Climate Change: The New Fear Porn (Consolidated Thread)

[J.J.Gibbs]

Al Gore: Without Climate Action, ‘We Could Lose Our Capacity for Self-Governance’
PAM KEY
24 Dec 2023

Former Vice President Al Gore said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union” that if the climate continues to warm, we “would lose our capacity for self-governance.”



Anchor Jake Tapper asked, “What happens if the world doesn’t react? What’s the worst-case scenario?”



Gore said, “The scientist who has warned us of these mega-storms and the floods and mudslides and droughts and the ice melting and the sea level rising and the storms getting stronger and the tropical diseases and climate and migrants crossing international borders in large numbers. They were dead right when they warned us about this, and so we need to pay more attention to them now.”



He continued, “Here is one thing they say: if we don’t take action, there could be as many as 1 billion climate refugees crossing international borders in the next several decades. Well, a few million have contributed to this wave of populist authoritarianism and dictatorships and so forth. What would a billion do? We can’t do this. We could lose our capacity for self-governance.”



Gore added, “Already, we’ve seen people driven from the places they’ve always called home, and we’re seeing an expansion of areas in the world that are physiologically unlivable now because of the combination of heat and humidity. They’re relatively small areas now, but if we don’t act, they will expand to include most of India, large parts of Northern and South America, the Philippines, Indonesia, Pakistan, the list goes on. The survival of our civilization is at stake. And it sounds dire, but it is dire.”


link

[schwartzie]

Biden Pushing ‘Wealth Redistribution’ to ‘Fight Climate Change’

Frank Bergman
December 26, 2023 - 11:45 am


When the United Nations climate summit drew to its close in mid-December, globalist governments around the world were pledging billions of dollars in taxpayer money to fight the so-called “climate crisis.”



Democrat President Joe Biden’s administration joined other Western governments in pledging billions for climate “reparations” and a “Green Climate Fund.”



The green agenda schemes are aimed at bringing regimes ruling poorer countries to heel.



Self-proclaimed world leaders say that is just the start, however.



Global taxes and “trillions” in funding will ultimately be demanded.



The latest wealth-redistribution schemes come as voters and taxpayers in nations such as Argentina and Holland, among others, increasingly reject the parties, politicians, and policies behind them.



Meanwhile, recent polls show most American adults reject the man-made “climate change” hypothesis.



This put U.S. officials in an awkward position at this climate summit in the major oil-producing nation of Dubai.



Right at the start, Western governments and Japan pledged large sums for what is being portrayed as climate “reparations.”



Dubbed the “loss and damage” fund by the United Nations and its members, the narrative behind it holds that since freer Western peoples developed first, they have put more CO2 into the atmosphere, and therefore must pay Third World governments who misrule poverty-stricken populations for the alleged harm caused.



All of this is based on the dubious hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), known to scientists as the “gas of life,” are “pollution.”



These “carbon emissions” must be reduced to prevent alleged man-made “climate change” and meet the “Net Zero” targets of the World Economic Forum (WEF).



CO2 makes up about 0.04 percent of the atmosphere, with human emissions of the gas — including exhalation — making up just a fraction of that.


The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claims that reducing this trace gas exhaled by all human beings will prevent “climate change.”



But to compensate alleged victims for the “climate changes” that have already resulted and will still supposedly come from Western CO2 emissions over the last century, this “loss and damage” fund was agreed to in principle at last year’s UN climate summit in Egypt.



With no trial and no jury, Biden and his “climate czar” John Kerry pleaded guilty on behalf of the United States a year ago.



Other Western governments did as well.


This year, the sentencing has been taking place in Dubai.



On the very first day of the 28th Conference of the Parties (COP28) in Dubai, governments began making pledges on behalf of their taxpayers.



The German government pledged $100 million.



Japanese authorities promised to hand over $10 million to start.



The Biden administration pledged $17.5 million to the reparations fund.



The unelected leaders of the European Union (EU) vowed to offer 200 million euros in taxpayer money.



But Third World regimes are demanding at least $100 billion per year just for this new fund.



They claim the cash is needed for what they call “climate justice.”



The fund, which will be housed at the World Bank for now as policymakers try to find a permanent home for it, is separate from the infamous “Green” climate slush fund.



That fund, which has been in existence for years, is being used to bribe Third World governments into keeping their people in poverty by prohibiting abundant energy and restricting resource development.



Biden and Obama have funneled billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars into that one already, in flagrant defiance of federal law.



This comes as Communist China continues increasing its gargantuan CO2 footprint as it ramps up fossil fuel burning to support its growing economy.



“Climate” activists funded by the Kremlin, European taxpayers, and the Rockefeller oil dynasty — infamous for funding racial eugenics and population control — celebrated the “loss and damage” developments.



“The responsibility now lies with affluent nations to meet their financial obligations in a manner proportionate to their role in the climate crisis,” Climate Action Network (CAN) “head of global political strategy” Harjeet Singh was quoted as saying in media reports about the development.



At the 2019 UN climate summit in Madrid, the largest financier of CAN was the Sea Change Foundation, according to the Heartland Institute.



Congressional investigations revealed that the Sea Change Foundation had received almost $25 million from a shell corporation in Bermuda known as “Klein Ltd.”



The corporation is controlled by Putin’s cronies and Russian energy interests.



The Biden administration is already pledging some $3 billion of additional U.S. taxpayer dollars for the “Green” slush fund.



That figure is in addition to $10 billion pledged for the fund by European governments and the Japanese government.



But even all that is just the tip of the iceberg of what the Biden administration has planned to “save the planet” from the “climate crisis.”



“Since day one, President Biden, Vice President [Kamala] Harris, and the entire Biden-Harris Administration have treated climate change as the existential threat of our time,” the White House said in an announcement.



“After spearheading the most significant climate action in history at home and leading efforts to tackle the climate crisis abroad, the United States heads into the 28th U.N. Climate Change Conference (COP28) in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE) with unprecedented momentum.”



Top officials are making clear that this is just the start of the planetary wealth redistribution.



International Monetary Fund boss Kristalina Georgieva called for governments to impose a global “carbon tax” on humanity, as Slay News reported.



“We are very keen to give the biggest possible incentive for decarbonization, which is putting a price on carbon,” the Bulgarian IMF chief said at the UN summit.



“That price needs to go up, up, up if we are to speed up decarbonization.”



Another supposed benefit of “carbon taxes” (really CO2 taxes) would be raising even more money for the government, declared Georgieva.



“We are a huge proponent of carbon price,” added the IMF bigwig, whose institution has long been groomed to eventually serve as a global central bank.



In addition to “creating liquidity” by issuing “Special Drawing Rights” (SDRs) out of thin air and handing them to member governments, the IMF is also building a globally interoperable system for central bank digital currencies (CBDCs).



Leading WEF luminaries have repeatedly expressed hope that digital cash will be used to track and control every individual’s “carbon footprint.”



Journalist Leo Hohmann slammed the IMF chief’s comments.



“Georgieva is a globalist elitist sitting there at COP28 under the banner of the IMF and World Bank, admitting in the wide open that what the globalists want is a global tax that punishes people for driving gas-powered cars, heating their homes, cooking on gas ranges, eating meat, flying on planes, etc.,” he said.



“These are all things that your typical middle-class family sees not as luxuries but as everyday necessities.



“If the globalists get their way, only the rich will be able to afford these things.



“The rest of us will be left to fend for ourselves in cold, dank little apartments, riding our bicycles to work, or catching the bus, while coming home to a dinner of meal worms and crickets. No thanks.”



As Slay News reported, Britain’s King Charles III, who flew to the event in a private jet despite serving as one of the world’s leading climate bullies, demanded at least $5 trillion per year to supposedly stave off a climate crisis.



“How can we bring together our public, private, philanthropic and NGO [nongovernmental organization] sectors ever more effectively, so that they all play their part in delivering climate action?” he asked, warning of “dangerous, uncharted territory” ahead.



Tax money will be key, but the private sector will also be coerced into forking over ever greater sums.



“With the private sector firmly at the table … we could mobilize the trillions of dollars we need, in the order of four-and-a-half to 5 trillion a year, to drive the transformation we need,” the British monarch declared, without specifying who would pay, how they would be forced to pay, or where exactly the gargantuan sums of money would be going.



Estimates suggest the British royal family is worth almost $30 billion, but Charles did not pledge any of that at the summit.



Climate skeptics across the Western world in particular have been slamming the whole UN process as a fraud.



Just this week, U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced a bill to defund and expel the UN itself.



And around the world, political leaders who reject the “climate” agenda have been performing well in polls.



Most Americans and most Republicans in Congress reject even the man-made “climate change” hypothesis underpinning the whole edifice.



Even establishment voices have been sounding the alarm.



Speaking about the climate summit on Fox News, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said the “whole thing” was merely “an elite ripoff of everyday workers.”



“When John Kerry talks about giving away money, guess what? That’s your money,” declared Gingrich.



“Kerry is cheerful about taking money from you to give to these people he’s never met, who will then, by the way, mostly squander it.…



“It’s an absurdity. And historians will someday look back and say, how could they have been so stupid for so long?”



Whether House GOP lawmakers will provide taxpayer funding for all of the pledges and promises Biden and Kerry are making remains to be seen.



But what is clear is that the public’s tolerance of such schemes is wearing thin.



Only about a third of Americans said in polls that they would be willing to pay even $1 extra per month on their energy bill to fight “climate change.”

link

[maybetoday]

Here We Go Again: Scientists Propose Radical ‘Sunshade’ Plan to Fight ‘Climate Change’

By Andrew Jose, The Western Journal
Dec. 26, 2023 6:20 pm

A group of scientists has proposed building a giant space curtain to reduce global warming and shield Earth from solar radiation.



Spanning as much as 4 million square kilometers, this megastructure aimed to fight “climate change” would be located about 1 million miles from Earth, in an area known as the Sun-Earth Lagrange-1 point, according to The Messenger, a news website launched in May.



The point marks the area between the sun and the Earth where the combined gravitational forces of the star and planet create equilibrium that allows a spacecraft to be “parked,” according to Space.com.



Upon installation, the structure could reduce the amount of heat from the Sun trapped on Earth due to greenhouse gases by deflecting sunlight toward outer space, Space.com reported.



That said, according to The Messenger, it is unclear how such a solar curtain would affect the light Earth receives from the Sun or whether the blocking of sunlight heading to Earth will bring forth unexpected consequences.


The idea is being proposed by scientists who are part of the Planetary Sunshade Foundation, a group whose website declares that “climate change is getting worse.”

The amount by which global temperatures would fall once the structure is in place is “variable depending on how long it takes to cease carbon emissions, how quickly carbon can be removed from the atmosphere, and whether society wishes to partially mitigate global warming or restore pre-industrial temperatures,” Planetary Sunshade Foundation research director Liz Scott noted in a 2022 report.



Pointing to solar sail technology — the use of reflective sails to propel a spacecraft through space using sunlight — the foundation believes that the “rapid” pace of technological development in space launch systems has reduced the cost of “sending materials and people into space dropping fast, changing the scope of what is possible,” The Messenger reported.



Planetary Sunshade Foundation argues there are two options for constructing the planetary sunshade, according to the group’s website.



During the phases, the project could be constructed using Earth-launched architecture, the group’s website stated.



Toward the final phases, construction could take place in space using resources also taken from space, including those from “the Moon or near-Earth asteroids,” according to the foundation’s website.



“A project this large influences the technology used to build it. We can start at the scale we’re able to, and learn how to build a sunshade as we go,” the foundation said.



The Planetary Sunshade Foundation’s proposed solar curtain is not the only project aimed at mitigating climate change by blocking out the sun.



Geoengineering — a similar project backed by tech billionaire Bill Gates — aims to block out portions of solar radiation headed for Earth by adding particles into the stratosphere, according to Forbes magazine.



The objective of spraying such particles into the atmosphere is to bring about a cooling effect on temperatures — an effect that happens to be the subject of the 2013 science-fiction movie “Snowpiercer,” currently streaming on Netflix.



In addition, according to a White House report published in July, the Biden administration is open to looking at the alteration of sunlight reaching Earth as a possible solution to lower global temperatures, Politico reported.



“A program of research into the scientific and societal implications of solar radiation modification (SRM) would enable better-informed decisions about the potential risks and benefits of SRM as a component of climate policy, alongside the foundational elements of greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and adaptation,” the White House report stated.



“SRM offers the possibility of cooling the planet significantly on a timescale of a few years.”

link

[schwartzie]

WEF Member: Reducing Human Population by 90% Would Help Achieve ‘Net Zero’

Frank Bergman
December 27, 2023 - 4:32 pm


A World Economic Forum (WEF) member has touted a shocking suggestion for meeting the globalist organization’s “Net Zero” targets.



English primatologist and anthropologist Jane Goodall, who the WEF lists as one of its “agenda contributors,” told her fellow globalists that they could “save the planet” from “global warming” if the Earth’s population was 90 percent smaller than it is today.



Goodall argues that all of the WEF’s “problems” would be solved if fewer humans were walking the Earth.



She made the statement during a panel discussion at the organization’s annual summit in Davos, Switzerland.



The panel was discussing plans for achieving “Net Zero” to comply with the targets for “Agenda 2030” as dictated by the WEF and its fellow unelected globalist organization – the United Nations.



Goodall’s comments have gathered renewed attention after a clip of her statement at the summit was recently shared on Twitter/X.



During the panel discussion, participants were discussing the hurdles they face with ushering in the WEF’s agenda to a non-compliant public.



They complained about the pushback to unpopular policies for fighting “climate change” and ending capitalism.



Goodhall then bemoaned the size of the world’s human population, suggesting that Earth would be better with far fewer people on it.



“We cannot hide away from human population growth,” she told frustrated elites.



“Because it underlies so many of the other problems,” she continued.



“All of these problems that we talk about wouldn’t be a problem if there was the size of the population that it was 500 years ago.”



WATCH:

In 2023, Earth’s human population is estimated to be 8 billion people.



500 years ago, as Goodall, a renowned anthropologist, would know, the population of humans was approximately 435 million.



To satisfy Goodall’s suggestion to solve globalists’ “problems,” 90% of humanity would need to go.



Of course, WEF-sponsored “fact-checkers” will scramble to tell you that directly quoting Goodall’s comments is “misinformation” and you shouldn’t believe your lying ears.


However, Goodall is not the first WEF member to promote the “advantages” of a smaller population of humans.



As Slay News reported, another celebrated WEF member called for a staggering 86 percent reduction in the population of humans, arguing that the goal can be achieved “peacefully.”



The call was made by Dennis Meadows, one of the main authors of the Club of Rome’s 1972 pro-depopulation book “The Limits to Growth.”



Meadows is an honorary member of the Club of Rome and a member of the World Economic Forum.



Despite his book being published over 50 years ago, his very anti-human ideology remains a key inspiration for the agenda of the WEF and its founder Klaus Schwab.



Meadows argues that most of the world’s population must be wiped out so that the survivors can “have freedom” and a “high standard of living.”



During a 2017 interview, Meadows claimed that genocide of 86% of the world’s population is “inevitable.”



However, he insists that a “benevolent” dictatorship could accomplish the mass de-population “peacefully.”



“We could [ ] have eight or nine billion, probably,” he says of the world’s growing population.



“If we have a very strong dictatorship which is smart … and [people have] a low standard of living,” Meadows says as he explains how the population reduction agenda could be triggered.



“But we want to have freedom and we want to have a high standard of living so we’re going to have a billion people.



“And we’re now at seven, so we have to get back down.



“I hope that this can be slow, relatively slow, and that it can be done in a way which is relatively equal, you know, so that people share the experience.”



WATCH:



It’s no coincidence that Meadows’ words echo the words in the 1995 report titled “United Nations Agenda 2030: Global Biodiversity Assessment.”

link

[schwartzie]

WHO Demands End of Public Meat Consumption

Frank Bergman
December 29, 2023 - 12:54 pm


The World Health Organization (WHO) has been accused of declaring “war on meat and traditional agriculture” after the unelected United Nations (UN) agency demanded that governments “transform food systems” to tackle the “global burden” of “climate change.”



In a video statement, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus called on governments of sovereign nations to end the consumption of meat among the general public.



Tedros argues that “Our food systems are harming the health of people and planet.”



To fight this alleged crisis, the powerful bureaucrat and his globalist organization are promoting the UN’s demands for replacing meat with “climate-resilient food systems.”



In his statement, Tedros insists that forcing the public to shift to “diversified and more plant-based diets” will promote the health of both people and planet.”



However, as many were quick to note on social media, the “diversified” diet Tedros is promoting is likely a reference to the insect-based “foods” pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and Bill Gates’ lab-grown “meats.”



“Our food systems are harming the health of people and planet,” Tedros declares in the video message.



“Food systems contribute to over 30% of greenhouse gas emissions, and account for almost one-third of the global burden of disease,” he alleged.



“Transforming food systems is therefore essential by shifting for this healthier, diversified and more plant-based diets.”



“If food systems deliver healthy diets for all we could save 8 million lives per year,” he continued.



“WHO is committed to supporting countries to develop and implement policies to improve diets and fight climate change.



“I’m therefore very pleased that over 130 countries have signed the code 28 UAE Declaration on climate and health.



“Together, we can protect and promote the health of both people and planet.”


Tedros did not produce any documentation or evidence to support his claims.



WATCH:

In a report on the statement, the Post Millennial accused the WHO of declaring “war on meat and traditional farming.”



“A new declaration from the World Health Organization has revealed that it wants the masses to eat less meat and more plant-based foods in order to supposedly combat ‘climate change,'” the report asserted.



The comments align with a page posted by the United Nations regarding the agency’s COP28 summit in Dubai.



The recent global warming conference was attended by unelected bureaucrats and corporate elites from around the world, many of whom arrived at the events in carbon-spewing private jets.



That UN page pushes for the uniting of “global leaders behind commitments and plans to achieve the Paris Agreement.”



The UN continues by falsely referring to the Paris Accord as a “legally binding UN treaty to tackle climate change and limit the global average temperature increase to 1.5°C.”



However, the Paris Accord asks for “non-binding commitments.”



Further, the UN site insists on a “transition away from fossil fuels.”



The agency also calls for nations “to implement integrated, multisectoral solutions to deliver sustainable, climate-resilient food systems as a climate change adaptation measure.”



A report from Rolling Out bluntly accused the WHO chief of “wanting to take away your meat.”



The calls from the WHO were met with widespread pushback on social media, however.



“Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declares war on meat and traditional agriculture, in the name of ‘fighting climate change,'” Wide Awake Media charged in a post on X.



“Anyone remember electing this clown to dictate what kind of agriculture and diets are permissible?



“Nope, me neither.”



Dennis McCleney, a self-proclaimed “hard-rocking, hard-riding conservative Christian,” explained:



“The assumption that the Earth’s atmosphere is a closed system and that CO2 is a hazard is absolutely absurd.



“Without CO2, there would be no life on Earth.



“It also comprises just 0.04% of the atmosphere.



“Quit giving credence to these liars and elitists.”



link

[schwartzie]

Al Gore Warns of Consequences of Failing WEF’s ‘Net Zero’ Agenda

Frank Bergman
January 2, 2024 - 12:54 pm


“Eco-warrior” Al Gore has issued a warning to the public about what he claims will happen to Earth if humanity fails to comply with the “Net Zero” climate goals of the World Economic Forum (WEF).



In a fearmongering statement, the Democrat former vice president made an apocalyptic prediction about what the world will look like if the public refuses to kneel before the green agenda of unelected foreign globalists and corporate elites.



According to Gore’s latest dire threat, there will be a “billion” climate refugees crossing our borders if the public fails to “save the planet” from the so-called “climate crisis.”



That would amount to two out of every three people from the dozens of nations on the African continent.



However, Gore and his globalist allies have a solution.



Taxpaying voters must “stay at true Net Zero” to stop “global warming” by ending “human-caused greenhouse pollution,” Gore insists.



Gore made his prediction during an appearance on CNN.



“We still have the ability to seize control of our destiny,” he claimed.



“If we stop adding to the overburden of these greenhouse gas pollutants in the sky, if we reach what they call true net zero and stop adding to the heat-trapping capacity up there, the temperatures will stop going up right away.



“And if we stay at true Net Zero, half of the human-caused greenhouse pollution will fall out of the atmosphere in as little as 25 to 30 years.”



Gore claims that ending fossil fuel use and replacing them with “solar electricity and wind electricity” will help tackle “global warming.”



“We can do this if we just overcome the greed and political power of the big fossil fuel polluters, who’ve been trying to control this process,” Gore insists.



“We have to make a decision to get past fossil fuels and start accelerating the shift over to renewable energy and efficiency.


“The scientists who warned us of these megastorms, and the floods, and mudslides, and droughts, and the ice melting, and the sea level rising, and the storms getting stronger, and the tropical diseases, and climate migrants crossing international borders in larger numbers, they were dead right when they warned us about this.



“And so we need to pay more attention to them now.”



Gore didn’t provide any evidence to support these claims, however.



Nor did he identify any of the “scientists who warned us” or provide supporting information regarding their alleged studies.



“Here’s one thing they say,” Gore claimed while citing unidentified “scientists.”



“If we don’t take action, there could be as many as one billion climate refugees crossing international borders in the next several decades.”



WATCH:







Gore also argues that allowing people to have access to information that conflicts with mainstream ideologies is a “threat to democracy.”



He said social media, which carries those very opposition messages, has “disrupted the balances that used to exist that made representative democracy work much better.”



Gore is demanding a “shared base of knowledge that serves as a basis for reasoning together collectively.”



He insists it’s “an abuse” of the “public forum” for people to have that information.



Access to such wrongthink causes people to be “sucked into echo chambers,” he warns.



“If you spend too much time in the echo chamber, what’s weaponized is another form of AI, not artificial intelligence, artificial insanity,” he claimed.



“I’m serious!”







Several powerful WEF members have been pushing proposals for nations to meet the unelected organization’s “Net Zero” goals.



As Slay News reported, WEF is demanding that taxpayers around the globe pay $3.5 trillion per year in order to meet the globalist organization’s “Net Zero” goal for “decarbonizing” the planet.



The WEF insists that the staggering bill is necessary as it will fund the noble global power elite’s alleged efforts to “reach Net Zero and restore nature.”



However, critics argue that “decarbonization” is just a euphemism for the WEF’s anti-human agenda.



Last month, after the culmination of the United Nations COP28 summit in Dubai, the WEF published a new whitepaper about its “Net Zero” agenda.



According to the whitepaper, it’s time to print more money to further devalue the wealth of the common citizens, in order to pursue the apparent noble goal of “decarbonization.”



The paper titled, “The Role of Public-Private-Philanthropic Partnerships in Driving Climate and Nature Transitions.”



“The world needs up to $3.5 trillion of additional investments each year to reach Net Zero and restore nature,” the report states.



However, globalists appear to disagree on the annual costs of meeting these goals.



During the COP28 summit, Britain’s King Charles III demanded $5 trillion per year from taxpayers to meet the WEF’s targets, as Slay News reported.



Meanwhile, Democrat President Joe Biden’s “Climate Czar” John Kerry is demanding that American farmers stop producing food to comply with “Net Zero.”



According to UN Chief Antonio Guterres, the public must start living in “mud huts” to meet the targets.



Yet a common theme promoted by WEF members is mass global depopulation would be the answer to tackling the “climate crisis.”



As Slay News reported, English primatologist and anthropologist Jane Goodall, who the WEF lists as one of its “agenda contributors,” told her fellow globalists that they could “save the planet” from “global warming” if the Earth’s population was 90 percent smaller than it is today.



Goodall argues that all of the WEF’s “problems” would be solved if fewer humans were walking the Earth.



link

[schwartzie]

Top Climate Expert Blows Whistle: Carbon Dioxide Does Not Cause ‘Global Warming’

Frank Bergman
January 4, 2024 - 12:56 pm


One of the world’s leading climate experts has spoken out to warn the public that the globalist green agenda claim that carbon dioxide causes “global warming” is “wholly untrue.”



In recent years, unelected bureaucrats, corporate elites, and their allies in global governments and the media have been promoting the “decarbonization” agenda.



This agenda, championed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the United Nations (UN), alleges that carbon dioxide is causing the so-called “climate crisis.”



The solution to this supposed “crisis” is for world governments to comply with the WEF’s “Net Zero” targets in order to meet “Agenda 2030” and “Agenda 2050.”



The WEF’s plan seeks to eliminate “man-made emissions” such as carbon dioxide to “save the planet.”



However, critics argue that “decarbonization” is just a euphemism for the WEF’s anti-human agenda.



Of course, the largest source of carbon dioxide on Earth is humans and human activities such as burning fossil fuels.



The average human exhales about 2.3 pounds of carbon dioxide on an average day.



Take this number and multiply it by a global population of 8.1 billion people, breathing away for 365.25 days per year, and you get an annual CO2 output of 3.4 billion tons.



However, experts are quick to point out that this figure is meaningless since human respiration is part of a “closed loop cycle” in which our carbon dioxide output is matched by the carbon dioxide taken in by the wheat, corn, celery, and Ugli fruit that we eat.



Nevertheless, the anti-carbon agenda directly targets humans and human activities.



The answer, according to the WEF, is that members of the general public must drastically lower their quality of life while handing over vast sums of cash to the global elite.



According to climate expert Willie Soon, however, carbon has nothing to do with changes in the climate.


Soon is now blowing the whistle against the green agenda and warning that anti-carbon claims are a lie.



The expert explains that changes in the climate are a natural occurrence that have been happening for billions of years and have nothing to do with human activity.



He says that humanity would need to look beyond Earth to find the source.



Soon, a visiting fellow on the Science Advisory Committee of the Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment at The Heritage Foundation, says the Earth’s rotation around the sun affects the planet’s temperature, not carbon dioxide as global power elites claim.



Glaciers, for example, “melted away because the sun started to get … brighter and provided more solar energy to the climate system,” according to Soon.



Throughout his career, Soon, a former researcher with the Center for Astrophysics-Harvard & Smithsonian, says he has sought to pursue the facts surrounding shifts in the climate because “science is not about belief.”



“Science is about data,” he said.



Globalists claim that “rising carbon dioxide that is the main factor … that affects climate change, and that is wholly untrue,” Soon says.



“That is such a distorted view that I think it needs to be corrected.”



WATCH:



Soon explains the false anti-carbon agenda during an interview on “The Daily Signal Podcast” for part two of a three-part series discussing “climate change.”



He explains why the Sun is the source of the changing climate and how it affects the Earth’s cycles of warming and cooling.



LISTEN:

shows.acast.com/5d6086695cbc0d0a41f6a9c4/65938c2f5148890017cb49af

link

[schwartzie]

Canada Backs WHO’s Push for Global ‘Climate Lockdown’ Powers

Frank Bergman
January 10, 2024 - 12:57 pm


Canada has thrown its full support behind the World Health Organization’s (WHO) power grab that seeks to gain control over sovereign nations under its new “Global Pandemic Treaty.”



Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government is now lobbying other nations to also back changes to the WHO’s treaty to expand the definition of a pandemic to include “climate change.”



If approved, the move would grant the WHO sweeping global powers to override the laws of individual nations to enforce “climate lockdowns,” travel limits, bans on private car ownership and use, and restrictions on meat and dairy consumption.



The lobbying efforts of Trudeau’s cabinet were exposed by Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis.



On Monday, Lewis posted a message on social media showing a portion of a response from the Trudeau Liberals to her inquiry about their activities and input with the WHO.



“As countries prepare to finalize the WHO Global Pandemic Accord in May, the Liberals have been lobbying the WHO to include climate change in the definition of a pandemic emergency,” she stated on X.



The feds responded to Lewis, indicating that “the new instrument should be inclusive and defined by an all-hazards approach in alignment with the [International Health Regulations].”



The response continues: “There are other global health threats that are currently building and/or could result in a global health emergency (e.g., climate change impacts) … which may be scoped out of an instrument with too narrow a focus.”



In other words, the feds acknowledged that they are in support of broadening the scope of the pandemic treaty to such that it directs countries not just on infectious disease outbreaks, but also on health impacts from climate change.



An October 2023 order paper response by the Trudeau Government to Lewis shows a similar message.



In it, the Government of Canada stated that “other global health threats, such as climate change, can impact pandemics, and we incorporate these broader considerations in our domestic pandemic, planning, preparedness, and response activities.”



The WHO’s “Pandemic Treaty” is set to be finalized in May.



Once finalized, all United Nations member states are expected to sign it.


Lewis has expressed concern that it will legally bind countries to the will of the unelected globalist organization.



In the United States, Democrat President Joe Biden and his so-called “climate czar” John Kerry have already expressed their unwavering commitment to signing the treaty on behalf of the American people.



As Slay News reported, the Biden admin confirmed last year that the president intends to sign the “Global Pandemic Treaty” in 2024.



Once signed, sovereign countries will surrender authority to the WHO in the event of a pandemic or other international “emergency” such as “global boiling.”



Under the treaty, the WHO will be authorized to declare a global “emergency” and enforce measures to respond to it.



If the WHO were to declare a “climate emergency,” for example, the unelected bureaucratic globalist organization would have the authority to enforce lockdowns, forcing Americans to stay inside their homes to supposedly “fight global warming.”



Not only is Biden planning to sign the agreement without congressional approval, but the Democrat president urged the WHO in 2022 to begin preparing the “Pandemic Treaty.”



“And now is a time when things are shifting,” Biden said of his commitment to the WHO’s treat on March 21, 2022.



“We’re going to — there’s going to be a new world order out there, and we’ve got to lead it.



“And we’ve got to unite the rest of the free world in doing it.”



The idea of “climate lockdowns” is not new, however, as the plan has been promoted by the World Economic Forum (WEF) since the beginning of the Covid pandemic.



Members of the WEF have noted how complementary the public was when Covid lockdowns were enforced, arguing that the same tactics could be used to pursue other agendas.



As Slay News reported, the WEF declared in 2022 that COVID-19 pandemic-related lockdowns have proved that “billions of citizens across the world” would comply with global restrictions on freedoms for the sake of “climate change.”



According to WEF founder Klaus Schwab’s daughter, however, Covid was merely a precursor to coming “climate lockdowns.”



According to Nicole Schwab, Covid was a “tremendous opportunity” to test how the public would comply with authoritarian measures that could be used to usher in the WEF’s “Great Reset” agenda.



The WEF’s promotion of the “climate crisis” narrative seeks to “create a change that is not incremental…to position nature at the core of the economy,” according to the younger Schwab.


link


Nicole Schwab made the comments in a recently unearthed video that was recorded during a WEF panel discussion in 2020.

[ExquisiteGerbil]

Climate Alarmists: U.S. and UK Militaries ‘Owe’ $111 Billion in ‘Climate Reparations’
JOHN HAYWARD
18 Jan 2024

China’s state-run Global Times on Wednesday eagerly touted a report from two climate alarmist think tanks, Common Wealth in the United Kingdom and the Climate and Community Project in the United States, that claimed the British and American militaries “owe” $111 billion in “climate reparations” to communities supposedly threatened by their carbon emissions.



The Global Times is the house organ of the Chinese government, the worst polluter and carbon emitter on Earth by a very wide margin, but it naturally left China’s emissions unmentioned as it focused on the “social cost of carbon” calculations run by the two think tanks to slam the “toxic legacy of war” spread by its Western rivals:



“The US military prioritizes its perceived strategic interests over evidence of its ecological impact. Nonetheless, the military presents itself as a solution to the climate crisis even if the opposite is true. Conflicts supported by the US are a source of insecurity, violence, and instability that will exacerbate the effects of the climate crisis while the military itself is a major source of ecological damage,” Khem Rogaly, co-author of the report, told the Global Times in a recent interview.



Patrick Bigger, another author, argued that it is “idiotic to waste dwindling carbon budget on war” through involvement in more conflicts. The two authors called on less military activities and a reduction of US and UK military bases around the world.



The US and UK governments and their militaries are important architects of the modern fossil fuel economy, research has found. The two militaries have generated at least 430 million metric tons of carbon dioxide since the 2015 United Nations Paris climate agreement. In 2017 alone, the Pentagon produced more emissions than Portugal.



The climate change movement always goes easy on China, in part because it knows the Chinese would never tolerate activists interfering with their industrial and military agenda, and such was the case when it came to military “carbon footprints.”



China is working on one of the largest and fastest military buildups in human history and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) does not spend much time worrying about its carbon emissions. China is working on expanding its military bases overseas, including island fortifications in the South China Sea that have proven to be unmitigated environmental disasters.



The Global Times ran through every allegation and conspiracy theory about U.S. military environmental damage it could find, even finding a way to complain about “the military application of A.I. technology” raising concerns about “significant water usage.” China is no slouch when it comes to militarizing A.I., with an agenda to become the world’s leading A.I. power by the end of the decade, but the climate alarmists do not seem terribly concerned about how much water Chinese robots might be drinking.



The “climate reparations” demands touted by the Global Times circled back around to the alleged “historical” responsibility of the United States and Britain to bear a vastly disproportionate share of the burden for reducing emissions, because they launched the Industrial Revolution, whereas China was treated as an innocent developing economy of the “Global South.”



In truth, China is building more carbon-spewing coal plants than the entire rest of the world combined, and its only real competition for pollution is the aspiring leader of the Global South movement, India. India, like China, does not allow climate activists to interfere with its industrial agenda, and the BRICS economic bloc that India and China co-founded has stated it has no intention of making big sacrifices for climate change.


link

[schwartzie]

WEF Member Calls for Farming to Be ‘Serious Crime,’ Equal to ‘Genocide’

Frank Bergman
January 19, 2024 - 12:33 pm


A speaker at the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland has called on globalist elites to push for farming to be labeled a “serious crime.”



Speaking from the WEF’s summit at the luxury Swiss ski resort, “Stop Ecocide Now” founder Jojo Mehta argued that fishing and framing should be considered equal to “genocide.”



Mehta insisted that fishing and farming for food should be a “serious crime” while arguing that it is immoral to make money from these industries.



“We have this cultural, very ingrained habit of not taking damage to nature as seriously as we take damage to people or property,” she told world leaders, bureaucrats, and corporate elites at the event.



She continued by claiming that farming, fishing, and presumably hunting, are “mass damage and destruction of nature.”



Mehta then demanded that these activities should be legally recognized as “a serious crime.”



“With human rights, mass murder and genocide are serious crimes, but there is no equivalent in the environmental space,” she said.



“Unlike an international crime like genocide that involves a specific intent, with ecocide, what we see is that people are trying to do is make money, is farm, is fish… and what’s missing is an awareness of the side effects and collateral damage that happens…”



WATCH:


rumble.com/v47k8au-wef-speaker-claims-farming-and-fishing-are-ecocide-and-it-be-recognized-as-.html
Social media quickly lit up after a video of Mehta’s comments went viral.



Many likened her claims to the anti-human “Net Zero” and “decarbonization” agendas of the WEF and its allies.

link

[schwartzie]

WEF Member Demands ‘Global Carbon Taxes’ to Force Climate ‘Transition’

Frank Bergman
January 22, 2024 - 12:57 pm


During the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) annual summit in Switzerland, one of the unelected organization’s most powerful members called for nations to enforce “carbon taxes” on a global level to force the public to “transition” into the globalist climate agenda.



During a panel discussion at the Davos event, Saudi Arabia’s Finance Minister Mohammed Al-Jadaan laid out plans for introducing a ” globally coordinated system of carbon taxes.”



According to Al-Jadaan, enforcing global “carbon taxes” would force the public to support the globalist green agenda whether they like it or not.



Al-Jadaan argues that carbon taxes are the only way to generate the revenue necessary to reach the “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDG) of the United Nations.



As Slay News reported, complying with the UN’s SDG will require the general public to make sweeping sacrifices to privacy, freedoms, and quality of life.



According to UN Chief Antonio Guterres, the SDG targets are designed to achieve “Net Zero” by rolling out bank account-linked digital IDs, mass censorship, and food restrictions.



Al-Jadaan told WEF elites that meeting these targets will require a new global taxation system.



“There is no realistic solution to the climate transition that does not involve a globally coordinated system of carbon taxes,” he said.



Al-Jadaan dismissed critics who claim global carbon taxes are unfair and inflationary.



The top Saudi official argues that “vulnerable communities” will suffer from “climate change” the most if they’re not enacted.



“There’s a perception that it’s unjust, it’s unfair, it’ll lead to inflation,” he said.



“In fact, quite the contrary.



“If we don’t do this, the countries that will suffer most ultimately are the developing countries.


“They’re going to be the worst affected by climate change.”



Al-Jadaan then insisted that taxpayers in developed countries should subsidize funding for third-world nations so they can pursue their own climate goals.



“What we need is a system of carbon taxes coupled with subsidies for developing households and a stream of funding for the developing world,” he told the crowd of power-grabbing corporate elites and globalist world leaders.



“To allow them to engage in investments and mitigations and adaption that allows them to keep growing.



“And that’s a real opportunity.”



“It’s a fair solution and it’s the only realistic solution, and we can’t keep ducking it,” he added.


link

[schwartzie]

WHO ‘Declares War’ on Food Supply to ‘Fight Climate Change’

Frank Bergman
January 23, 2024 - 12:58 pm


The head of the World Health Organization (WHO) has called for a global crackdown on the food supply in order to “fight climate change.”



In a video statement, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared war on the meat industry and traditional farming.



In his disturbing address, Dr. Tedros attempted to demonize the food systems that humanity relies on for survival.



Specifically, the WHO chief targeted meat and dairy farming and production which he claims are “harming the health of people and the planet.”



He continued by calling for governments around the world to “transform” the food supply by pushing the general public to “diversified and more plant-based diets.”



Presumably, the “diversified” diets refer to insect-based “foods” and lab-grown “meats” promoted by the United Nations (UN), World Economic Forum (WEF), and Bill Gates.



“Our food systems are harming the health of people and the planet,” Tedros said in his fearmongering statement.



“Food systems contribute to over 30% of greenhouse gas emissions and account for almost one-third of the global burden of disease.



“Transforming food systems is therefore essential, by shifting towards healthier, diversified and more plant-based diets.”



WATCH:

The agriculture industry became a target of attack during the WEF’s annual summit in Davos, Switzerland last week.



Globalist elites are increasingly seeking to demonize traditionally farmed foods in order to replace them with factory-made corporate-controlled products.



As Slay News reported, one WEF member called on globalist elites to push for farming to be labeled a “serious crime.”



Slay the latest News for free!

Email Address *

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.



Speaking from the WEF’s summit at the luxury Swiss ski resort, “Stop Ecocide Now” founder Jojo Mehta argued that fishing and framing should be considered equal to “genocide.”



Mehta insisted that fishing and farming for food should be a “serious crime” while arguing that it is immoral to make money from these industries.



“We have this cultural, very ingrained habit of not taking damage to nature as seriously as we take damage to people or property,” she told world leaders, bureaucrats, and corporate elites at the event.



She continued by claiming that farming, fishing, and presumably hunting, are “mass damage and destruction of nature.”



Mehta then demanded that these activities should be legally recognized as “a serious crime.”



“With human rights, mass murder and genocide are serious crimes, but there is no equivalent in the environmental space,” she said.



“Unlike an international crime like genocide that involves a specific intent, with ecocide, what we see is that people are trying to do is make money, is farm, is fish… and what’s missing is an awareness of the side effects and collateral damage that happens…”



WATCH:




rumble.com/v47k8au-wef-speaker-claims-farming-and-fishing-are-ecocide-and-it-be-recognized-as-.html


Elsewhere during the summit, Tedros used the event to call for WEF-aligned government officials to sign the “Global Pandemic Treaty” of his United Nations “health” agency.



The unelected bureaucrat called on global leaders to surrender their nations’ “pandemic” powers to the UN so that the organization can supposedly fight so-called “Disease X.”



While addressing world leaders, corporate elites, and globalist powermongers, Tedros urged the governments of sovereign nations to sign the WHO’s “Global Pandemic Treaty.”



The WHO’s proposed Pandemic Treaty and the amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) give the globalist organization sweeping new powers that override the laws of sovereign nations.



The accord will give the Chinese Communist Party-linked WHO, the UN’s “health” agency, ultimate control over U.S. pandemic policies such as lockdowns, censorship, masking, vaccine mandates, and public surveillance.



The treaty will award the WHO with sweeping global powers if passed and will give the United Nations agency the authority to declare and manage the pandemic emergency policies of once-sovereign nations, as Slay News has previously reported.



Once a health emergency is declared by the World Health Organization, every signatory, including the United States, must submit to the authority of the WHO.



This includes caving to the WHO on treatments, lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and government surveillance.



Although the “Pandemic Treaty” suggests that it is meant to tackle virus outbreaks, the amendments have continued to expand its reach.



The definition of “pandemic,” according to the WHO, now includes “climate change.”



The treaty gives the WHO ultimate control over individual nations to declare an “emergency” and then dictate the response.



Should the WHO declare an “emergency” over “global warming,” the UN “health” agency would be able to override the laws of sovereign nations to enforce “climate lockdowns.”



Under the plan, the WHO would be able to exercise its sweeping powers to tackle, or even “prevent,” a self-declared emergency.



To prevent a “major climatic event,” the WHO could block the public from buying meat and dairy products with their digital dollars to stop “global warming.”



All UN member states, including the U.S., are expected to sign the treaty in May this year.

link

[schwartzie]

WEF Banker Calls for Restrictions on Public Coffee Drinking to Fight ‘Climate Change’

Frank Bergman
January 24, 2024 - 4:32 pm


A globalist World Economic Forum (WEF) banker has called for restrictions on the public’s consumption of coffee in order to meet green agenda targets.



A video has emerged from the WEF’s recent annual summit in Davos, Switzerland that shows Swiss banker Hubert Keller discussing how coffee production allegedly contributes to so-called “climate change.”



Keller told his fellow WEF globalists during a panel discussion that coffee production is putting too much “carbon emissions” into the atmosphere.



warning that “they’re coming for your coffee.”



In the clip, Keller, who is listed as a WEF “agenda contributor,” notes just how many “tonnes” (a metric unit equivalent to 2,204 lbs) of CO2 coffee makers put into the atmosphere globally when producing their product.



“Basically, the coffee that we all drink emits between 15 and 20 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of coffee,” he said.



“So we should all know that this is – every time we drink coffee, we are basically putting CO2 into the atmosphere.”



Keller added, “Most of the coffee plantation – most of the coffee’s produced through monoculture, and monoculture is also affected by climate change.



“The quality of these nature assets is deteriorating quite rapidly.”



Elsewhere, the WEF contributor told his fellow elites about how there is, conveniently, an opportunity to re-organize the coffee industry.



He noted that there is a “$250 billion market globally” up for grabs if WEF elites can seize the market by claiming to address “climate change.”



Keller suggested that it would be easy pickings because “most coffee growers live below the poverty line.”



WATCH:

Tech journalist Tim Hinchliffe, who originally posted a video of the comments on X, interpreted Keller’s points to mean that coffee growers are going to be stripped of their livelihoods by massive corporations.



He posted, “They’re going after coffee farmers.



“When he says production is ‘fragmented,’ he’s saying it has yet to be captured by corporations & centralized.



“The coffee farmers in the globalist-termed ‘global south’ are to be stripped of their livelihoods in the name of climate justice.”



Hinchliffe added, “He’s putting a guilt-trip on coffee drinkers for supporting poor coffee farmers because they don’t know any better in their ‘monoculture’ endeavors.



“It’s all a power grab to seize land and the means of production to carbon tax you and I to oblivion.”



Other X users ripped Keller for even addressing coffee’s impact on the climate, expressing that it’s a clear attempt by green agenda activists to regulate something people love.



X account “Wide Awake Media” reposted Hinchliffe’s video, writing, “Now they’re coming for your coffee.”



Author and scientist Gad Saad shared a sarcastic response to Keller’s statements, writing:



“Pets cause damage to the climate; cars do as well; having children is irresponsible because of overpopulation; eating meat is eco-terrorism; gas stoves are evil; and now coffee.



“I could list many other examples but for now, here is a way that you could help the environment.”



He added, “If you don’t have any children, commit to becoming celibate; restrict your diet to tofu; use walking as a green way of transportation; reimagine water as coffee and drink it in the morning; and for God’s sake euthanize those ecoterrorist pets!”



Conservative columnist Tim Young wrote:



“Now, the WEF clowns are claiming that coffee is bad for the environment.



“You’ll have nothing and you’ll like it.”



Australian politician Malcolm Roberts rebuked Keller and the Davos elites, saying, “Hands off our coffee.



“The elitists at Davos love to chat about restricting travel while comparing the private jets they flew in on.



“They push EVs, yet the Davos limos are fuel-powered.



“The forum sessions openly plot to reduce animal farming and fishing, yet they dine on the finest steak and seafood.



“Where do we draw the line?”



He added, “It’s all part of the plan to make you feel guilty for existing and change purchases to products owned by the WEF-connected billionaires.



“Reject the CO2 Climate scam.



“One Nation is hugely pro-human and anti-WEF.”



Conservative influencer ALX asked, “How much CO2 is this idiot emitting into the atmosphere?”



And earth science researcher and self-described climate “realist” Dr. Matthew M. Wielicki wrote:



“You need to stop drinking coffee…



“So, Swiss banker Hubert Keller can fly another 4 miles in his private jet.”

link

[schwartzie]

Democrats Push WEF’s ‘Climate Lockdowns’ to Fight ‘Global Warming’

Frank Bergman
January 27, 2024 - 12:58 pm


Democrats are quietly pushing the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) plans to lock members of the public in their homes under so-called “climate lockdowns” to “save the planet” from “global warming.”



Many Americans are only now beginning to realize the devastating impacts that Covid lockdowns had on our society.



Businesses are still struggling to recover and children are trying to catch up with missed learning opportunities.



But what if the pandemic was just a trial run for more drastic restrictions and lockdowns related to climate change?



After decades of arguing that the world is at a tipping point due to the alleged “climate crisis,” Democrats may try to enact restrictions to stop perceived global warming at an order of magnitude larger than the COVID-19 measures imposed during the height of the pandemic.



Considering the pandemic’s ability to bring out authoritarian streaks in our leaders, this should be worrying for most Americans.



Some claim that “climate change” is the “greatest health crisis of our time.”



Microsoft co-founder and pandemic enthusiast Bill Gates agrees it could be worse than Covid.



Some unelected bureaucrats are already laying the foundation for climate-related restrictions.



For example, states such as New York and California have moved to ban the use of fossil fuel-powered vehicles, lawnmowers, and stoves.



Democrats in Minnesota are even pushing for jail time for those caught using gas-powered gardening tools, as Slay News reported.



A combination of efforts could build, perhaps coercing mass support for draconian regulations and soft environmental lockdowns over the next decade.



For many young people and city dwellers who don’t drive regularly, cut grass, or individually heat their homes, such actions to curb energy use may seem like no-brainers.


Whether it’s a liberal U.S. president or some party apparatchik abroad, the restrictions will be packaged in some panacea-like a scaled-down Green New Deal.



There likely would be sweeteners.



For example, perhaps your student loan could be eligible for dismissal if you voluntarily give up going to the office or owning a car.



What, exactly, might environmental restrictions mean for ordinary Americans?



Short flights could be banned, as France has done to “fight climate change.”



A carbon tax could be levied on travel, an idea championed by the WEF and United Nations (UN) that is being increasingly pushed by Democrats and globalists.



Some measures may be imposed through involuntary changes, such as a four-day school week.



Such a change likely would be difficult for families working traditional schedules, but this hurdle will be framed as being for “the greater good” of the climate.



A four-day mandatory workweek could do the same for families whose kids attend schools with traditional schedules.



Local governments and utilities might limit access to power.



A Colorado utility recently came under fire for changing its customers’ thermostats without their knowledge, and the same happened in Texas during extreme heat.



Restrictions on gasoline cars could lead to a de facto rationing regime similar to that during the 1973 oil embargo.



If you’re old enough, you’ll have bad memories of being able to purchase fuel only on certain days.



But a climate lockdown will not be an all-hands-on-deck event, such as with the start of the pandemic.



Those on the political Left and in the administrative state know that hitting Americans with one regulation, or tax, or ban at a time may not spark a sharp reaction.



Rather than mandating that you can’t leave your house, for example, you may slowly notice over several years that your work and personal habits have been restricted one step at a time.



Many of the changes produced by the Covid lockdowns have made Americans more accustomed to severe measures.



Earlier this month, a New York City school switched from in-person classes to remote learning in order to house migrants during severe weather, as Slay News reported.



Yet there are many reasons why such a restriction is a bad idea: Learning outcomes during the pandemic were disastrous, especially for younger students.



Test scores, basic fundamentals, socialization, and behavioral issues all became worse because teachers’ unions and Democrat policymakers insisted that schools had to close during Covid.



In some cases, these closures were lasting into 2022.



When a precedent is set, the genie is out of the bottle.



Schools could institute remote learning instead of a snow day or for a “climate day.”



Once there is a model for institutions to scrap tradition for electronic facsimiles, the building blocks of a new lockdown are in place.



At the same time, the pandemic shifted the American workforce significantly.



In 2019, just 5% of Americans worked from home.



Two years later, the figure had tripled.



It would be relatively easy to require much of the white-collar workforce simply to stay at home to prevent environmental impacts.



After all, the thinking goes, cutting back just one day of commuting to an office can cut your carbon footprint, and working from home may reduce carbon emissions by more than half.



There likely would be some workers and young people who would willingly go along with environmental lockdowns.



Many people got to work remotely or received unemployment checks during COVID lockdowns, and now may prefer remote work.



Make no mistake, the Left will make climate shutdowns sound alluring.



And people will flood social media to virtue signal about how it’s “saving the planet.”



Despite these ideas clearly being the enemy of freedom, they are all supported and pushed by Democrats.



Of course, the Democrats and their allies in the corporate media will insist that the idea of climate lockdowns is just “misinformation” or a “right-wing conspiracy theory.”



However, the WEF and its members are openly gloating about the “advantages” of enforcing such attacks on liberty.



As Slay News reported, the daughter of WEF founder Klaus Schwab declared that tyrannical restrictions during the Covid pandemic served as a precursor to coming “climate lockdowns.”



According to Nicole Schwab, Covid was a “tremendous opportunity” to test how the public would comply with authoritarian measures that could be used to usher in the WEF’s “Great Reset” agenda.



The WEF’s promotion of the “climate crisis” narrative seeks to “create a change that is not incremental…to position nature at the core of the economy,” according to the younger Schwab.



As Slay News reported in 2022, the WEF announced that COVID-19 pandemic-related lockdowns have proved that “billions of citizens across the world” would comply with global restrictions on freedoms for the sake of “climate change.”



In an article published by the WEF, the organization lauds how “billions” of people complied with Covid “restrictions.”



To paraphrase what may have been Karl Marx’s only cogent pronouncement, history repeats itself, first as tragedy and then as farce.



The lockdowns of 2020 were ham-fisted efforts by both well-meaning and malicious politicians to grapple with the surprise of the first global pandemic in a century.



But the next round of restrictions may be planned with icy precision and little thought about their practical effects.



These will be framed however Democrat policymakers need them to be.



Those who resist the “Great Reset” may be labeled “anti-government extremists” for not simply accepting the “New Order” and rolling over.


link

[schwartzie]

Chicago Moves to Ban Natural Gas from Private Homes to Meet WEF’s ‘Net Zero’ Goals

Frank Bergman
January 28, 2024 - 12:58 pm


The Democrat-controlled City of Chicago is moving to ban natural gas from all new homes in an effort to comply with the “Net Zero” goals of the unelected World Economic Forum (WEF).



The Chicago City Council is considering an ordinance that would outlaw the use of natural gas in most new buildings.



City Council officials claim the plan is vital in meeting the WEF’s “Net Zero” agenda to “save the planet” from the so-called “climate crisis.”



The proposal is dubbed the Clean and Affordable Buildings Ordinance (CABO).



It would set an emission standard effectively prohibiting natural gas via an unreachable standard.



This would make the Windy City the latest blue city to prohibit future homes from using gas stoves.



It would also pave the way for electric heating and appliances that reportedly emit lower greenhouse gases.



“This is a matter of real survival and the future of our city – and especially our economic future,” said Democrat Alderwoman Maria Hadden, who introduced the CABO.



“We’re being forced in this direction [not only] by nature, but also by policy, by business and [by] industry. People are making these decisions because it’s economical, it’s healthier [and] it’s safer.”



Democrats at the federal, state, and local levels have floated or pursued bans on gas stoves.



A proposed rule from Democrat President Joe Biden’s Department of Energy (DOE) would ban the sale of half of all gas stoves on the market, the department projected in February 2023.



Months later, the New York State legislature passed a bill that would require new buildings seven stories tall or shorter to use induction ranges and electric heat pumps.



Democrat Gov. Kathy Hochul likened the transition from natural gas to the transition away from coal.


The Biden administration in June supported Berkeley, Calif.’s plan it enacted in 2019 to ban natural gas in future buildings.



Years after the city handed down the plan, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the restriction of natural gas by cities and states violates federal law.



Earlier this month, the court declined a petition to grant the case a new hearing, meaning the ruling will be final unless the Supreme Court takes up the case.



Meanwhile, some leftist lawmakers are pushing severe penalties to force the public into complying with “Net Zero.”



Democrats in Washington state are pushing for members of the public to be jailed for up to one year if they are caught using gas-powered gardening tools, as Slay News reported.



According to State Reps. Amy Walen and Liz Berry, jailing law-abiding citizens over their lawn mower’s power source will help to fight “climate change.”



Last month, the Democrat lawmakers introduced House Bill 1868.



The legislation seeks to meet “Net Zero” by the year 2030 by “reducing emissions from outdoor power equipment.”



According to the bill, gas- and diesel-powered landscaping tools “emit a host of air pollutants.”



These “pollutants” are allegedly “contributing to climate change and negatively impacting public health,” the legislation claims.



Elsewhere, Democrat mayors across the country have been pushing measures to ban the public from consuming meat and dairy products as part of a national effort to comply with the WEF’s globalist agenda.



As Slay News reported, 14 major American cities have set a “target” to comply with the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) green agenda goals by banning meat, dairy, and private car ownership by 2030.



The U.S. cities have formed a coalition called the “C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group” (C40).



The C40 has established an “ambitious target” to meet the WEF’s goals by the year 2030.



To fulfill the “target,” the C40 Cities have pledged that their residents will comply with the following list of mandatory rules:



“0 kg [of] meat consumption”

“0 kg [of] dairy consumption”

“3 new clothing items per person per year”

“0 private vehicles” owned

“1 short-haul return flight (less than 1500 km) every 3 years per person”

The C40 Cities’ dystopian goals can be found in its “The Future of Urban Consumption in a 1.5°C World” report.



The report was published in 2019 and 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.



The American city members of C40 include:



Austin

Boston

Chicago

Houston

Los Angeles

Miami

New Orleans

New York City

Philadelphia

Phoenix

Portland

San Francisco

Washington, D.C.

Seattle

The move also has the full support of the White House.



Democrat President Joe Biden’s outgoing “climate czar” John Kerry has declared that farmers must stop producing food in order to meet “Net Zero.”



During the Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) AIM for Climate Summit last year, Kerry told the audience that “we can’t get to net zero, we won’t get this job done, unless agriculture is front and center as part of the solution.”



Kerry warned attendees that his and other world leaders’ “lives depend” on farmers ceasing their operations.



Stopping farmers from growing food will lower agriculture “emissions,” Kerry insists.



He continued by noting that he does not even call it climate change anymore.



“It’s not change; it’s a crisis,” he declared.



“Mitigating methane is the fastest way to reduce warming in the short term,” Kerry claimed as he took aim at livestock farmers.



“Food and agriculture can contribute to a low-methane future by improving farmer productivity and resilience,” he further stated.



However, the overall message delivered by Kerry appeared to be that eating meat should be a luxury that is limited to wealthy elitists like himself.



Essentially, the masses must stop eating meat and using natural fuels to meet the goals of the elite.



link

[ExquisiteGerbil]

Climate Change™ Roundup: Backyard Gardens in Crosshairs
SATURDAY, JAN 27, 2024 - 11:44

Originally published via Armageddon Prose:



“Here comes an avalanche of [Climate Change™] bullsh*t.” -Marla Singer



John Kerry at Davos: ‘No one politician’ can resist Climate Change™ policy



“If you wound up with a different President who was opposed to climate crisis, I got news for you. No one politician anywhere in the world can undo what is happening now...The only issue for all of us is not whether or not we can get or will get to a low carbon, no carbon economy globally. We will. The only question is, will we get there in time to meet the challenge of the scientists in order to avoid the worst consequences of this crisis. That is what is at stake.”

-John Kerry, ‘Special Presidential Envoy for Climate’



Mind you, John Kerry’s “climate office” hoovers up $4.3 million in taxpayer money every year (well, technically, it’s just piled onto the national debt, but in theory taxpayer money) in order to ferry him around the globe on private jets giving the finger to the American voter.



And America started a war with King George over tea tax. Bathe in the juxtaposition.



Obviously, the non-domestic-terrorist interpretation of Kerry’s words is that dismissing out of hand the policy preferences of a duly elected leader in a “democracy” is in no way contradictory to the elites’ professed deep and abiding appreciation for Democracy™.



Only a white supremacist would see any cognitive dissonance there.



Another totalitarian Davos girl, Naomi Oreskes, issued a similar pledge to clamp down on any dissent related to the war on carbon, the essential building block of life.



Via TIME:



“It will be crucial to build on the framework established in the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act to accelerate the transition to renewable energy. This will include opposing infrastructure that will lock in fossil-fuel energy for decades to come and carbon capture and storage projects that are adjuncts to fossil-fuel production. It will also be crucial not to allow new forms of denial to take hold. We are already seeing examples, such as the false claim that off-shore wind kills whales and that restrictions on gas stoves are the latest excuse by liberals to control our lives and deny our freedom. Scientists will have to work with climate activists to block the spread of such misleading narratives.”



What the lady meant to say was “government censors” will be necessary to censor dissenting views, but the euphemisms “scientists” and “climate activists” have a much more palatable ring to them for the liberals she appeals to.



If these people were barred from speaking in euphemisms, they wouldn’t be allowed to say anything at all.



WHO announces full-tilt jihad against farmers

WHO is now officially at war with farmers — as in, the people who own and operate farms and use them to grow the food that sustains the human population on planet Earth, the suppression of which would be literally genocidal.



Here’s the diverse WHO executive Tedros on shutting down food production for Climate Change™:



“Our food systems are harming the health of people and planet. Food systems contribute to over 30% of greenhouse gas emissions, and account for almost one third of the global burden of disease. Transforming food systems is therefore essential.”





Via United Nations:



“Food is now firmly on the menu as a vital area of action to achieve global climate goals and countries have led the way- challenging themselves to do more, faster. The key COP28 outcomes represent a collective commitment to integrated action for food systems and climate, and provide powerful advocacy tools to drive forward action which delivers on these commitments at all levels. Though this is a huge step forward- we are still only at the start of the journey. While food systems action made monumental leaps within COP28 proceedings, the integration of nutrition considerations within this remains a vital area for joint advocacy. The phrase echoing through nutrition discussions was “a glass half full” – with the groundwork laid for integrated action, but much more work to do to integrate nutrition considerations into country NDCs and NAPs, and deliver on the vision of food systems for people, planet and prosperity.



Focus now turns to transforming this momentum into measurable results*, with the 2024 COP29 in Azerbaijan and 2025 COP30 in Brazil serving as critical progress checkpoints. In line with their unique mandates, UN-Nutrition Members and partners stand ready to support countries in this mission, including championing healthy diets from sustainable food systems as a solution to achieve multiple Sustainable Development Goals and global climate targets. An exciting platform for this will be the scale up of the I-CAN initiative which is set to continue inspiring integrated action for climate and nutrition and monitoring change across food, health, social protection and water systems, as well as commencing country case studies for accelerated progress in 2024. Stay tuned!”



*“Measurable results” is yet another euphemism for “curtailed food production.”



This is how these social engineering schemes always unfold:



· The Experts™ publish dubious research manufacturing the problem and creating the narrative to underscore its urgency



· Various NGOs and unelected multinational corporate state governing bodies (like the WHO and UN), via controlled media, promulgate the narrative, referencing The Science™ and prescribing fixes that always, conveniently, centralize power and control into smaller and smaller sets of hands



· Said fixes to the manufactured dilemma — as we saw with the gradual banning of gas stoves for Climate Change™ in certain blue jurisdictions — are first said to not exist and derided as “conspiracy theory,” then acknowledged but framed as theoretical, then they are marketed as practical but voluntary, then shoved down the throats of the public through force of law once any will to resist has been exhausted in enough of the population to make it manageable



Climate Change™ scientists: Home gardening is destroying the planet

Via The Telegraph:



“Growing your own food in an allotment may not be as good for the environment as expected, a study suggests.



The carbon footprint of homegrown foods is five times greater than produce from conventional agricultural practices, such as rural farms, data show.



A study from the University of Michigan looked at how much CO2 was produced when growing food in different types of urban farms and found that, on average, a serving of food made from traditional farms creates 0.07kg of CO2.



The impact on the environment is almost five times higher at 0.34kg per portion for individual gardens, such as vegetable patches or allotments…



Fruit was found to be 8.6 times more eco-friendly when grown conventionally compared to in a city, whereas vegetables were 5.8 times better for the environment when left to the professionals.”



The cryptically referenced “professionals” here are satanic multinational corporations like Monsanto hellbent on:



· patenting nature down to the DNA level so that you’ll pay them to grow anything to feed your family



· running all independent agricultural operations out of business



· destroying the integrity of the soil, poisoning the food supply, and driving chronic disease for the benefit of the biomedical industry through monoculture, pesticides, insecticides, etc. so that nothing but their mutant corn will grow



A real bang-up job the “professionals” have been doing.



Here’s the cited study, so brazenly flawed and biased in its methodology that it doesn’t even factor in the transportation costs in terms of carbon consumption of growing, for example, Franken-soy in China and then shipping it halfway across the world in a freighter for peasants in Seattle or Santiago, whose farms have all been shuttered for the Earth.

link

[schwartzie]

89% of ‘American Elites’ Back WEF’s Plan to Ration Meat, Gas, Electricity for General Public

Frank Bergman
January 29, 2024 - 12:58 pm


A disturbing new report has emerged revealing that an overwhelming number of so-called “American elites” support the tyrannical “climate” policies of the World Economic Forum (WEF).



According to a report from the Committee to Unleash Prosperity (CUP), America’s wealthiest citizens fully support the WEF’s plan to ration gas, electricity, and meat and dairy products for the general public in order to allegedly “fight climate change.”



The report includes polling data regarding support for policies designed to force compliance with the WEF’s “Net Zero” agenda.



Astonishingly, the polling shows that almost 90 percent of “American elites” believe strict rationing of gas, meat, and electricity is necessary to combat the so-called “climate crisis.”



The CUP report shows that 77 percent of higher-income Americans overall support these plans.



However, 89 percent of those wealthy individuals from “top universities” believe in restrictions on the public’s quality of life to meet “Net Zero.”



In fact, nearly 60 percent of such people believe there’s too much liberty in America even though, objectively speaking, we’re less free than ever.



Moreover, in another example of the pseudo-elite vs. street divide, 63 percent of Americans in general oppose the above rationing policy.



Reporting on the story, The College Fix writes that the “Committee to Unleash Prosperity [CUP], in a survey that sought to measure the beliefs of ‘elites,’ stated the findings reveal climate change ‘is clearly an obsession of the very rich and highly educated.’”



The poll, released this month and titled “Them vs. U.S.: The two Americas and how the nation’s elite is out of touch with average Americans,” was billed by the committee as a “first-of-its-kind look at the views of the American Elite.”



They are defined as “people having at least one post-graduate degree, earning at least $150,000 annually, and living in high-population density areas (more than 10,000 people per square mile in their zip code).”



The report is based on two surveys of 1,000 elites conducted last fall.



“The study also examined a sub-sample of elites, adults who attended Ivy League schools or other elite private schools, including Northwestern, Duke, Stanford, and the University of Chicago” according to CUP.


“Roughly half of those we classify as ‘elites’ attended one of these schools.



“For the purpose of this study, we label those who attended one of these schools as ‘Ivy League Graduates.’”



The “shocking” findings reveal “a wealthy, partisan elite class that’s not only immune from and numb to the problems of their countrymen but enormously confident in and willing to impose unpopular policies on them,” argued Isaac Schorr in an op-ed Friday for the New York Post.



“It’s near impossible to behold the results and not acknowledge they’re indicative of a fundamental disconnect between two Americas,” he wrote.



“That disconnect should be of as much concern to proud aristocrats as it is to the peasantry.”



As Slay News recently reported, the Democrat-controlled City of Chicago is now moving to ban natural gas from all new homes in an effort to comply with the “Net Zero” goals of the unelected WEF.



The Chicago City Council is considering an ordinance that would outlaw the use of natural gas in most new buildings.



City Council officials claim the plan is vital in meeting the WEF’s “Net Zero” agenda to “save the planet” from the so-called “climate crisis.”



Meanwhile, Democrats at the federal, state, and local levels have floated or pursued bans on gas stoves.



A proposed rule from Democrat President Joe Biden’s Department of Energy (DOE) would ban the sale of half of all gas stoves on the market, the department projected in February 2023.



Months later, the New York State legislature passed a bill that would require new buildings seven stories tall or shorter to use induction ranges and electric heat pumps.



Democrat Gov. Kathy Hochul likened the transition from natural gas to the transition away from coal.



Elsewhere, some leftist lawmakers are pushing severe penalties to force the public into complying with “Net Zero.”



Democrats in Washington state are pushing for members of the public to be jailed for up to one year if they are caught using gas-powered gardening tools, as Slay News reported.



According to State Reps. Amy Walen and Liz Berry, jailing law-abiding citizens over their lawn mower’s power source will help to fight “climate change.”



Last month, the Democrat lawmakers introduced House Bill 1868.



The legislation seeks to meet “Net Zero” by the year 2030 by “reducing emissions from outdoor power equipment.”



Further, Democrat mayors across the country have been pushing measures to ban the public from consuming meat and dairy products as part of a national effort to comply with the WEF’s globalist agenda.



As Slay News reported, 14 major American cities have set a “target” to comply with the WEF’s green agenda goals by banning meat, dairy, and private car ownership by 2030.



The U.S. cities have formed a coalition called the “C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group” (C40) which has established an “ambitious target” to meet the WEF’s goals by the year 2030.



To fulfill the “target,” the C40 Cities have pledged that their residents will comply with the following list of mandatory rules:



“0 kg [of] meat consumption”

“0 kg [of] dairy consumption”

“3 new clothing items per person per year”

“0 private vehicles” owned

“1 short-haul return flight (less than 1500 km) every 3 years per person”

Essentially, the masses must stop eating meat and using natural fuels to meet the goals of the elite.

link

[schwartzie]

Globalists Unleash ‘Carbon Controls’ to Declare War on Food

Frank Bergman
February 2, 2024 - 12:59 pm




The unelected globalist elite is unleashing a new weapon as it declares war on the global food supply.



In early 2020 in the midst of the Covid lockdowns, blue states run by leftist governors pursued mandates with extreme prejudice.



In red states like Montana, after the first month or two most of us simply ignored the restrictions and went on with life as usual.



It was clear that Covid was not the threat federal authorities made it out to be.



However, in states like Michigan, the vice was squeezed tighter and tighter under the direction of shady leaders like Gretchen Whitmer.



Whitmer used Covid as an opportunity to institute some bizarre limitations on the public, including a mandate barring larger stores from selling seeds and garden supplies to customers.



“If you’re not buying food or medicine or other essential items, you should not be going to the store,” Whitmer said when announcing her order.



The leftist governor was fine with purchases of lottery tickets and liquor, but not gardening tools and seeds.



She never gave a logical reason why she targeted garden supplies, but most people in the preparedness community understood very well what this was all about: This was a beta test for wider restrictions on food independence.



There was widespread rhetoric in the media throughout 2020 attacking anyone stockpiling necessities as “hoarders,” and now they were going after people planning ahead and trying to grow their own food.



The establishment did NOT want people to store or produce a personal food supply.



Another prospect that was being openly discussed among globalists was the idea that lockdowns were “helpful” in ways beyond stopping the spread of Covid (the lockdowns were actually useless in stopping the spread of Covid).



They suggested that these measures could be effective in preventing global carbon emissions and saving the world from “climate change.”


The idea of climate lockdowns began to spread.



The corporate media has since lied about the existence of the climate lockdown agenda, but articles and white papers extolling the virtues of shutting down the planet in the name of “climate change” are easy to find and read.



The globalists and their academic defenders wanted PERMANENT lockdowns, or rolling lockdowns every couple of months, shutting down most human activity and travel outside of basic production.



It could be argued that what Whitmer was doing in Michigan was a part of this agenda – That her garden supply ban was part of a wider goal that had nothing to do with public health safety and everything to do with stopping people from prepping.



The covid controls were only meant to be a precursor to carbon controls.



This past week we have seen more confirmation of this, as a study out of the University of Michigan claims that homegrown foods produce five times more carbon emissions than industrial farming methods. In other words, private gardens could be considered a threat to the environment.



The Telegraph and other corporate platforms have jumped on the story, and I believe this is cause for concern.



The study includes analysis of various gardens from individual family plots to urban and community plots and claims that “garden infrastructure” for individual plots (such as raised beds) contributes far greater carbon pollution than large-scale farming.



The study seems to ignore the fact that raised beds are more efficient and grow more food in a smaller space, but I doubt they really care to take these kinds of things into consideration.



The average person might be confused by this and assume the opposite is true – Wouldn’t growing foods at home be BETTER for the environment?



Not if your funding relies on portraying independent food supplies as bad for the planet.



The study is bankrolled by a host of international groups, including the European Union’s Horizon Program which lists “100 Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities by 2030” as one of its project goals.



These 100 cities are then supposed to act as flagship models for the eventual carbon agenda takeover of all cities by 2050.



Such groups have billions of dollars at their disposal and focus most of that monetary firepower on climate change research (propaganda).



Was the Michigan study rigged in favor of a predetermined outcome? Probably.



When these studies are funded by globalist interests, their outcomes always seem to favor globalist goals.



The study itself does not necessarily argue that people should stop gardening, but it does push the narrative that carbon controls are necessary, even at an individual level.



The Michigan report might seem like a meaningless footnote.



However, as we witnessed last year with a study from the Consumer Product Safety Commission on natural gas appliances, these little and obscure studies are often used to justify large-scale government interventions in people’s daily lives.



The CPSC study inspired months of debates from Democrats in the US demanding that gas appliances including stoves be banned because they MIGHT cause health side effects, specifically in children (it turns out the study had no concrete basis for this claim).



Leftists and globalists do not care about protecting your health; they care about how these studies can be used to fearmonger, thus increasing their power.



In other words, if you can rig the science, then you can rig the laws.



We saw something similar to this in a UN study in 2006 which claimed that meat production contributed to nearly 20% of all carbon emissions and was worse for the environment than transportation.



The study was exposed in 2010 as “flawed” (fraudulent), but for years the media and globalist organizations used its false conclusions as a springboard to demand limitations and bans on meat production in the name of saving the climate.



If you think the war on farming which is raging right now in Europe is only intended to affect industrial farms, think again.



The establishment is going to try to use the man-made climate change lie to dictate ALL food production, right down to your unassuming backyard garden.



And they won’t limit their efforts to the EU; they will come after American farms with the same restrictions.



This is really what the globalist “Net Zero” programs and 15-minute cities are all about – They are based on the idea that all human activity needs to be monitored and managed.



They say it’s for the good of the planet, but the systems they want to put in place from 2030 to 2050 sound like new digital feudalism, a society where bureaucracies track and trace and micromanage every aspect of your life. The elites benefit greatly while never proving that carbon emissions are a danger to anyone.



Why the obsessive focus on food? Because if people have their own food, then they might be more willing to rebel against further mandates.



It’s really that simple.



The end game is obvious – Control the food, and you control the world.



Do it in the name of saving the planet and a lot of people will even thank you as you starve them.



link

[schwartzie]

Bank of America Walks Back Green Agenda Pledge to Stop Financing Fossil Fuel Industry

Frank Bergman
February 5, 2024 - 4:31 pm


Bank of America has walked back its pledge to comply with the globalist green agenda by cutting off the fossil fuel industry.



In December 2021, the bank committed to stopping its direct financing of new coal-fired power plants, thermal coal mines, and arctic drilling.



However, the financial services company appears to be reversing course on its pledge to “save the planet” from “climate change,” the New York Times is reporting.



The bank originally stated that it would stop financing the fossil fuel industry in order to comply with the World Economic Forum-led “environmental, social, and corporate governance” (ESG) criteria and the goals of the WEF’s “Net Zero” agenda, as outlined in the Paris Climate Agreement.



In its “Environmental and Social Risk Policy Framework,” the company stated:



“By 2025, we will phase out all financing (including facilitating capital markets transactions and advising on mergers and acquisitions) of companies deriving ≥ 25% of their revenue from thermal coal mining, unless the company has a public commitment to align its business (across Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions) with the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and the transaction would be facilitating the diversification of the company’s business away from thermal coal.”



“We will not directly finance petroleum exploration or production activities in the Arctic,” the framework added.



However, a December 2023 updated version of Bank of America’s “Environmental and Social Risk Policy Framework” appears to backtrack on those promises.



The new version now says the company will exercise “due diligence” with the projects.



The most recent framework explains:



“Any client or transaction involving direct financing of oil and gas exploration or production activities in the Arctic must be escalated to the Senior-level Risk Committee for decisioning.



“As part of the enhanced due diligence process, we give consideration to whether a company has a public commitment to align its business… with goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and the transaction would be facilitating the diversification of the company’s business away from thermal coal,” it added.



Any initiatives involving new coal extraction or the expansion of existing coal extraction would also be escalated to the bank’s risk committee


The latest framework walks back the bank’s pledge to “phase out all financing” of new coal projects by 2025.



Instead, it states that the company is “on a trajectory to phase out such financing by 2025.”



Lucie Pinson with Reclaim Finance told the Times that Bank of America’s decision to backpedal on its previous commitments “sends a very bad signal” that “it’s OK to take up new fossil-fuel assets.”



In a statement to the Times, Bank of America explained that projects “that carry heightened risks will continue to go through an enhanced due diligence process involving senior level risk review.”

link

[schwartzie]

Canada Moves to Begin Jailing ‘Net Zero’ Critics

Frank Bergman
February 8, 2024 - 12:58 pm


Globalist lawmakers in Canada are pushing a disturbing new piece of legislation that seeks to jail members of the public who question the “Net Zero” agenda of the unelected World Economic Forum (WEF).



The push aims to tackle so-called “climate skepticism” as governments around the world scramble to meet the WEF’s “Net Zero” goals.



The legislation, Bill C-372, was introduced by Canada’s left-wing socialist New Democratic Party (NDP).



Under the bill, the promotion of fossil fuel use will be outlawed with restrictions similar to tobacco advertising applied.



Those who speak in favor of fossil fuels, or criticize plans to eliminate them, will face massive fines and possible prison time.



The bill was authored by New Democrat MP Charlie Angus, a close ally of Canada’s far-left Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.



Angus was runner-up in the NDP’s 2017 leadership race which was won by Jagmeet Singh.



The prominent lawmaker has dubbed his bill the Fossil Fuel Advertising Act.



Angus seeks to curb if not ban advertisements for fossil fuels while outlawing criticisms of the policies required to comply with Net Zero.



In his bill, Angus cites “health” and “environmental” concerns by drawing parallels between the tobacco and fossil fuel industries.



He insists that such drastic measures are necessary to tackle a so-called “crisis” which he alleges is caused by fossil fuel consumption.



“Whereas fossil fuel production and consumption has resulted in a national public health crisis of substantial and pressing concern, in a way that is similar to the public health crisis caused by tobacco consumption,” the bill reads.

The bill proposes a range of restrictions, including outright bans on wrongthink with severe penalties for non-compliance.



It introduces terms like “producer” and “promotion,” broadly defining them to encompass various opponents of the anti-fossil fuel agenda.



According to the legislation, a “producer” is an individual who questions the policies, presumably by posting on social media or speaking publicly about it.



Someone who engages in “promotion” is a person or entity who brings attention to the questions raised by the “producer” by advocating the talking points or sharing the information on social media.



Also outlined in the bill are suggested penalties for individuals who “engage in false, misleading, or deceptive” critique of Net Zero policies.



“It is prohibited for a person to promote a fossil fuel, a fossil fuel-related brand element, or the production of a fossil fuel,” the bill reads.



Moreover, failure to comply could land individuals in prison for “up to two years.”



Outlined in the bill is a summary of the penalties that “violators” would face, including:



For “Producers Violating Promotion Restrictions”:



On conviction on indictment, a producer could face a fine of up to $1,000,000 or imprisonment for up to two years, or both.



On summary conviction, the penalty could be a fine of up to $500,000 or imprisonment for up to one year, or both.



For “False Promotion”:



Producers who engage in false, misleading, or deceptive promotion could, on conviction on indictment, be fined up to $1,500,000 or face up to two years in prison, or both.



On summary conviction, the fine could be up to $750,000 or imprisonment for up to one year, or both.



For “Other Persons (Non-Producers) Violating Promotion Restrictions”:



Individuals other than producers found guilty of contravening promotion restrictions on summary conviction could face a fine of up to $500,000.



link

[schwartzie]

Carbon Dioxide Is NOT Causing ‘Climate Crisis,’ Study Warns

Frank Bergman
February 9, 2024 - 12:59 pm


A group of leading climate scientists has issued a warning to governments and the public after conducting a study that debunks the globalist anti-carbon agenda.



Three scientists, including the world-renowned Atmospheric Professor Yi Huang of Canada’s McGill University, have published a study showing that carbon dioxide is not causing a so-called “climate crisis.”



They analyzed data that is frequently used to promote the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) “Net Zero” agenda.



However, even after doubling the current amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) in their calculations, the scientists found that figures quoted for the impact on “global warming” were exaggerated by at least 40 percent.



In addition, they found that CO2 isn’t capable of heating the atmosphere beyond the levels already passed in the pre-industrial age.



“Transmissivity in the CO2 band center is unchanged by increased CO2 as the absorption is already saturated,” they note.



The study’s findings destroy the “settled” climate science that backs the collectivist “Net Zero” agenda of WEF and its allies.



As Slay News has reported, carbon dioxide has become increasingly demonized by corporate elites, globalist government officials, the WEF, the United Nations (UN), the World Health Organization (WHO, and other unelected bureaucrats.



In order to meet the goals of the “Net Zero” agenda, members of the general public will be expected to drastically reduce their quality of life while paying for major tax hikes to cover the cost of the scheme.



Sacrifices promoted by the WEF and UN include bans on private car ownership, restrictions on travel, eliminating the majority of the farming industry, replacing meat and dairy products with lab-grown and insect-based “foods,” and the introduction of digital IDs, CBDCs, “cashless societies,” and limits of privacy.



The head of the UN, Antonio Guterres, even expects the public to start living in mud huts to meet the “Net Zero” targets.



One idea often touted by WEF members is massive global depopulation.



As Slay News reported, one WEF member recently suggested a 90 percent reduction in the world’s population would “help” globalists meet their “Net Zero” targets.


Of course, these restrictions will only apply to the general public and not the powerful elites who need private jets to “save the planet.”



Meanwhile, the findings from the groundbreaking study are likely to be ignored by the corporate media.



It’s more likely that some activist “journalists” and scientists may seek to get the paper retracted.



For the time being, it is published by the American Meteorological Society in its peer-reviewed Journal of Climate.



The scientists didn’t only debunk the anti-carbon “global warming” narrative, however.



Another sensational finding is that higher levels of CO2 seem to actually cool Antarctica.



“The [doubled CO2] forcing in polar regions is strongly hemispheric asymmetric and is negative in the Antarctic,” write the scientists.



None of this will be a surprise to regular readers since it would appear to be confirmed by observations that the region has shown “nearly non-existent warming” over the last 70 years.



The recent “mind-blowing’” scare over low levels of winter sea ice has been debunked by evidence from early weather satellites showing similar levels in 1966.



The main paper is behind a paywall but an excellent summary of its contents is provided by the science blog No Tricks Zone.



The science is complex with the “Abstract” explaining that the paper evaluates the “spatiotemporal variation of the instantaneous, longwave CO2 radiative forcing at both the TOA [top of the atmosphere] and surface.”



In plain terms, the work investigates the rise in temperature at three levels in the atmosphere as the Earth adjusts its thermal balance from heat trapped by so-called “greenhouse” gases.



Using watts per square meter formulation (3.7 W/m2), it is commonly held by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that a doubling of CO2 will lead to a rise in temperature at the TOA of 1.2°C.



The scientists have reduced this number to 2.26 W/m2, a 39% reduction down to a temperature rise of 0.72°C.



At the surface, the rise is only 0.55°C.



Large parts of the globe are measured at 0 W/m2 including below zero for Antarctica.



The inconvenient idea that CO2 “saturates” above certain atmospheric levels, possibly at levels lower than current concentrations, has long been dismissed.



However, it does have the advantage of explaining the higher gas levels seen in the past.



Carbon dioxide only absorbs heat in narrow bands on the infrared spectrum and it commonly overlaps with other warming gases such as ubiquitous water vapor.



“The water vapor and CO2 overlapping at an absorbing band prevents absorption by additional CO2,” observe the authors.



The water vapor usually damps the doubled CO2 forcing by reducing the energy additional CO2 can absorb, they add.



The W/m2 figure is a vital building block in attempts to put a figure on the final temperature rise caused by a doubling of CO2, a process known as climate sensitivity.



Scientists also point to other influences, or forcings, on climate and these include feedback from many sources such as evaporation, ice albedo (reflection), and clouds.



For a “settled” scientific narrative, it is remarkably little understood how such feedback actually happens.



In fact, it is probably beyond accurate measurement in a chaotic, non-linear atmosphere.



The results of climate models over 40 years would appear to confirm that last statement.



None of this has stopped activist scientists from claiming double CO2 warming between 2-6°C.



It is essentially a made-up figure often called a hypothesis – science-speak for an opinion.



Despite claims it cannot be “denied,” it is not a “theory” or a “law.”



It is an opinion that has remained unproven for over 50 years.



Not a single science paper can tell us what the climate sensitivity figure is.



Corporate collectivists insist that temperatures will rise by up to 6°C.



Yet, others suggest it is well below 1°C and indistinguishable from natural climate variation.



Despite all this, a majority of science papers preach climate doomsday scenarios using RCP 8.5 “pathway” modeled data that suggests the global temperature will rise by up to 4°C within less than 80 years.



Other green agenda “experts” use computer models to claim that they can attribute single bad weather events to long-term changes in the climate.



All of this is pseudoscience since it’s non-falsifiable and hence doesn’t meet the test of a scientific hypothesis.



It is however the lynchpin of the argument that there’s no point in debating climate science and all heretics should be silenced in the interest of drastic Net Zero-inspired economic and societal control.




link

[schwartzie]

Top EU Leader: WEF Wants to ‘Control CO2’ to ‘Control the People’

Frank Bergman
February 11, 2024 - 12:40 pm


A top European Union official has spoken out to warn the public that the World Economic Forum (WEF) is pushing to seize control of carbon dioxide (CO2) so the unelected globalist organization can “control the people.”



The warning was issued by Rob Roos, a Dutch politician and a current independent Member of the European Parliament (MEP).



As farmer protests rage across Europe, sits down with The HighWire’s Del Bigtree to discuss the climate scam being pushed by globalist elites as part of the WEF’s “Net Zero” agenda.



As Roos notes, the WEF has no interest in environmental issues and is only pushing the green agenda to seize more power and control in the Western world.



“[WEF elites] go against family values,” Roos explained.



“They go against natural food.



“They go against freedom – because if you have to buy an electric car.



“They’re almost twice as expensive – and people cannot buy that – it’s not about the car – it’s about you can’t go anywhere and must depend on public transportation.



“It’s also digitalization,” he noted.



“What we see is the digital identity and central bank digital currency.



“This is all about a new form of communism,” Roos said.



“If you want to control the people, you have to control the CO2 – because everything we do in life, breathing, living, traveling, eating, and everything we do in life leads to CO2 emissions.



“And if you can control the CO2, you can control the people.”


He further explained that the ultimate control comes when globalists connect people’s digital identities to the central bank’s digital currency.



Bigtree responded: “So much of this [globalist takeover of the West] was really fast-tracked during Covid.”



He pointed out that WEF branded the Covid era as the “Great Reset.”



WATCH:

As Slay News has previously reported, 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, have signed a declaration asserting: “There is no climate emergency.”



But under the guise of an imminent climate disaster, globalist elites, NGOs, governments, politicians, mega-corporations, and, of course, legacy media outlets push climate fear to usher in a reset of society.



The most critical line to remember from Roos’ interview is: “If you can control the CO2, you can control the people. ”



The “Net Zero” goals pushed by radical progressive politicians and rogue billionaires, like Bill Gates, advocating for “green’ policies” are all designed to strip the public of their freedoms and turn citizens into taxpaying consumers who fuel the global elite’s agenda.



Claims of a “climate crisis” are being promoted around the globe by governments and their media accomplices in an effort to comply with the green agenda goals of the World Economic Forum (WEF), United Nations (UN), the World Health Organization (WHO), and other unelected globalist organizations.



Meeting these goals typically involved plans to slash the quality of life for most of the general public while ramping up taxes to “save the planet.”



Meanwhile, the handful of powerful elites promoting the green agenda will continue to fly around in private jets and eat meat because they are “part of the solution.”


link

[schwartzie]

Bill Gates Launches Scheme to ‘Save Planet’ from ‘Climate Change’ by Chopping Down Millions of Trees

Frank Bergma
February 13, 2024 - 12:34pm


Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has just launched his radical new scheme that promises to “save the planet” from “climate change.”



As Slay News reported last year, Gates’s organization, Breakthrough Energy, plowed $6.6 million into the project led by Kodama Systems.



The project promised to remove “carbon emissions” from the Earth’s atmosphere by chopping down trees and burying them underground.



The move will see 70 million acres of forests, mostly in the Western United States, cut down.



According to the project organizers, “scientists” say “burying trees can reduce global warming.”



Kodama claims that burying the trees will prevent them from allegedly “spewing” carbon back into the air.



The trees will be buried instead of being used for conventional means, like timber for housing.



WATCH:

This week, Gates has just launched a new product to work alongside his tree-chopping project.



Graphyte, a carbon removal startup backed by Gates’s Breakthrough Energy, just kicked off operations at its Arkansas-based plant, according to Inc.



After the trees are culled by Kodama, they will be sent to Gates’s Graphyte for “carbon casting.”



The company’s “carbon casting” technology involves drying and compressing biomass from timber and agricultural by-products into blocks roughly the size of shoe boxes, the report explains.


The blocks are then covered in an impermeable barrier, buried underground, and monitored to prevent decomposition.



This supposedly eliminates potential emissions created when the biomass is burned or left to decompose.



The one-year-old company has just launched its goal of removing 15,000 metric tons of CO2 from the atmosphere by the end of 2024 by burying culled trees.



The company is also aiming for an additional 50,000 in 2025.



JOIN THE FIGHT - DONATE TO SLAY NEWS TODAY!

“Graphyte’s first facility producing carbon casting blocks this week will become the largest carbon removal company in the world in the next several months and alone will remove 50,000 tons next year,” Graphyte CEO Barclay Rogers said in a statement.



“This is not a hypothetical, this is happening as we speak.”



Graphyte claims its “innovation” will allow for the removal of carbon at the cost of about $100 per ton.



Carbon removal via direct air capture, by contrast, can cost anywhere from $600 to $1,000, according to the World Economic Forum (WEF).



The startup predicts its method will keep captured carbon out of the atmosphere for more than 1,000 years.



Graphyte boasts investment from Breakthrough Energy Ventures, which counts Gates, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Alibaba’s Jack Ma, Virgin Group’s Richard Branson, and hedge fund manager Ray Dalio on its board or among its investors.



It already inked a deal in November 2023 with American Airlines, which paid for the removal of 10,000 tons of CO2.



link

[schwartzie]

Bill Gates’ Plan to ‘Fight Climate Change’ by Blocking the Sun Begins

Frank Bergman
February 15, 2024 - 12:59 pm


Bill Gates’s radical plan to “save the planet” from “climate change” by blocking out the Sun has officially launched as scientists began pumping chemicals into the sky this week.



As Slay News has previously reported, Bill Gates has long been advocating for the plan to fight “global warming” using experimental geoengineering to block the Sun.



The idea, promoted by Gates and leftist billionaire George Soros, involves pumping manmade white clouds into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight away from the planet’s surface.



The radical scheme would lower the planet’s temperature and allegedly “combat global warming.”



Soros claims the technology will help to prevent ice sheets from melting.



Ice sheets melting in Greenland in particular, he claimed, could doom human civilization.



“Our civilization is in danger of collapsing because of the inexorable advance of climate change,” Soros said.



“The melting of the Greenland ice sheet would increase the level of the oceans by seven meters.



“That poses a threat to the survival of our civilization,” he alleged.



The method pushed by Bill Gates involves increasing aerosol concentrations in the stratosphere to reflect solar radiation away from the Earth.



Gates has been funding a major project at Harvard using balloons to deploy aerosols.



However, Gates’s Harvard project was shut down following pushback from the public over the plan.



Nevertheless, another group of scientists has now been advancing Gates’s plan, the Wall Street Journal is reporting.

The scientists are injecting reflective particles into the sky, dumping chemicals in the ocean, and spraying saltwater in the air in a desperate effort to stop or reverse “climate change.”



They claim techniques are necessary to cool the planet because global efforts to check greenhouse gas emissions are failing.



These geoengineering approaches were once considered taboo by scientists and regulators who feared that tinkering with the environment could have unintended consequences.



However, researchers are receiving taxpayer funds and private investments to advance Gates’s plans.



The plan involves three experimental methods of blocking out sunlight.



Marine Cloud Brightening, is a research project led by Southern Cross University as part of the $64.55 million, or 100 million Australian dollars, Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program.



The program involves modifying clouds to make them reflect sunlight away from the Earth to supposedly stop “global warming.”



This week, researchers aboard a ship off the northeastern coast of Australia near the Whitsunday Islands started spraying a briny mixture through high-pressure nozzles into the air in an attempt to brighten low-altitude clouds that form over the ocean.



Scientists hope bigger, brighter clouds will reflect sunlight away from the Earth, shade the ocean surface, and cool the waters around the Great Barrier Reef.



In Israel, a startup called Stardust Solutions has begun testing a system to disperse a cloud of tiny reflective particles about 60,000 feet in altitude.



These geoengineered clouds reflect sunlight away from Earth to cool the atmosphere in a concept known as solar radiation management, or SRM.



Meanwhile, in Massachusetts, researchers at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution are preparing to pour 6,000 gallons of a liquid solution of sodium hydroxide, a component of lye, into the ocean 10 miles south of Martha’s Vineyard this summer.



They hope the chemical base will act like a big tablet of Tums, lowering the acidity of a patch of surface water and absorbing 20 metric tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, storing it “safely” in the ocean.



Experiments aimed at cooling the atmosphere by reflecting sunlight away from Earth are an attempt to mimic what happens when a volcano erupts.



In 1991, Mount Pinatubo, an active volcano in the Philippines, spewed sulfur and ash into the upper atmosphere, lowering the Earth’s temperature by .5 degrees Celsius (. 9 degrees Fahrenheit) for an entire year.



But until a few years ago, many scientists opposed human interventions.



Scientists feared that such experiments would create a slippery slope that would allow society to avoid making tough decisions about reducing emissions and could ultimately backfire.



However, as global elites such as Gates and Soros, along with their allies in the World Economic Forum (WEF) and United Nations (UN), have been advocating such plans, these taboos and fears have gradually eroded, despite the same risks remaining.



In 2022, Democrat President Joe Biden’s White House also published “Guidelines on Solar Radiation Modification.”



The guidelines state:



This Research Plan was prepared in response to a requirement in the joint explanatory statement accompanying Division B of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, directing the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), with support from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), to provide a research plan for “solar and other rapid climate interventions.”



Not only do we need brighter clouds, we need more ash in the sky to darken it.



Ironically, the short-term risk is that one of these plans is actually successful in lowering global temperatures.



Data will almost certainly be manipulated to show success if for no other reason than to get more funding for “saving the planet.”



However, the long-term risk, of actually cooling the planet to satisfy the globalist “green” agenda, would be catastrophic.



link

[schwartzie]

WEF’s War on Farmers Will Do Nothing to ‘Reduce Emissions,’ Study Warns

Frank Bergman
February 16, 2024 - 12:39 pm




A new study has revealed that the globalist war on farmers will do nothing to “reduce emissions” and “save the planet” from “climate change.”



Governments around the world have been placing crippling restrictions on the farming industry in order to comply with the World Economic Forum’s “Net Zero” agenda.



However, official data from the Canadian government has revealed that there will be zero change in so-called “emissions” by 2030, even after the globalist attacks on farmers have been implemented.



The Liberal government’s fertilizer emission reduction target will lead to zero net change in emissions by the year 2030.



Environment Canada’s recently published “Greenhouse Gas and Air Pollutant Emissions Projections – 2023” report has raised eyebrows regarding the effectiveness of certain federal government climate policies, particularly in the agricultural sector.



It has been also revealed that despite implementing plans to meet the goals of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government to reduce fertilizer emissions, Ottawa’s projections suggest that there will be no net reduction in emissions by the goal year.



The key focus lies on the “Additional Measures Scenario.”



This encompasses the Liberal government’s ambitious target to slash fertilizer emissions by 30% below 2020 levels by the end of this decade.



It was also revealed the fact that a deeper dive into the data was able to reveal an inconvenient reality for Canada’s ruling Liberals:



The projected emissions for 2030 under this scenario remain stagnant at 48 million metric tons of CO2, the same level historically recorded in 2020.



The reported data has provoked a backlash on social media.



Many are warning that the farming industry is being sabotaged for the green agenda with no benefit for the environment.



Farmers are being told to slash fertilizer emissions by 30% to save the environment.

Someone commented on X:



“Fertilizer reduction = less food, period.



“30% less fertilizer = mass world starvation.



“Plain and simple. Seems like this aligns with the WEF culling of the herd.”



Agrologist and CEO of AgvisorPRO Robert Saik told the House of Commons Environment Committee in October 2022 that a 30% reduction in agricultural emissions, if it were to be achieved, would amount to a reduction of only about 0.0028% of 1% to global greenhouse gases.



“It’s recognized that Canada produces about 1.6% of the global emissions.



“Agriculture is about 10% of Canada’s emissions, and fertilizer is 17% of agriculture’s emissions or 1.75% of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions,” explained Saik.



He continued and highlighted the following:



“So, if we reduced our emissions by 30% in Canada from all fertilizer sources, it would amount to 0.0028%.”

link