet Earth may well be seen as justification to abandon environmental concerns and reform of our economic systems, which would be a terrible tragedy.
In order to avoid this highly likely total embarrassment, world governments and the scientific community need to admit that the coming dip in solar energy output is going to lead to the cooling of our planet for at least 2 decades, possibly 4 or 5 or even 7 decades! This is not conspiracy, this is not mis-information or propaganda – this is proven, verifiable fact which can be validated by current solar observation, previous observation of sun cycles for 400 years and ice-core samples stretching back millions of years.
As someone who has been involved in the environmental movement since I was 16, when I joined a conservation group at college, I am very concerned about how this plays out. If the public feels that they have been lied to it may lead to a backlash and a disinterest in environmental issues. The reasons I outlined at the beginning of this article are more than sufficient for humanity to change its modus operandi. One does not need to concoct highly improbable narratives about the world ‘burning up’ within decades to justify environmental activism. In fact the coming GSM is likely to produce similar negative effects to predicted ‘global warming’, such as habitat loss, loss of farming land, a drop in food availability, migration, social unrest and possibly other problems too.
It is time that the whole ‘climate change’ theory was re-assessed and the known solar activity cycle as observed by NOAA and NASA taken into account. To fail to do so is total folly and only creates another problem, that will come back to haunt us if the grand solar minimum is ignored. We do need to take better care of our world and learn to live far more harmoniously within it, but we need to base our actions on good science and not on misleading or inaccurate information.
“Do you think crows are the smartest animals? What are the smartest animals? I bet it’s parrots, or maybe dolphins. No, no, it’s gotta be some kind of dog, Mama.”
This volley of questions from my 7-year-old son about a group of crows on a nearby power line early one morning caused me to reflect on how we are bathed in a human-centric worldview from the very start of our lives.
“What does ‘smart’ mean exactly?” I said. “Perhaps every animal, every being has its own unique genius. Do you think any animal is smarter than another, the way a spider weaves its intricately patterned web, the way an owl sees a mouse in the dark, the way a squirrel flies from branch to branch? It seems to me that there are so many ways of expressing intelligence in this world.”
Somehow we can only understand intelligence from a certain cognitive ladder that exists to always put humans on top. It is this human-centrism, I believe, that is at the very core of our ecological catastrophe. In addition to it being deeply problematic psychologically, when we do not value the lives of all beings, they become unfeeling and expendable resources for our ceaseless human consumption.
There is no doubt that practical, actionable changes to our everyday way of life are essential to creating an ecological civilization. Continuing to shift how we are commuting, shopping, eating, and farming is clearly essential. But beyond these physical acts, what are we doing to create an ecological civilization within our psyches? If our minds cannot conceive of it, we surely will not act to make it a reality.
We must begin by confronting how entrenched beliefs in human ownership of all places and things keep us foreign to and outside of the living world. We are not the Earth’s keepers or savers, just as we are not the Earth’s landlords or masters. The Earth provides for and nurtures our very existence—we must stop perpetuating the harmful illusion that we are separate from and superior to nature’s ingenuity. Clearly recognizing this human-nature split within our mindset is the gateway to other beneficial ways of knowing.
From there we can practice seeing ourselves as one kind of being within a much wider field of living kinship. At its foundation, developing an ecological psyche means that we are reclaiming and diversifying this sense of relational intimacy.
We can engage in simple rituals of reciprocity by finding a daily communion with the creatures, waterways, and stars that remind us something vibrantly alive exists beyond our limited knowledge and understanding.
Perhaps you are already in a loving relationship with a pet, a special tree, or a nearby river. Let us legitimize the way these things nourish and comfort us, and then seek out an even larger web of connection.
Beginning with the place where we live, we can practice rousing our fullest attention by learning its Indigenous history, both past and modern. Bringing a presence to the ground beneath our feet, we can study its slow, ever-changing geology, as well as the names of the plants and animals of the place we call home. We can engage in simple rituals of reciprocity by finding a daily communion with the creatures, waterways, and stars that remind us something vibrantly alive exists beyond our limited knowledge and understanding.
We can regularly seek out experiences that offer a greater perspective, reminding us of our small but unique niche within the mix of all creation. This is what draws millions of people to National Parks every summer or what puts us behind telescopes at 3 o’clock in the morning—the opportunity to feel humbled and awed, put back in place by the immensity of it all.
We no longer need to believe in the story of our separateness—shifting our belief of individualism into a life-affirming sense of belonging with all beings. Earth-honoring ethics are the wisdom teachings of Indigenous cultures around the world. But all of us are on the hook. It is the birthright and responsibility of all humans to come back into relationship with the Earth.
With an ecological psyche we awaken something essential within ourselves. Listening to our quiet biophilic longings, we find that our bodies and spirits are hardwired for wilderness and our cells, our muscles, our lungs have a memory of this: We are more sunflower, more thunder, more ocean tide than we are concrete. We have to rekindle this deep memory of where we come from. We are nature breathing, moving, trembling in human form.
Kendra Ward has been an acupuncturist and herbalist since 2003. She lives with her family in rural Vermont on traditional Abenaki lands.
CHD’s New ‘Medical Racism’ Film Exposes Long-Standing Experimentation on Minorities
Watch the trailer now! Medical Racism, premiering March 11, chronicles the medical cartel’s history of targeting minorities for unethical experiments, the acquiescence of regulatory agencies and medical ethicists, and the silence of physicians who allow these atrocities to continue today.
Children’s Health Defense, in conjunction with Centner Productions and the Urban Global Health Alliance, along with co-producers Rev. Tony Muhammad and author-historian Curtis Cost, today released the trailer for their upcoming documentary, “Medical Racism: The New Apartheid.”
“Medical Racism,” which premieres March 11, illuminates the shocking history of government health regulators and private pharmaceutical companies conducting human experiments on Black Americans.
“Though many Americans are familiar with the history of medical atrocities committed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention at Tuskegee, by the father of American gynecology, Dr. J. Marion Sims, on South Carolina slave girls and the continuing medical larceny against Henrietta Lacks, most people are likely unaware of the routine medical barbarism committed against Africans that persists today,” said Curtis Cost, the film’s co-producer.
The documentary, directed by Academy Award nominee David Massey, chronicles the medical cartel’s long history of targeting minority populations for unethical experiments, the acquiescence of regulatory agencies and medical ethicists, and the silence of physicians who allow these atrocities to continue today.
According to “Medical Racism” producer Kevin Jenkins of the Urban Global Health Alliance: “These racially targeted experiments have been hiding in plain sight for decades. It’s time to expose the truth and end inhumane and barbaric forms of racism by the ‘respected’ medical establishment.”
“Medical Racism” explores the recent racially based experimentation by government health officials and pharmaceutical companies on Black children in South Central Los Angeles.
The film also exposes Big Pharma’s medical experiments and “drug dumping” in modern-day Africa, and the World Health Organization’s 2014 population control campaign to sterilize a million Kenyan girls with infertility chemicals hidden in tetanus vaccines.
“The high levels of medical mistrust in the Black community are a rational response to routine callousness and systemic savagery toward Blacks by medical professionals and pharmaceutical interests,” said Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman of Children’s Health Defense. “Our hope in producing this film is to learn from past misdeeds, so we can avoid their future repetition.”
For more information and to register to receive a notification on where and how the film can be seen when it’s released, visit medicalracism.org.
Whopper-doozie alert! This one is so over the top that I simply had to blog about it. It was shared by W.G., whom I thank for bringing to my attention. To be honest, this is such a whopper-doozie that I don’t even know where to start with respect to today’s high octane speculation, and I rather suspect – once readers dive into the article – that it will stimulate your own speculations. I’m presenting three different sources or versions of this story, because it is so unbelievably breathtaking in its implications:
Let’s look at the second article linked above. Consider these breathtaking paragraphs:
Pfizer has been accused of “bullying” Latin American governments in Covid vaccine negotiations and has asked some countries to put up sovereign assets, such as embassy buildings and military bases, as a guarantee against the cost of any future legal cases, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism can reveal.
In the case of one country, demands made by the pharmaceutical giant led to a three-month delay in a vaccine deal being agreed. For Argentina and Brazil, no national deals were agreed at all. Any hold-up in countries receiving vaccines means more people contracting Covid-19 and potentially dying.
Officials from Argentina and the other Latin American country, which cannot be named as it has signed a confidentiality agreement with Pfizer, said the company’s negotiators demanded additional indemnity against any civil claims citizens might file if they experienced adverse effects after being inoculated. In Argentina and Brazil, Pfizer asked for sovereign assets to be put up as collateral for any future legal costs.
One official who was present in the unnamed country’s negotiations described Pfizer’s demands as “high-level bullying” and said the government felt like it was being “held to ransom” in order to access life-saving vaccines. (Boldface emphasis added)
That pretty much sums it up; “Muck Pharmaceuticals” as we like to call Big Pharma here, in the form of Pfizer, is allegedly demanding collateral against potential lawsuits against its “vaccine.” Now my high octane speculation of the day comes in the form of three questions: (1) Why would Pfizer be so concerned about potential lawsuits if it was confident its “vaccine” was safe? (2) why would it ask nations for embassies and military bases? And (3) was the idea of collateralizing embassies and military bases the objective of the planscamdemic/”vaccine” operation one of the goals at the outset of the whole planscamdemic to begin with?
In looking at question one, we gain a bit of a speculative clue: seizing a nation’s embassies and military bases is, from one point of view, a real estate scam, one which anticipates that lawsuits are likely to be both many and costly, which is in its way a tacit admission that there are “problems” with the “vaccines.” The amounts of money are likely to be vast, and thus, hard assets are required in order to minimize Muck Pharmaceutical’s exposure to the risk.
But that brings us to question two: why ask for embassies and military bases? This, in my opinion, means one of two things, and possibly both together: either Pfizer’s action is on behalf of someone else whom it anticipates can buy those assets – and has the money to do so – should lawsuits ensue, or Pfizer itself views itself as a sovereign entity, in need of embassies and military bases to enforce its corporate will, which implies its having plans for a professional corporate military, or its has already developed one. Or, as I already stated, it is some combination of these two. With regard to the first prospect, there are few actors on the world stage that would have the liquidity to buy such hard assets, and use them for their original intended purpose. China would certainly be one primary suspect, and after all, the planscamdemic did originate there in a certain sense. But there could be others as well, including extra-territorial actors.
And that leads us to question three: was this one of the goals (among many others) that Mr. Globaloney wanted to accomplish through the planscamdemic? I suspect it’s a strong possibility, since it is clear that Mr. Globaloney is using the whole farce to further his agenda of control. And control doesn’t work unless one has centers for intelligence operations that are “sovereign territory” (embassies) and a means to enforce its dictates (military bases).
When one considers that there are other effective methods of covid treatment, this draconian effort regarding vaccines seems to make the agenda all too obvious.
Michael Burry Slams “Out Of Touch, Rich White Man” Bill Gates
Less than two weeks ago, we reported on the fact that The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is bankrolling an activist educational group that believes math is racist and that arriving at an objective answer is an example of “white supremacy.”
Yes, really.
Specifically, as Summit News noted at the time, a conglomerate of 25 educational organizations called A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction asserts that asking students to find the correct answer is an “inherently racist practice.”
The organization’s website lists the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as its only donor.
“In fact, over the past decade, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has awarded over of $140 million to a variety of groups associated with Pathway. Their “antiracist resources” are at the epicenter of a new training course for teachers offered by the Oregon Department of Education throughout the state,” reports National File.
“Three of the most prominent organizations receiving grant money from the Gates’ are The Education Trust, Teach Plus, and WestEd, all non-profit 501c organizations.”
A guidebook for teachers produced by Pathway called ‘Dismantling Racism in Mathematics Instruction’ ludicrously claims that mathematics “is used to uphold capitalist, imperialist, and racist views.”
Teachers are instructed to blame non-white students getting answers wrong on “white supremacist practices,” which are truly to blame for the “underachievement” of minorities.
This liberal, progressive insanity appears to have triggered Michael “Big Short” Burry who unleashed his usual acerbic, and entirely accurate, wit on Gates and the entire concept of math being racist…
“Math is a form of #whitesupremacy? Where I’m from, whites are the dummies in math. South and East Asians apparently didn’t get the message whites use math to #suppress them. Would be a #LOL moment at the local high school, at whites’ expense. “
“I am of a generation that I know junior people who worked with Gates. Brilliant, exacting, and intimidating. Could and would pick apart and embarrass anyone in the room who was not prepared. Open conflict was his weapon. The right answer was never wrong.“
Ending with the all too telling hashtag: #formenotforthee
Hard disks and optical drives store gigabits of digital data at the press of a button. But those technologies—like the magnetic tapes and floppy drives before them—are apt to become antiquated and unreadable when they are overtaken by new technology. Now, researchers have come up with a way to electronically write data into the DNA of living bacteria, a storage option unlikely to go obsolete any time soon.
“This is a really nice step” that might one day spur commercial development, says Seth Shipman, a bioengineer at the Gladstone Institutes and the University of California, San Francisco, who was not involved in the new work. He notes, however, that real-world applications are a long way off.
DNA is attractive for data storage for several reasons. First, it is more than 1000 times as dense as the most compact hard drives, enabling it to store the equivalent of 10 full-length digital movies within the volume of a grain of salt. And because DNA is central to biology, the technologies to read and write it are expected to become cheaper and more powerful with time.
‘This Week’ With Mary + Polly: You Can’t Sweep Deaths Under the Rug + Free Pot With Your COVID Shot? + More
In “This Week” with Mary Holland, Children’s Health Defense vice chair and general counsel, and Polly Tommey, co-producer of “Vaxxed,” Mary and Polly discuss the growing reports of injuries and deaths from COVID vaccines … and more.
As The Defender reported, in the U.S., 66 deaths have been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). These haven’t been fully investigated yet, but clearly many people, mostly the frail elderly but also some younger (as in the 56-year-old Florida doctor) are reporting serious injuries, even death. “People are dying from these vaccines. That can’t be swept under the rug by mainstream media.”
Adverse reactions to COVID vaccines that are being reported “are similar to those we’ve seen from HPV vaccines, only worse.”
Some “fantastic” news: Massachusetts rescinded its flu vaccine mandate. “This is the power of the courts.”
More exciting news: A group of scientists convinced the National Institutes of Health to no longer recommend against the use of Ivermectin to treat COVID. “It’s very exciting that this cheap, effective treatment is no longer being withheld from patients.”
A new peer-reviewed study from Stanford University says there’s no benefit to COVID lockdowns. “There are lawsuits against these in virtually every state.”
Despite a big push to get nursing home workers to get the COVID vaccine, some are pushing back. A Wisconsin nursing home said it will lay off employees who refuse the vaccine. “We believe any attempt for an employer to mandate a vaccine that hasn’t been licensed by the FDA is illegal. Under federal and state law, no one can be forced to participate in this experiment.”
The Telegraph reported that Germany’s eastern state of Saxony says it could put people who violate COVID quarantine rules in detention centers. “Human rights lawyers say this won’t fly, but we have to be very concerned about these detention centers.”
Forbes reported this week that a group calling itself “Joints for Jabs” is offering free marijuana as an incentive to get the COVID vaccine. “What I find most disturbing about this article is this quote: ‘If you believe in the science that supports medical cannabis, you should believe the science that supports the efficacy of the vaccine.’ Science isn’t something you ‘believe,’ it’s something that’s proven.”
If you see something disturbing, as in evidence of “quarantine camps” or attempts to bully people into getting the vaccine, or if you or someone you know experiences an adverse reaction, please contact CHD@childrenshealth.org. “These messages don’t go into a black hole, we react to all of them.”
Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is implementing many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.
Recently Sasha Stone hosted a 2 hour live stream event called “Focus on Fauci.” Participating in the event were Dr. Rocco Galati, Dr. David Martin, Dr. Judy Mikovits, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Dr. Martin has made tidal waves in the Alternative Media since this event, by explaining that the experimental mRNA COVID vaccines are not even vaccines, and legally cannot be called “vaccines,” because they are really medical devices.
Dr. Martin should be familiar to readers of Health Impact News (as are the other participants), as he was the featured scientist in filmmaker Mikki Willis’ excellent production: Plandemic. He exposed, for example, how the U.S. Government has owned patents on coronaviruses since the 1990s.
His first invention was a laser integrated system to target and treat inoperable tumors. His mathematics helped unravel the way the human body processes hormones and led to the detection and treatment of many diseases.
His observation of human behavior led to his development of technology which deciphers the intention and motivation of communication – a technology that has impacted and saved the lives of billions.
His global business activities served to develop the world’s top-performing global equity index (including the CNBC IQ100 powered by M·CAM).
He’s brought the world’s largest white-collar criminals to justice and brought the world’s most oppressed and disenfranchised transformative ways to engage.
From the starry expanses of Mongolia to the flashing lights of New York, his work is as passion-filled whether it’s with a camel herder or a global CEO. (Source.)
“This is not a vaccine.”
Here is a partial transcript of the video below explaining that the mRNA vaccines are not really vaccines:
This is not a vaccine.
We need to be really clear. We’re using the term “vaccine” to sneak this thing under public health exemptions.
This is not a vaccine. This is an mRNA packaged in a fat envelope, that is delivered to a cell.
It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator.
It is not a vaccine. Vaccines actually are a legally defined term, and they’re a legally defined term under public health law, they’re legally defined term under the CDC and FDA standards.
And a vaccine specifically has to stimulate both an immunity within the person who is receiving it, but it also has to disrupt transmission.
And that is not what this is. They have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell, it is not to stop transmission. It is a treatment.
But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of the public health authorities, because then people would say, well what other treatments are there?
