NASA scientists published a study in Nature claiming to have discovered the primary cause of (alleged) global warming in the past few years and attributed it to a climate/ green policy that decreased sulfur dioxide emissions. In 2020, the International Maritime Organization forced the sulfur content in shipping fuel to drop from 3.5% to no more than 0.5%. The process involved sulfate particles, formed from sulfur dioxide, which can mix with clouds and make them brighter, reflecting the sun’s rays back into space instead of heating the Earth. With a reduction in sulfur dioxide, there is less cloud brightening. The NASA researchers attribute 80% of recent global warming to the drop in sulfur dioxide emissions.
A group of NASA scientists is raising the alarm after a study found that globalist green agenda policies to supposedly fight “climate change” may actually be causing “global warming.”
The NASA scientists believe that efforts to supposedly cool the Earth, such as Bill Gates’s atmospheric aerosols experiments, are having the reverse effect and are dangerously warming the planet.
For decades, globalists have been promoting conflicting narratives in an effort to use the environment to push the public into accepting a collectivist agenda.
The 1970s saw scientists warning of a coming Ice Age in which “arctic cold and perpetual snow could turn most of the inhabitable portions of our planet into a polar desert.”
At the end of the twentieth century, it was the alleged threat of the exact opposite – “global warming.”
“Global warming” fear mongering then accompanied government campaigns urging the adoption of new regulations.
Then, at the start of the twenty-first century, when people were not fully embracing the fear of “global warming,” so-called experts ambiguously warned of “climate change.”
“Climate change” would conveniently cover all eventualities, including temperatures that sometimes went down.
This was especially convenient as science has long proven that Earth’s climate has been constantly changing over the last few billion years.
Now, NASA scientists claim to have discovered the primary cause of (alleged) global warming in the past few years: Green agenda “environmental ” policies.
Interestingly, they do not address the controversial question of whether or not global warming is actually occurring.
Specifically, curbs placed on sulfur dioxide emissions in 2020 by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) forced the sulfur content in shipping fuel to drop from 3.5 percent to no more than 0.5 percent.
Sulfur dioxide is one of the gases targeted by green activists as it is considered a pollutant contributing to acid rain as well as various respiratory problems.
Environmentalists appear, however, to have been taken off-guard by one consequence of the drop in atmospheric sulfur dioxide: a potential global increase in temperatures.
In their research paper, the NASA scientists note:
While IMO2020 [the new regulation] is intended to benefit public health by decreasing aerosol loading, this decrease in aerosols can temporarily accelerate global warming by dimming clouds across the global oceans. IMO2020 took effect in a short period of time and likely has global impact.
The process involved sulfate particles, formed from sulfur dioxide, which can mix with clouds and make them brighter.
These bright clouds then reflect some of the sun’s rays back out to space, so that less heat reaches Earth.
The scientists estimate that the drop in sulfur dioxide emissions means fewer bright clouds with the result, they claim, of a doubling (or more) of the warming rate:
Here we estimate the regulation leads to a radiative forcing of +0.2±0.11Wm−2 averaged over the global ocean.
The amount of radiative forcing could lead to a doubling (or more) of the warming rate in the 2020 s compared with the rate since 1980 with strong spatiotemporal heterogeneity.
They claim that we saw this rise in temperatures last year.
They attribute 80 percent of recent global warming to the drop in sulfur dioxide emissions:
The warming effect is consistent with the recent observed strong warming in 2023 and expected to make the 2020s anomalously warm.
The forcing is equivalent in magnitude to 80% of the measured increase in planetary heat uptake since 2020.
The study also mentions the implications for general weather patterns across the globe.
The scientists argue that the issue is making the weather more unstable, particularly this decade:
The radiative forcing also has strong hemispheric contrast, which has important implications for precipitation pattern changes … [and] can create significant perturbations in precipitation patterns.
Had they not been scientists from NASA, the media would probably have ignored the findings.
After all, a single corporate news outlet did not pick up a recent study revealing how carbon dioxide’s current and future impact on global warming is likely zero.
This time around, the study was published in Nature and picked up by no less than 120 news sites.
However, what the mainstream media outlets focused on was a tangential issue raised by the research findings.
The NASA scientists had mentioned in their work a process called marine cloud brightening which Bill Gates is championing.
This involves spraying sea salt into the clouds to create a similar bright-cloud effect to that created by sulfates, possibly cooling the planet.
In response, The Washington Post headlined its article, “Could spraying sea salt into the clouds cool the planet?”
In fact, it dates back to 1990 and has been investigated for almost two decades.
The Post did not make a single reference to the discovery that “carbon emissions” are not, after all, causing temperature increases.
No more did the New York Times, which hid the (partial) results of the study in an obscure paragraph tucked away in an article headlined, “Hanging by a Thread: U.N. Chief Warns of Missing a Key Climate Target.”
In fact, NYT omitted to mention that the study was conducted by NASA scientists, only mentioning that:
Other contributors [to global warming] might stick around for longer. In a study published last week, a team of scientists led by Tianle Yuan, a geophysicist at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, estimated that the planet could be experiencing additional warming right now for a counterintuitive reason: recent regulations that slashed air pollution from ships.
NYT then dashed back to the accepted narrative of normal, everyday human activity being the main driver of alleged “global warming,” stressing that:
To scientists, the foremost driver of warming remains clear: Atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, the three most important human-caused heat-trapping gases, have continued their steady upward climb.
At current rates of emissions, it might only be five or so more years before humans have altered the atmosphere’s chemistry so significantly that it becomes extremely difficult to stop warming from surpassing 1.5 degrees Celsius, scientists have estimated
Evidently, NYT esteems the views of scientists from Imperial College London and other institutes more than the views of researchers from NASA.
Forbes, too, in an article titled, “Shipping Pollution Curbs Made Climate Change Worse, Controversial NASA Study Claims,” quotes random climate scientists who cast doubt on the study’s findings.
Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of the research findings is that they shouldn’t have been news at all.
The effects of sulfates in the atmosphere have been known for decades.
… the effects of the sulfur dioxide from industry might be countering the greenhouse effect created by carbon dioxide …
When fossil fuels are burned, both carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide are released.
As demonstrated in the ship tracks study, sulfate particles produced from sulfur dioxide create brighter clouds, which may cool the atmosphere.
Any light that is reflected cannot reach the ground and heat the surface of the Earth.
This means there is less heat for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to trap in the atmosphere.
This article was written by NASA scientists.
Today’s NASA scientists suggest in their study that the important question to address now is the “trade-off” between improving air quality and “global warming.”
They also imply that, in the future, scientists should exercise more caution in their efforts to control the climate, given the complex and often contradictory issues involved:
Why a Global Government Is the Ultimate Goal of Billionaires
October 06, 2023
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
The European Union’s “Energy Performance of Buildings Directive” — the legislative instrument that dictates the energy performance standards for buildings within the EU — will be used to achieve a massive wealth transfer scheme
By 2030, the EU must meet a minimum 55% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. By 2050, they want every building — commercial, public and residential — in the EU to meet zero-emission standards. To achieve that, they will impose a slew of new renewal energy requirements on homeowners
For example, heating systems that use fossil fuels are to be completely phased out of existence by 2035. Homeowners will be required to install new “green,” presumably electric, heating systems — and pay for it out of pocket. The cost for these new energy requirements are estimated to be around 100,000 euros for a residential house
The goal is to force people out of their homes. If you cannot afford the required upgrades, you’ll be forced to sell your home. Asset management companies will then buy them and turn them into rentals
September 20, 2023, the U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) president approved a declaration on pandemic prevention, which assigns pandemic authority to the WHO, without a full assembly vote and over the objections of 11 member states. The objections should have prevented a consensus adoption the declaration, but the U.N. is skirting the rules by having the UNGA president, rather than the General Assembly, approve the declaration
In the video above, Bjorn Andreas Bull-Hansen, a best-selling Norwegian novelist, explains how the European Union’s “Energy Performance of Buildings Directive” — the legislative instrument that dictates the energy performance standards for buildings within the EU — will be used to achieve a massive wealth transfer scheme.
In March 2023, the EU Parliament voted to revise this directive as part of a “Fit for 55” package, which aims to meet a minimum 55% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.
By 2050, the EU intends to achieve a “zero-emission and fully decarbonized building stock.”1 In short, by 2050, they want every building — commercial, public and residential — in the EU to meet zero-emission standards. To achieve that, they will impose a slew of new requirements on homeowners.
For example, heating systems that use fossil fuels are to be completely phased out of existence by 2035,2 if the European Parliament gets its way, and that means homeowners will be required to install new “green,” presumably electric, heating systems — and pay for it out of pocket. According to Bull-Hansen, the cost for these new energy requirements is estimated to be around 100,000 euros for a residential house.
The Goal Really Is for You to Own Nothing
The goal, Bull-Hansen, explains, is to force people out of their homes. If you cannot afford the required upgrades, you’ll be forced to sell your home, and asset management companies like BlackRock and Vanguard will stand at the ready to snatch these properties up.
And that’s if you’ll be allowed to sell a house that isn’t up to standards; the government might just deem it unsellable and seize it, or you may have to pay a fine of some sort.
In the U.S., BlackRock and Vanguard started bulk-buying residential homes in earnest in early 2021, which they then rent out rather than resell, thereby eroding middle class homeownership. They also artificially drove up home prices by paying above-asking price, thereby pushing homeownership further out of reach.
Of course, the price of rent has also skyrocketed, and renters will have to pay even more after these energy upgrades. So, not only is homeownership something many young people can no longer achieve, many can’t even afford to rent, and are forced to live with their parents or multiple roommates. We can eventually expect the number of homeless to skyrocket as well.
As noted by Bull-Hansen, the elimination of personal property ownership is all part of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Great Reset agenda, Agenda 2030 and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. These are just different names for the same overarching plan.
The WEF’s “8 Predictions for the World in 2030” video,3 in which they cheerfully declared that by 2030 “you will own nothing,” spelled out many of the aspects of this global plan, including the goal to eliminate personal ownership rights. “All products will become services,” the WEF explains on its website.4 That’s what “you’ll own nothing” refers to.
Gone will be the days when you buy something once and can use it indefinitely because you own it. Instead, the new system they’re pushing us into will require you to rent everything — your home, transportation, furniture, pots and pans and all the rest. You’ve probably noticed this creep already.
For example, you used to be able to buy a piece of software, which came on a disc. You could install and reinstall that program on any computer you wanted, because you had the CD.
Today, most software programs are cloud-based subscriptions, and you have to pay a monthly or annual fee for as long as you’re using it. And, while the fee may be low, once you add it up over a lifetime of use, you’ll end up paying many times more than what you did when you were able to buy it outright.
Homeownership Has Always Been a Wealth-Building Strategy
As noted by Bull-Hansen, homeownership defines the middle class. More importantly, it’s been a way to build and secure generational wealth for ages. Remove the ability for people to buy their own home, and you effectively eliminate the middle class, leaving just the very rich, and the very poor.
“It doesn’t matter if you believe this will be good for the environment or not,” Bull-Hansen says. “This is about controlling you. This is about owning you … This is a wealth transfer that we’re looking at, and we can’t accept that. Ownership is important. It’s a very, very essential concept …
If you take ownership away, what you’re left with is feudalism. Someone’s going to own the stuff that you need, and they will be the so-called ‘elites’ … So we must put our foot down and refuse to accept this.”
Disobedience Is Our Only Way Out
OK, so what do we do about it? I second Bull-Hansen’s call for peaceful disobedience. “We MUST be disobedient now,” he says. The alternative is to accept serfdom.
And again, the coming slave system is not merely about removing human rights and eliminating the freedoms we’ve enjoyed our whole lives — even simple things, such as having the freedom to travel wherever you choose, whenever you want — it’s also about stripping us of our wealth and eliminating the possibility of building wealth in the future.
They’re not just trying to take away your ability to own a home and build generational wealth that way. With a central bank digital currency (CBDC), you won’t make interest on your money, and they’ll take taxes out automatically. They’ll also have the ability to dictate where and what you can spend your money on, and put expiration dates on your funds so that you can never save up for a rainy day.
The globalist cabal behind this entire agenda intends to create a permanent slave class that has no rights, no freedoms and no way out.
If you go along with these “green” proposals — which is what they’re using to justify this particular wealth transfer scheme — then you are actively choosing poverty and slavery for yourself, your children and all descendants thereafter, because dismantling this global system of control will be unimaginably difficult once it’s in place.
How are you going to rebel when the government can seize your bank accounts at will, lock you out of grocery stores, send you to an infectious control internment camp to “protect public health” even though you’re not sick, program your electric vehicle such that it only runs within a specific designated area, and punish everyone you know in the same way, simply because they know you?
All of that, and much more, will be possible once the AI-run digital surveillance and control grid is fully implemented and linked to your digital identity, a programmable CBDC and the unified ledger system.
As noted by Bull-Hansen, there will be ramifications for disobedience and refusal to go along with the globalist “green” agenda, but if we agree to pay the price now, and refuse en masse, this globalist power grab will absolutely fail. They cannot do it without mass obedience.
Who’s Looking to Rule the World?
If this topic is new to you, you might be wondering who these “globalists” are that are trying to effect this global coup. I’m not going to name names here, although it’s getting easier by the day to identify the individuals who are part of the club by examining their public statements and stances, their business endeavors and affiliations.
The reason for this is because most are no longer even trying to hide their involvement, and the organizations erected to drive the agenda forward are becoming more and more open about their goals.
For example, June 5, 2023, the United Nations published a document spelling out its commitment to make the World Health Organization the central global governance body.
The following excerpt is from page 9 of the Zero Draft of the “Political Declaration of the United Nations General Assembly High-level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response” document drafted in advance of the September 20, 2023, General Assembly meeting.5
The final text6 of this document was published September 1, 2023, and in that version, all of the headings have been removed, but the overall intent to make the WHO a de facto governing body for the world remains unchanged.
While the document focuses on the WHO’s authority to dictate pandemic prevention and response worldwide, as I’ve detailed in several previous articles, the WHO will not only be in charge of pandemics. That’s just the justification they use to get its foot in the door.
Next, the WHO will move into general health care by advancing the acceptance of a universal health care system. This will be promoted under the banner of enhancing pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, as detailed on page 11 under OP33 in the Zero Draft,7 and under article 22 in the final text.8
Then, through the global One Health program, which expands “public health” to include everything from agriculture and pollution to travel and climate change, the WHO — or some spinoff thereof — will take over all government functions.
The final text of the UN’s “Political Declaration” even declares that health is an indicator of “sustainable development,” thereby directly linking the WHO’s pandemic authority to the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and Agenda 2030.
Lawlessness Reigns
Making matters all the more dire for the people of the world is the fact that governments and global organizations involved in this power grab are increasingly flouting rules, guidelines, laws and treaties that previously have ensured at least some semblance of democracy and rule of law.
One of the latest examples of this is the U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) president’s approval of the declaration on pandemic prevention (the document discussed above) without a full assembly vote and over the objections of 11 member states (Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Eritrea, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Nicaragua, the Russian Federation, the Syrian Arab Republic, Venezuela and Zimbabwe).
According to Francis Boyle, J.D., Ph.D., a bioweapons expert and professor of international law at the University of Illinois who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, the objections by 11 nations should “prevent this declaration being adopted by consensus and thus arguably becoming part of customary international law, which is what those behind the declaration intend.”
“They could not get it through the UNGA as a Consensus Resolution because of the 11 objecting states,” Boyle told The Defender.9“They are trying to spin it and misrepresent it by having the UNGA president — not the UNGA — approve the declaration.”
UN Declaration Calls for Universal Vaccinations and More
The fact that the UN General Assembly president is creating loopholes where there are none is particularly disturbing in light of the fact that the declaration makes the COVID-19 power grabs permanent and calls for universal vaccination, increased surveillance, vaccine passports, social media censorship, and an “integrated One Health approach,” which I just explained is the primary way by which the WHO will end up governing all aspects of human life.
So, we can see that even when countries disagree and push back, U.N. leadership simply skirts the rules and follows the Deep State plan anyway, and that’s precisely the kind of behavior we can expect from a “One World Government.” They’ll have rules for themselves, which they’ll conveniently ignore when it suits them, and fixed rules with harsh penalties for the rest of the plebs. As reported by The Defender, September 20, 2023:10
“Critics called the declaration, which seeks to create a global pandemic authority with the power to enforce lockdowns, universal vaccination and censorship of ‘misinformation,’ ‘hypocrisy’ and ‘unhinged.’ The approval came as part of a high-level meeting on PPPR [Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response] …
In a statement, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said, ‘If COVID-19 taught us nothing else, it’s that when health is at risk, everything is at risk.’ He linked the PPPR to the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), saying world leaders should ‘show they have learned the painful lessons of the pandemic’ …
Writing for the Brownstone Institute, Dr. David Bell, a public health physician, biotech consultant and former director of Global Health Technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund, said ‘the main aim’ of the declaration ‘is to back’ the ‘pandemic treaty’ and IHR amendments currently under negotiation by WHO member states.
Bell said a ‘silence procedure’ is in place, ‘meaning that States not responding will be deemed supporters of the text.’ He said the text is ‘clearly contradictory, sometimes fallacious, and often quite meaningless,’ and intended to centralize the WHO’s power.
Bell told The Defender, ‘The declaration was not written with serious intent, but is essentially empty rhetoric promoting a continued centralization of control that the U.N. and WHO are openly seeking, at the expense of democracy, human rights and equality.’
Francis Boyle … agreed … ‘This is a full-court press to have the entirety of the United Nations Organization, its specialized agencies and its affiliated organizations, back up and support their proposed globalist WHO worldwide totalitarian medical and scientific police state,’ he said.”
Why Does the Deep State Reveal Its Plans?
In recent years, the last three in particular, the Deep State global mafia has gotten more and more open about its plans. That said, even decades ago, the plan for a “New World Order,” a “One World Government,” was there for anyone to see. They discussed it in published white papers and reports, they hinted at it in movies and entertainment, they divulged it in tabletop exercises.
Why do they always reveal their plan? Wouldn’t it be more sensible to keep it a secret so that people don’t know what’s coming and therefore won’t put up a fight?
As it turns out, there’s a method to the apparent madness, and the video above, “Revealing the Method: Esoteric Symbolism as Mind Control,” explains it. In summary, the agenda for a global governance system uses mass mind control to condition people to loss of personal power by promoting and getting us used to three types of loss:
Loss of memory (amnesia)
Loss of will or initiative (abulia)
Loss of interest in that which is vital to one’s health and well-being (apathy)
These three psychological conditions are required for the global cabal to successfully implement a global government. Mind control methods used by the cabal to promote these conditions include the subversion of sacred symbolism and archetypes.
With the use of occult and esoteric symbols, they appeal to mankind’s lower instincts, animalistic appetites, compulsive urges and “inharmonious drives that conflict with an individual’s higher conscious nature.” The goal is to arrest the spiritual development of individuals and stifle the evolution of spirit within society.
Putting their “mark” on everything they do may also be an ego-driven facet of the cabal’s megalomania. It proclaims their dominance to each other and, subconsciously, to the masses, while simultaneously mocking those they view as inferior.
One particularly interesting aspect of the cabal’s use of symbolism is that the symbol typically means the exact opposite of the mainstream consensus view of its meaning. For example, the hammer and sickle symbol, found on the flag of the former Soviet Union, is commonly thought to represent the tools of the working class — industry and agriculture. The idea is that of a “working class utopia.”
The occult meaning, however, which predates the Soviet Union, is that of Saturn, a demi-urge who used a sickle to sever the unity of earth and heaven. Having separated earth from the divine, Saturn became the architect of the material world. In emulation of Saturn, the cabal is also engrossed with matters of the material world: owning it, shaping it, controlling it.
The hammer, meanwhile, represents the obliteration of matter — “The final act of chaotic destruction to usher in their new order.” It’s the instrument that shatters the last remnants of divine will within mankind “in a process in which man devolves and descends further into a post-human world.”
The hammer and sickle, then, seen from an occult perspective, denotes the tyrannical rule of an elite class intent on separating mankind from the divine and, ultimately, destroying it. Its occult meaning is that of a divided dystopia — the opposite of a unified utopia.
I recommend viewing the video, which goes into much greater detail than this short summary. If nothing else, it’s food for thought.
Sweden Dumps Climate Agenda, Scraps Green Energy Targets
Frank Bergman10 Comments
Sweden has just dealt a severe blow to the globalist climate agenda by scraping its green energy targets.
In a statement announcing the new policy in the Swedish Parliament, Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson warned that the Scandinavian nation needs “a stable energy system.”
Svantesson asserted that wind and solar power are too “unstable” to meet the nation’s energy requirements.
Instead, the Swedish Government is shifting back to nuclear power and has ditched its targets for a “100% renewable energy” supply.
The move is a major blow to unreliable and inefficient technology.
Countries are being pushed toward “renewable energy” to meet the goals of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) green agenda.
The group argues that the Swedish decision is “an important step in the right direction, implicitly acknowledging the low quality of unstable wind and solar, and is part of a general collapse of confidence in the renewable energy agenda pioneered in the Nordic countries and in Germany.”
Under its new direction, Sweden now views nuclear power as being critical to the nation’s “100% fossil-free” energy future.
Sweden can “afford to reject fossil fuels, relying on nuclear and hydro and biomass,” Net Zero Watch suggests.
Svantesson also sent a warning to other Western nations who are blindly pushing to meet the energy requirements of the WEF’s green agenda.
In “substantial industrialized economies… only a gas to the nuclear pathway is viable to remain industrialized and competitive,” Svantesson noted.
Experts have argued that lowering carbon dioxide emissions is not really a worthwhile goal for an individual country or globally.
The potential harms of the gas are uncertain and exaggerated while the benefits are overlooked.
Dr. John Constable, Net Zero Watch’s Energy Director, said that “living close to Russia focuses the mind.”
The Swedish people wish to “ground their economy in an energy source, nuclear, that is physically sound and secure, unlike renewables which are neither,” he explains.
Other world governments are continuing “to live in a fantasy” about meeting the green agenda goals, Constable added.
“But we are coming to the end of the green dream.’
World Economic Forum Behind Sudden Push to Ban Gas Stoves
Frank Bergman14 Comments
Details have emerged to suggest that Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum is behind the recent sudden push from the Democrats and President Joe Biden’s administration to ban gas stoves from American homes.
As Slay News reported earlier, the Biden admin is considering a nationwide ban on gas stoves over claims they emit “harmful pollutants.”
According to a report by Bloomberg, Biden officials claim that a ban on the appliances being used in American homes “is on the table.”
The far-reaching admission was made by U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) commissioner Richard Trumka Jr.
Trumka reportedly told Bloomberg that gas stove appliances are a “hidden hazard” that “can be banned.”
“Any option is on the table,” Trumka told the outlet during an interview.
Reports on the possible ban quickly spread on social media, causing outrage and confusion among baffled citizens.
Several Democrats and “woke” media figures were quick to voice their support for the ban.
Radical Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) responded by taking to social media to speak out in support of banning gas stoves.
Ocasio-Cortez argues, without evidence, that gas stoves cause brain damage.
“Did you know that ongoing exposure to NO2 from gas stoves is linked to reduced cognitive performance?” AOC wrote in a post on Twitter.
Controversial California Democrat State Senator Scott Weiner also put out a statement on Twitter saying he is in favor of the ban, as Slay News reported.
“Gas stoves are toxic to people’s health,” he alleged.
“They cause asthma in children, cardiac problems & other disease,” Weiner claimed, without evidence.
“They need to be phased out.”
The sudden push for banning the household appliances, which have been used in American homes without issue for decades, has left many questioning the true motivation.
Florida’s Republican Governor Ron DeSantis fired back by arguing that the Biden admin is considering the ban to meet the “green agenda” goals of Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum (WEF).
“You see, the Biden administration wants to nix gas stoves,” Gov. DeSantis said during a press conference in Bonita Springs, Florida.
“Are you kidding me?”
DeSantis may be right, however.
A new report by Red State points out that prominent Democrats and liberals never demonstrated an iota of concern over gas stoves before.
Despite claiming that gas stoves cause brain damage, AOC had never even mentioned it before this week.
As Slay News highlights in a previous report, the statements put out by AOC, Wiener, and other leftists, eerily echo an article published by the WEF in February last year.
The article argues that gas stoves are a “climate threat” that should be “phased out.”
The WEF claims that “gas stoves have been found to be a bigger contributor to the climate crisis than previously believed.”
A major Twitter leftist named Max Kennerly also got in on the act, pushing the supposed dangers of cooking with gas.
Like AOC, he had never tweeted about gas stoves before this week.
Aside from never mentioning this supposed “threat,” several high-profile Democrats have been pictured using gas stoves before.
A tweet from Libs of TikTok shows images of Kamala Harris, Jill Biden, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and AOC all cooking on gas stoves.
Yet, none of them appear concerned over the potential impact on their health.
“Regardless, it’s worth asking where this is all coming from, right?
“Why did Democrats all start moving in lockstep to ban gas stoves, seemingly with no prior concern at all?
“And sure enough, with a little digging, it’s been revealed that this isn’t just idle science taking place.”
“The company behind the study is called ‘Carbon-Free Buildings.’
“That company is a partner of the World Economic Forum and has a true-believer CEO who wants to rid the world of all carbon emissions (which is impossible and would lead to mass extinction).”
It appears that all of this sudden, manufactured hysteria about gas stoves may have been orchestrated by the WEF.
The WEF and the Democrats both share a common goal of eliminating fossil fuels for the public while they fly gas-guzzling private jets across the globe.
The elimination of gas stoves qualifies as another step toward meeting the goals of the organization’s “green agenda.”
