If C40 Cities’ climate aims are carried out, people will die.
EVITA DUFFY-ALFONSO
Fourteen major American cities are part of a globalist climate organization known as the “C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group,” which has an “ambitious target” by the year 2030 of “0 kg [of] meat consumption,” “0 kg [of] dairy consumption,” “3 new clothing items per person per year,” “0 private vehicles” owned, and “1 short-haul return flight (less than 1500 km) every 3 years per person.”
C40’s dystopian goals can be found in its “The Future of Urban Consumption in a 1.5°C World” report, which was published in 2019 and reportedly reemphasized in 2023. The organization is headed and largely funded by Democrat billionaire Michael Bloomberg. Nearly 100 cities across the world make up the organization, and its American members include Austin, Boston, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New Orleans, New York City, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Portland, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and Seattle.
Media coverage of C40 Cities’ goals has been relatively sparse. The few media personalities and news outlets who have discussed it have been heavily attacked by the corporate “fact-checkers.” In a “fact check” aimed at conservative commentator Glenn Beck, AFP Fact Check claimed that the banning of meat and dairy and limits on air travel and clothing consumption were actually “not policy recommendations.”
AFP quotes a paragraph from the original “The Future of Urban Consumption in a 1.5°C World” report, which reads, “This report does not advocate for the wholesale adoption of these more ambitious targets in C40 cities; rather, they are included to provide a set of reference points that cities, and other actors, can reflect on when considering different emission-reduction alternatives and long-term urban visions.”
But this paragraph, likely included in the report as a liability in the case of pushback, seems to directly contradict the meaning of “target,” which in this context can be defined as a “desired goal.” The target of eliminating meat, dairy, and private vehicles by 2030 is “based on a future vision of resource-efficient production and extensive changes in consumer choices,” the report notes — something its authors clearly hope to bring about. If these were not their goals, they would not have labeled them “ambitious targets.”
The “fact-checker’s” insistence that C40 Cities’ explicitly stated climate goals are somehow insincere is even more unconvincing, given that we are watching them start to unfold right now. This year, in lockstep with C40 Cities’ 2030 aims, New York City Mayor Eric Adams announced that the city will place caps on the amount of meat and dairy served by city institutions, such as schools and prisons. Meanwhile, the U.K. has banned the sale of new gas-powered vehicles after 2030, and France has banned short-haul flights “to cut carbon emissions.”
In 2020, the World Economic Forum (which promotes C40 Cities on its website) introduced “The Great Reset,” which seeks to use the Covid-19 pandemic as a point from which to launch a global reset of society to supposedly combat climate change. This reset, however, has far more to do with social control than it does with the climate. If globalist leaders truly cared about the environment, they wouldn’t be chartering private jets or owning massive, energy-consuming mansions on the coast in California, which, by climate fanatics’ own calculation, will soon be underwater.
As the WEF plainly stated in a 2016 promotional video, by 2030 “You’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy.”
Right now, hedge funds and private billionaires are buying up residential homes and farmland all over the world. At the same time, unrealistic zero-emissions policies are impoverishing Westerners and annihilating the middle class, which is fueling reliance on centralized government. Such intentional steps backward also, ironically, harm the earth because wealthier nations are proven to have cleaner environments and put less strain on natural resources.
Climate activists are also advocating for “climate lockdowns,” in the same way there were Covid lockdowns. Ideas floated for a climate lockdown have ranged from shuttering people in their homes and restricting air travel to providing a Universal Basic Income and introducing a maximum income level.gene
Climate dystopianism doesn’t end there. WEF-linked “bioethicist” Dr. Matthew Liao has proposed the idea of scientists genetically modify humans to be allergic to meat. Liao has also discussed shrinking the physical size of humans via eugenics or hormone injections so they consume fewer resources.
All of these policy proposals appear even more unreasonable and illogical when we actually evaluate the data. According to the International Disaster Database, deaths related to extreme heat, floods, storms, and droughts have plummeted as C02 emissions have risen. The fossil fuel economy has provided billions of people with heating, air conditioning, weather warning systems, mass irrigation, and durable buildings.
This isn’t to say that we shouldn’t try to limit carbon emissions. Environmentally friendly nuclear energy, which is safe and more reliable than wind and solar energy, is a great way to wean our society off of our reliance on fossil fuels. The globalist climate activists, however, oppose nuclear energy, further undermining their supposedly good intentions.
Ultimately, the climate coalition’s goals are inherently anti-human. People generally need meat and the protein it provides to flourish. Banning meat and dairy, restricting calories, genetically altering the human body, and impoverishing the masses will hurt the planet and people. More likely than not, it will do more than hurt people — it will kill many of them.
Evita Duffy-Alfonso is a staff writer to The Federalist and the co-founder of the Chicago Thinker. She loves the Midwest, lumberjack sports, writing, and her family. Follow her on Twitter at @evitaduffy_1 or contact her at evita@thefederalist.com.
Most of you have entered the final stage of your voluntary acceptance of mass slavery, and that slavery is fully dependent on the concept of fear, compliance to a false ‘authority,’ and total dependence on the very tyrant called government, whose plan is to control the world by controlling the common, ignorant, and apathetic collective crowd called ‘the people.’
The most vital component of this ‘Great Reset’ agenda, is for the majority to be dependent on the State, and that phenomenon is now close at hand.
“It’s not an endlessly expanding list of rights – the ‘right’ to health care, the ‘right’ to food and housing. That’s not freedom, that’s dependency. Those aren’t rights, those are the rations of slavery – hay and a barn for human cattle.”
P.J. O’Rourke
The final foundation of all restriction, control of financial and monetary transactions, and control of movement, will hinge on the farcical fraud called manmade ‘climate change.’
No worries however, because many other excuses, and aspects of control and manipulation will be used as well, but at this point, the ‘climate change’ hoax is the lynchpin of the future takeover plot.
The speed of this agenda has accelerated far past earlier time projections, and I believe this to be due to more exposure by the few who understand what is actually happening, to explain all the contradiction, lies, and propaganda, that have inundated society for the past few decades. At this point, the somewhat panicked ruling class and its pawns in government, have vastly escalated their terror campaign worldwide, in order to shut down dissent before it can gain too much ground. This campaign of terror is meant to drive the tool of fear to a much higher degree, so as to be able to accomplish takeover goals with less resistance. As mentioned earlier, the main focus of this increased intimidation is based on the fake ‘climate change’ model.
One obvious example of this fear campaign, is the purposely heightened threat of so-called weather anomalies, especially what are conspicuous (intentionally set) fires burning at ridiculously high temperatures, destroying particular properties, towns, cities, and valuable mineral-laden land holdings. These unnatural fire outbreaks began in earnest in early spring, and have continued incessantly since that time. What began in Canada, has now overtaken the Hawaiian island of Maui, among many other areas around the world, and the devastation is incredible. Only psychopaths could perpetrate such evil as this, but the coverup and blame on bogus ‘climate change,’ has been accepted by most of course, and promulgated by the ruling class, and every State-owned or controlled mainstream media outlet. The attack on all truthtellers claiming these horrendous fires to be intentionally set, was instant, without any legitimate evidence to the contrary to back their plotted refutations, and in fact, this universal response was certainly coordinated.
Now there is a fight to see who will take this land in Maui, and by take, I mean exactly that. It has been exposed that many are attempting to buy and gain contracts to build a new ‘smart city’ on this hallowed ground, and many big players are involved, including Blackrock.. Those claiming to help, people like Jeff Bezos and Oprah Winfrey, are already heavily involved, and the governor of Hawaii, Josh Green, has taken control of this, and not to the benefit of those residents and business owners who lost everything. (As an aside, the houses and property of Bezos and Winfrey magically escaped the fire?) This evil governor, a true controlling politician, said, and before all bodies have been recovered, or any funerals for the dead have taken place, “I’m already thinking of ways for the state to acquire that land so that we can put it into workforce housing, to put it back into families, or make it open spaces in perpetuity as a memorial to the people who were lost,” Democrat Gov. Josh Green said. What about all those who own that land the ‘State’ is going to force buy? (Steal)
But let us not stop here, as during this same year, there were unbelievable train derailments. most all of which involved very poisonous, and toxic materials, the most noted of course, being the purposely released (due to deliberate fire-setting) noxious chemicals in East Palestine, Ohio, that poisoned much of the northeast U.S. There were many more incidents of this nature as well.
As to extreme fear-mongering, weather ‘services’ nationwide, have intentionally changed all reporting in order to strike extreme fear in the collective herd called the ‘citizenry.’ Fantastic claims of record heat, which are bogus in most every case, are rampant. Instead of greens and darker muted colors to show heat, dark reds and purples just so happen to be the new norm across the entire country, and simultaneously; a coincidence certainly? In addition, the heat is not just hot, it is now “boiling” according to these weather idiots. These descriptions, while ludicrous and plotted, are purposely meant to cause undue alarm in an uninformed ‘public’ with little or no desire or effort to understand any truth.
All of these things, and an endless supply of other threats, including the threat of nuclear war, of financial collapse, of food shortages, of extreme inflation leading to extreme prices, to new ‘pandemic’ emergencies, to travel restrictions, lockdowns, monitoring of all transactions, and of total digitization of the economy in order to control all, are now constant. The end of cash is being pursued aggressively, and the replacement by central bank digital currency (CBDC) is looming in the near future. This agenda too, has recently accelerated greatly, indicating that the ruling element of society is attempting to expand its control mechanisms more quickly so as to avoid any pushback. Given what is happening in open view, the great increase of intentionally-structured disastrous events, the massive transfer of wealth and property, the government’s aggressive stance immediately following every manufactured ‘weather event’ or so-called ‘natural’ emergency, and the total disregard for life and personal property, how long will it be until this takeover plot becomes fully entrenched in reality?
All of these events are meant to make the average ‘citizen’ dependent on the State. The more dependency, the easier to control. When the bulk of society cannot or will not take care of themselves, will not be responsible for their own lives and freedom, will not fight back in their own defense, and voluntarily choose to acquiesce to authority and State relief instead of taking any personal responsibility, what will become of this country?
It will be very telling to watch this State terrorism that has been released on Maui, and how the people respond. Will they give up their homes and land that was destroyed by and due to evil forces, or will they demand to keep and hold their property? Will they disallow this totalitarian scum called a governor from his nefarious U.N. plans, and keep what is theirs? Or will they simply allow the State’s political class to do as they please with everything they have deliberately destroyed, and become wards (slaves) of the State?
“Between the government which does evil and the people who accept it – there is a certain shameful solidarity.”
~ Author: Victor Hugo
Once mass dependence is in place, there will no longer be any chance of a free society.
The State seeks to control all, and the way to accomplish that heinous mission, is to make the populace at large completely impotent, so that they have not the ability or drive to fight back. Total dependency is key to any takeover conspiracy by the ruling class and its State thugs, and many feigned threats and so-called emergencies will erupt on a regular basis going forward.
This is without doubt in my opinion, so believe nothing, trust no State representative at any level, trust no mainstream media, and question everything!
‘Reduce Population’: Kamala Harris Verbal Slip-Up Corrected By White House
Vice President Kamala Harris speaks during the conclusion of the Investing in America tour at Coppin State University in Baltimore, Md., on July 14, 2023. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)
Vice President Kamala Harris mistakenly (?) suggested that one of the goals of investing in clean energy is population reduction.
“When President [Joe] Biden and I took office, we set an ambitious goal … to cut our greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030 and to reach net-zero emissions by 2050,” Harris told an audience at Coppin State University in Baltimore on Friday.
“When we invest in clean energy and electric vehicles and reduce population, more of our children can breathe clean air and drink clean water,” she continued.
According to the official transcript, the 58-year-old Vice President meant to say ‘pollution,’ not ‘population.’
Ms. Harris spoke at the event to address the Environmental Protection Agency’s $20 billion investment program across two grant competitions under the Biden administration’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund that aims to spark clean energy investments across the country.
After clips of Ms. Harris’s verbal miscue emerged online, social media users and a number of Republican figures seized on the error to suggest the Biden administration was publicly calling to reduce the population in the United States.
Responding to Ms. Harris’ verbal slip-up in a Twitter post, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) asked the vice president what exactly she meant by reducing the population.
“Abortion? Assisted suicide? Or what means are you suggesting to reduce population in order to help public health?” Ms. Greene wrote.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), meanwhile, warned his followers on Twitter, asking: “Are you the population she wants to reduce?”
“Kamala Harris admits she wants to reduce the population for environmental reasons,” Ohio state Sen. Michael Rull said in a post on Twitter. “That’s not just anti-American. That’s anti-human.”
Tesla CEO Elon Musk also commented on the vice president’s mix-up of the phrase, tweeting: “We need to increase population.”
‘It’s less digestible than real meat, and certainly less nutritious’
Posted by Yudi Sherman
August 10, 2023
Fake meat giant Beyond Meat’s revenue plunged over 30% for the second quarter compared to last year as consumers turn to real meat.
The California-based company also slashed its annual sales forecast from $375m–$415m to $360m–$380m “in light of greater than expected consumer and category headwinds and their anticipated impact on net revenues,” according to The Telegraph. Last year, the company was forced to cut a fifth of its workforce as its stock dropped nearly 80%.
Beyond Meat, founded in 2009 to “fight climate change,” counts globalist billionaire Bill Gates as one of its investors. It has since supplied its plant-based fake meat to McDonalds, Dunkin’ Donuts, Taco Bell, Walmart and PepsiCo. In 2013, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) named Beyond Meat “Company of the Year” and the company has been endorsed by several Hollywood celebrities.
Frontline News reported last year that Beyond Meat was distributing its fake Beyond Burger to 1,600 supermarkets throughout Germany as the country moves to reduce livestock to “fight climate change.”
Beyond Meat is not the only player in the fake meat industry. It primarily competes with Impossible Foods, which also provides plant-based meat, and Upside Foods, which provides lab-grown meat. All three companies are backed by Gates, who has clarified that government regulation may be needed to force people to transition to fake meat.
“I don’t think the poorest 80 countries will be eating synthetic meat,” Gates told the MIT Technology Review. “I do think all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef. You can get used to the taste difference, and the claim is they’re going to make it taste even better over time. Eventually, that green premium is modest enough that you can sort of change the [behavior of] people or use regulation to totally shift the demand.”
But nutrition experts have been warning against fake meat. Nutritionist and Sacred Cow: The Case for (Better Meat) author Diana Rodgers says lab-grown meat, such as that sold by Upside Foods, is still not as healthy as McDonalds.
“I’d rather eat my shoe than lab-grown meat,” Rodgers stated.
British investigative food journalist Joanna Blythman warns against even plant-based meat, which she says sometimes contain up to 30 artificial ingredients.
“Artificial plant-based proteins tend to be loaded with ‘anti-nutrients’ – compounds that make it harder for our guts to absorb beneficial macro and micronutrients,” Blythman wrote in an article for the Daily Mail. “Essentially, it’s less digestible than real meat, and certainly less nutritious.”
While Gates and his World Economic Forum (WEF) colleagues hope to significantly reduce meat consumption by 2030 and, ideally, phase it out completely by 2050, Blythman says the global real meat industry is forecasted to rise up to 7% annually.
There are also significant concerns about fake meat’s purported contribution to the climate. Plants require fertilizer, processing and shipping, too, and lab-grown meat is also expected to be environmentally taxing.
A preprint study published in April by University of California, Davis researchers found that if fake meat becomes as widely accepted as globalists would like, it could be extremely harmful to the climate.
The researchers found that the production process for fake meat emits 246 to 1,508 kg of carbon dioxide per kilogram of fake meat, while retail meat production produces only about 60 kg of CO2 per kilogram. According to the scientists’ estimates, producing fake meat is 4 to 25 times worse for the climate than real beef.
“Currently, animal cell-based meat products are being produced at a small scale and at an economic loss, however companies are intending to industrialize and scale-up production,” the scientists opine in the study.
“Results indicate that the environmental impact of near-term animal cell-based meat production is likely to be orders of magnitude higher than median beef production if a highly refined growth medium is utilised,” they concluded.
Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry spoke with MSNBC Host Jen Psaki about climate change, while cautioning about its affect on farmers’ crops and homes.
In coming weeks Americans will celebrate Flag Day and the Fourth of July. We will gather with neighbors to grill hot dogs in the backyard, drape our kids’ bikes with red, white and blue bunting, kick back from the workweek and… tip a hat to the founders of our great nation.
I wonder: will we still celebrate our nation’s holidays with these time-honored traditions five years from now? Ten years from now?
Start with the obvious: John Kerry and climate zealots everywhere are adamantly opposed to the kind of food we eat, and how it is produced. He and his Democrat colleagues are equally incensed that we might cook over gas grills; I can’t even imagine their horror at charcoal fires. Surely, carbon-emitting charcoal is on the kill list.
Next is the cost of feeding the neighborhood. It used to be the traditional hamburger barbeque was reasonably inexpensive. But in the past year the price of such fare skyrocketed 9%, on top of a 10% increase in 2022, and while some costs, like those for meat or tomatoes, may fluctuate, there’s little chance that food companies are going to drop the prices of ketchup (up 28% in one year) or hamburger buns (up 7%) anytime soon.
Much more important than all of the above: the actual purpose of Flag Day and the Fourth of July is to honor the birth of our nation. With the left actively rewriting U.S. history and savaging our country’s accomplishments and exceptionalism, these holidays could well be rebranded in the future as National Apology Day or maybe American Reparations Day.
As Joe Biden might say, this is no joke.
The climate zealots running the White House and our country want to change how we live, what we eat, how we heat our homes, what kinds of cars we drive and how we cook. Joe Biden appointed John Kerry our official Climate Czar and loosed him upon our country, armed with a $14 billion budget and staff of 45.
One of Kerry’s most urgent missions is to overhaul our extremely successful agricultural industry. At a recent meeting of AIM for Climate, co-hosted by U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack and the UAE Minister of Climate Change and Environment, Kerry thundered that farmers worldwide create fully one-third of global greenhouse gases, an amount that must come down if the world is to reach net zero emissions.
“Food systems themselves contribute a significant amount of emissions just in the way in which we do the things we’ve been doing…” intoned Kerry, having evidently co-opted Vice President Kamala Harris’ speechwriter.
He further warned: “We’re facing record malnutrition at a time when agriculture, more than any other sector, is suffering from the impacts of the climate crisis. And I refuse to call it climate change anymore. It’s not change. It’s a crisis.”
Left out of Kerry’s near-hysterical speech was any indication of how changes sponsored by AIM for Climate might deliver both lower emissions and more nutrition. But a strategy paper published by the Department of Agriculture gives some clues. For example, it proposes “conversion of inedible biomass and waste into new materials, food, and fuels”, which sounds tasty.
The paper also advocates research and education on “diet-related chronic diseases, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and certain cancers.” Does anyone doubt this agency will soon suggest that for health reasons Americans must stop eating red meat? c
Lest you think this concern is overblown, I recommend to you what is transpiring in the Netherlands. That country’s government, attempting to meet unrealistic emissions targets set by the EU, has recently allocated billions of dollars to buy out as many as 3,000 livestock farmers, accusing the industry of producing unacceptable levels of nitrogen.
The land sales are compulsory – in other words, confiscatory. The program may reduce Holland’s herds by one-third, significantly cutting the nation’s exports of food to other countries. Despite a huge political backlash, authorities are proceeding, even as critics allege that replacing Holland’s production with food imports from more polluting countries will render the effort meaningless.
Kerry and his Democrat colleagues are too caught up with cow flatulence to focus on banning charcoal or gas grills; give them time. After all, climate activists report that charcoal fires “typically generate three times as much greenhouse emissions than gas for the same cooking job.”
Also, we learn that a typical grilled meal “emits as much carbon dioxide as driving a car for roughly 26 miles,” according to a New York Times reporter who worried about the “smoke coming from my friend’s charcoal grill.”
Concerns about the environmental impact of charcoal grilling led to a proposed ban in 2021 in Brighton, U.K., which is controlled by the Green Party. Local authorities explain that disposable barbecues are partly to blame for the world’s rising CO2 levels.
In the U.S., ordinances against charcoal have focused on the fire hazard, but tying charcoal burning to environmental damage is catching on. Of course, cooking over a gas grill is just as unpopular with climate warriors. If gas stoves are a problem indoors, surely they pose a threat outdoors too.
Much more concerning than climate nuttiness is the concerted effort to convince Americans that our country is “systemically racist” and that our history is a source of national shame. This appalling and dishonest narrative, which only serves to divide our nation and plump up race-baiters like Al Sharpton, should be denounced and resisted.
The United States is the most prosperous nation in the world because we have encouraged industry and entrepreneurship, welcomed immigrants who arrive legally to access the almost unlimited opportunities available to all, and commemorate success.
Destructive food policies in the name of climate are weapons in the war on food. Reduction of methane emissions from livestock animals, especially beef and dairy cattle, is planned, along with switching from current farming practices to undefined “innovative” methods. 13 countries have committed to the Global Methane Pledge to transform their farm policies include the United States, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Chile, Czech Republic, Ecuador, Germany, Panama, Peru and Spain.The UN, World Economic Forum and other NGOs have been promoting meatless diets and the consumption of insect protein for years. There has been heavy investment in insect factories to add processed bugs into foods. It is doubtful that labels will inform people of what they are eating. Cancer cells from cows, chickens and pigs are used to quickly grow artificial meat in laboratories. Meanwhile, the UN’s World Bank is warning of a global famine.
.The global climate cult is getting ready to kick its war on food into overdrive with 13 nations – many of them major cattle and food-producing states led by the United States, Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Spain – signing onto a commitment to place farmers under new restrictions intended to reduce emissions of methane gas.
The Global Methane Hub announced in a May 17 press release that agriculture and environmental ministers and ambassadors from 13 countries, including the United States, have signed a commitment that pledges to reduce methane emissions in agriculture. The U.S. was represented by Biden’s climate czar, John Kerry.
What does this mean and why should you care? We’ll break it down.
According to the press release issued by these nations and posted at Global Methane Hub:
“Last month (in April 2023), the Global Methane Hub collaborated with the Ministries of Agriculture of Chile and Spain to convene the first-ever global ministerial on agricultural practices to reduce methane emissions. The ministerial brought together high-ranking government members to share global perspectives on methane reduction and low-emission food systems. The gathering led to a statement in which the nations committed to support efforts to improve the quality and quantity of, and access to, finance for climate change adaptation and mitigation measures in the agriculture and food sectors and to collaborate on efforts aimed at lowering methane emissions in agriculture and food systems.”
Conference participants included the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Climate & Clean Air Coalition, Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture, the World Bank, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, and the Inter-American Development Bank.
The World Bank, another creation of the post-World War II, U.S.-led liberal rules-based order, has been talking a lot lately, along with the U.N., about a coming famine. The World Bank issued a white paper just last week, on May 22, titled Food Security Update: World Bank Response to Rising Food Insecurity.
So it’s curious to me that, at the very time the globalists are warning about food shortages and famine, their mouthpieces at the World Bank, the U.N., and within the administrations of the U.S. and its allies (notice China and Russia are nowhere to be found in these preposterous anti-food policies), are talking about converting over to a new and unproven form of “sustainable” farming that’s focused more on reducing methane than it is on producing the highest yields of food.
Modern food production is bad, they tell us, because it produces methane which supposedly harms the environment.
“Food systems are responsible for 60% of methane emissions,” said Marcelo Mena, CEO of Global Methane Hub. “We congratulate countries willing to take the lead in food systems methane mitigation and confirm our commitment to support this type of initiative with programs that explore promising methane mitigation technologies and the underpinning research of methane mitigation mechanisms to create new technologies.”
John Kerry is also very excited about taking valuable, productive farmland offline, reducing the size of cattle herds, and turning our food-production systems over to technocrats and globalists offering vague promises of “new technologies.”
Top 15 Unbelievable Reasons That Prove Global Warming Might be a Hoax
Global Warming is the name given to the current belief that the earth’s temperature has been gradually increasing over the past few hundred years since the dawn of the industrial revolution.
The human impact on this is believed to only account for 10% of all the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and as such, it is highly unlikely that we, as a species, are having a massive negative impact on the stability of the earth’s climate. In this article, we will be giving you 15 reasons that prove global warming might be a hoax.
Top 15 Unbelievable Reasons That Prove Global Warming Might be a Hoax
1. The climate of the earth is warming up rapidly
If you look at the HadCRUT3 surface temperature index, which is based in the UK, records show warming to 1878, cooling to 1911, warming to 1941, cooling to 1964, warming to 1998 and cooling to 2011. The increase in temperature between 1964 was the same rate as recorded between 1911 to 1941. Numerous satellites, ground stations, and weather balloons show recorded cooling since 2001.
The current warnings of a temperature increase of 0.6 degrees to 0.8 degrees are nothing irregular and fit into the natural rate of the warming recorded over the last few centuries.
The placement of these global weather stations should be taken into account. They are mostly based in so-called heat islands in cities where temperatures are normally higher, and few have been placed in rural countryside locations.
Two teams have corrected the average temperature readings between all the stations and have reduced the reported increase in temperature by half since 1980. Up to today, there has never been any sort of significantly extreme event caused by warming.
There was global warming about a thousand years ago (Medieval Warm Period) – it’s a cyclic matter, no need for alarmism.
2. Reports show that the global climate has been cooling for the past 1000 years and recently, temperatures have skyrocketed
Throughout history, the climate of this planet has fluctuated greatly, many ancient people and religions alike talk about a great flood, which was probably caused by the melting ice caps or glaciers. Recorded history tells us of a warm period from around 1000 to 1200 AD, which allowed the Vikings to farm crops on Greenland. This was followed by the little ice age.
Since the end of the 17th century, the average global temperature has been rising at a steady rate, except for the period of 1940 to 1970 in which the climate cooled off, which in turn led to a global panic about global cooling!
Over a century, stratocumulus clouds forming off the coastlines can turn the global temperature up or down by a few degrees, and the “climate models” cannot predict which way it will go. (July 2018 issue of “Science).”
3. The rate of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been directly credited to the human species and greenhouse gasses, causing the current warming trend
The carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere has fluctuated due to various reasons over time. Since the industrial revolution, the CO2 levels in the atmosphere have increased on average by roughly 120 parts per million. Most of this is linked to the human cause, and during the current century, the increase is approximately 0.55% per year.
See alsoCauses, Effects and Solutions to Global Dimming
Though there is absolutely no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As ancient ice core measurements have proven that CO2 levels in the past have often changed after a temperature drop or increase. Solid evidence exists that shows that as temperatures fluctuate naturally through solar radiation and other galactic and local influences, the warming of the surface levels of the planet results in more CO2 being released into the atmosphere.
The ratio of man-made CO2 to natural CO2 on Earth is about 1 to 2400. That means man’s portion is about 2 drops if a 12 ounce glass held Earth’s CO2.
Recent findings show Mt. Katla buried under a glacier in Iceland emits up to 24,000 tons CO2 per day; it’s possible that many more other sub-glacial volcanoes worldwide are dumping much more CO2 into the atmosphere. There are 40,000 miles of volcanically active mid-ocean ridges, of which only a tiny fraction has been mapped. That’s a real big thermal and CO2 output area we know little about.
4. The poles are warming, and ice caps are melting, apparently
Updated data from NASA satellite instruments reveal the Earth’s polar ice caps have not receded at all since the satellite instruments began measuring the ice caps in 1979. Temperatures at the poles have not increased since 2005. In fact, apart from the Palmer Peninsula, the entire Antarctic region is cooling down. Icecap thickness in the arctic and north poles are increasing in size and will continue to do so until things naturally warm up.
5. Computer models are being used to calculate the future impacts of CO2
These computer models are programmed to assume that CO2 is the largest climate driver and that the sun has little effect on the climate. These computer models can be programmed with a large number of variables in order to come to the conclusion that the earth will cool down or warm-up. A computer model is no way to measure anything, as it is purely a matter of who inputs the data for the model.
The sun is a major driver of the climate, with daily additions of solar radiation that are completely random and follow no pattern at all. These computer models do not take this into account and, therefore, do not give a true representation of the actual climate. And as such, they should not be used as a base for such claims.
6. The melting of natural glaciers proves global warming?
Glaciers have naturally receded and grown countless times throughout history. Recent glacier receding is simply an outcome of the warming planet after the little ice age of the early medieval period. Scientists have discovered evidence that the ice caps and glaciers have receded and increased in size on numerous occasions throughout history.
It is a normal thing for the glaciers to shrink and expand over time. Anyway, this is more driven by precipitation than temperature.
7. CO2 is a toxin?
A lot of people believe this, and it plays a part in many scientific studies from a purely theoretical standpoint. CO2 is just as important as nitrogen to the atmosphere.
CO2 plays a major role in the bringing about of life on earth, it is necessary for plant growth, and in some areas with higher levels of CO2, records show that some tree and plant life can grow at extraordinary rates. The assumption that CO2 is a pollutant is completely false.
Source: Canva
8. Global warming apparently will cause storms and extreme weather
These claims are completely baseless. No evidence exists of the weather being affected by global warming on a global scale. Regional variations do occur. Extreme weather can be affected by a large number of variables; things like the jet stream, for example, can change the weather for many seasons in different European countries. Even sand swept up from the Sahara desert can change the climate of the northernmost European nations.
See alsoVarious Human Activities That Affect an Ecosystem
Global warming has no impact on these weather systems. Some argue that global warming will lead to droughts across the world, but if global warming happens the way we are being told, there should be more moisture in the air all around us as the moisture evaporates due to high temperatures.
Considering that the earth’s climate has been forever changing since the formation of the planet. It didn’t stop just because our human race popped up. Even during our history, the earth’s climate has fluctuated from cold to hot and back again; we do what we have always done, and what life always does, we adapt.
Due to all the major increases in scientific and medical studies, our current lifespan is vastly superior to our ancestors, and this will continue to grow as time goes on.
10. Does CO2 form the largest part of the greenhouse gases?
Greenhouse effect causing gas forms roughly 3% of the volume of the atmosphere. 97% of which is water vapor and clouds, with the remaining percentages being gases like CO2, CH4, Ozone, and N20. CO2 makes up about 0.4% of our atmosphere.
The small amounts of gasses in the atmosphere are capable of retaining the heat from solar radiation, but due to the relatively small amounts of them in comparison to the other 90% of water vapor. That 90% is believed to cause 75% of the greenhouse effect.
At their current levels, if water vapor were to increase just 3%, that would amount to the same level of the greenhouse effect as if CO2 increased by 100%.
11. “The impacts of climate change are expected to act as a ‘threat multiplier’ in many of the world’s most unstable regions, exacerbating droughts and other natural disasters as well as leading to food, water and other resource shortages that may spur mass migrations.”
Regarding food and water supplies, global crop production has soared as the Earth gradually warms. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is essential to plant life, and more it added to the atmosphere enhances plant growth and crop production. Plant growth and crop production also benefit from longer growing seasons and fewer frost events. Global crops set new production records virtually every year as our planet modestly warms.
The same holds true as per objective data for water supplies. As our planet warms, there is a gradual increase in global precipitation and soil moisture. Warmer temperatures evaporate more water from the oceans, which in turn stimulates more frequent precipitation over continental landmasses. This results in enhanced precipitation, which means an improvement in soil moisture at almost all sites in the Global Soil Moisture Data Bank.
If crop shortages, declining precipitation and declining soil moisture cause national security threats, then global warming benefits rather than jeopardizes national security.
12. “Sea Levels Rising – Warmer temperatures are causing glaciers and polar ice sheets to melt, increasing the amount of water in the world’s seas and oceans.”
The pace of sea-level rise remained relatively constant throughout the 20th century, even when global temperatures rose gradually. In recent decades, there has similarly been no increase in the pace of sea-level rise.
When utilizing 20th-century technologies, humans effectively adapted to global sea-level rise, then utilizing 21st-century technologies, humans will be much more equipped to adapt to global sea-level rise.
Although alarmists frequently point melting of polar ice sheets and a recent modest shrinkage in the Arctic ice sheet, that decline has been completely offset by ice sheet expansion in the Antarctic. Since NASA precisely began measuring those 35 years ago with satellite instruments, cumulatively, polar ice sheets have not declined at all.
13. “Economic Consequences – The costs associated with climate change rise along with the temperatures. Severe storms and floods combined with agricultural losses cause billions of dollars in damages, and money is needed to treat and control the spread of disease”
Extreme events such as severe storms, floods and agricultural losses may cost a great deal of money, but such costs are dramatically declining as the Earth modestly warms. Therefore, EDF’s asserted economic costs are actually economic benefits.
Similarly, scientific measurements and peer-reviewed studies report no increase in flooding events regarding natural-flowing rivers and streams. If there was an increase in flooding activity, that is due to human alterations of river and stream flow rather than precipitation changes.
Also, the modest recent warming is producing the U.S., and global crop production records virtually every year, creating billions of dollars in new economic and human welfare benefits each and every year. This creates a net economic benefit completely ignored by EDF.
14. 31,000 scientists say “no convincing evidence”
While polls of scientists actively working in the field of climate science indicate strong general agreement that Earth is warming and human activity is a significant factor, 31,000 scientists say there is “no convincing evidence” that humans can or will cause “catastrophic” heating of the atmosphere.
This claim originates from the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, which has an online petition (petitionproject.org) that states:
We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.
Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.
15. No Real Proof or Evidence
According to an article by the Huffington Post, President Donald Trump told the American public about his disbelief in climate change because he didn’t see any real evidence. This comment has been made by millions of other people since the 2016 election, and since the American President pulled out of the Paris Accords, an agreement signed by several countries to change their environmental practices.
Geo-engineering scientists working on blocking the sun’s rays to cool the planet say that: “Even if we completely stopped carbon dioxide emissions today, the earth will continue warming over the next several decades.”
Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, one of the largest banks in the U.S., is advocating for the forceable seizure of American land. In an annual shareholder’s letter, he advised that seizing private property might help the U.S. cope with the climate crises.
JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon
100 Percent Fed Up reports – The CEO began his letter by admitting to shareholders that the pandemic and the Ukraine war have taken a toll on the bank, “Across the globe, 2022 was another year of significant challenges: from a terrible war in Ukraine and growing geopolitical tensions — particularly with China — to a politically divided America, almost all nations felt the effects of global economic uncertainty, including higher energy and food prices, mounting inflation rates and volatile markets, and, of course, COVID-19’s lingering impacts.”
Dimon Continued, “While all these experiences and associated turmoil have serious ramifications on our company, colleagues, clients, and the countries in which we do business, their consequences on the world at large — with the extreme suffering of the Ukrainian people and the potential restructuring of the global order — are far more important.”
But then Dimon surprised shareholders when he brought an “Update on Specific Issues Facing Our Company” under the “Climate Complexity and Planning” subsection and spoke on Eminent Domain.
Eminent Domain is the legal theory enabling governments to seize private property for public use. The property owner’s reimbursement for their possessions is generally less than the value of the property that was taken.
Following previous climate fearmongers like Al Gore, Dimon warned shareholders that time is running out, “The window for action to avert the costliest impacts of global climate change is closing,” He added, “to expedite progress, governments, businesses, and non-governmental organizations need to align across a series of practical policy changes that comprehensively address fundamental issues that are holding us back. Massive global investment in clean energy technologies must be done and must continue to grow year-over-year,” Dimon noted.
He described the need to employ “practical policy changes.” And said that could include utilizing eminent Domain to take private property in order to fight climate control, “At the same time, permitting reforms are desperately needed to allow investment to be done in any kind of timely way. We may even need to evoke Eminent Domain.”
West Virginia State Treasurer Riley Moore pointed out the devastation that could be caused by the U.S. government simply seizing personal property. He tweeted, “JP Morgan’s CEO wants to use Eminent Domain to build more wind and solar farms. If you think food and energy prices are bad now, just wait until the government starts seizing farmland to build solar panels. This kind of thinking poses an existential threat to the middle class.
JP Morgan’s CEO wants to use eminent domain to build more wind and solar farms.
If you think food and energy prices are bad now, just wait until the government starts seizing farmland to build solar panels.
This kind of thinking poses an existential threat to the middle class.
Dimon, who has yet to offer his own private property to the government for less than its value, tried to make his suggestion sound less tyrannical and extreme by saying “green energies” are not advancing quickly enough,
“We simply are not getting the adequate investments fast enough for grid, solar, wind, and pipeline initiatives.”
Dimon’s comments are reminiscent of World Economic Forums Founder Klaus Schwab’s eery promise, “You will own nothing and be happy.”
One Twitter user responded that JPMorgan and Chase Bank customers should pull their accounts ASAP to make Dimon shut his mouth while also pointing out that the communist desire to strip Americans of their hard-earned assets is alive and well.
First the story, then the really interesting part.
Axios: “Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) sent two planes of undocumented migrants to [elite] Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts on Wednesday, joining Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) in sending migrants to sanctuary cities, Fox News first reported.”
“DeSantis appeared to target Massachusetts, which has a Republican governor, because state and local leaders have expressed support for policies that benefit immigrants regardless of their status.”
“Some 50 migrants believed to be from Venezuela arrived by charter plane at Martha’s Vineyard Airport on Wednesday afternoon, per multiple reports.”
“‘States like Massachusetts, New York and California will better facilitate the care of these individuals who they have invited into our country by incentivizing illegal immigration through their designation as “sanctuary states” and support for the Biden administration’s open border policies,’ Taryn Fenske, DeSantis’ communications director, told Fox News.”
Now let’s see, isn’t one of the sparkling celeb couples who make their home on Marth’s Vineyard…the Obamas?
Why, yes. Right there on the waterfront. They have no fear of impending climate-change tsunamis.
Sitting on 29 acres, the house spreads out its arms 6,892 square feet, and features seven bedrooms and eight and half bathrooms. Plus a garage, a separate barn, a pool, a pond, a boathouse, and a private beach.
Marvelous.
Perfect for housing undocumented illegal aliens.
I would think at least a dozen.
Can we expect an announcement in the next few days?
“Michelle and I are providing a home for three youths who appear to be about 29, two small children, and four men and three women. They’ll have all their meals served to them, and we’ve hired tutors to facilitate their fluency in English. Of course, Michelle and I will be taking Spanish lessons as well. Having new people moving around in our home is a welcome addition to our daily lives. We’re all in this together.”
Meanwhile, TMZ is reporting: “We have audio of a phone conversation between Michelle Obama and her Martha’s Vineyard gal pal, Gloria Van Landingwort-Schwartzmeister. The first voice you hear is Michelle’s:”
“Barack has gone full-bore wackaloon. Bullshitting the press is one thing, but making a promise like that…there’s no fucking way those migrants are moving into my house. I have enough trouble with the hired help.”
Van Landingwort-Schwartzmeister: “Lock up the silverware, baby. The invaders have come ashore. I’ll give you the name of my guy, Pedro. He’s flaming gay and sensational on details. He’ll do a running inventory of every single item in your house and ride herd on those aliens. By the time he gets through with them, they’ll be reporting on how many squares of toilet paper they use…”
Alas, I have a feeling all those exceedingly wealthy liberals who live and vacation on Martha’s Vineyard, and who support unlimited immigration, will consign the migrants to some sort of “community housing”—as far away as possible from their mansions, lawn parties, boating excursions, and leverage-merger type conversations that slice and dice the country on behalf of…themselves.
Tune in next week, when a commercial construction baron on the Vineyard brings a tank, mortars, and flamethrowers to his property, so he can remain secure while he conducts high-level meetings on new gun control legislation…
Take a look and a listen, then think again about the wonders of electric cars (notwithstanding the ability for24/7 tracking, the abiility to control your electric car by Bir Bro, etc., etc., etc.)
