Climate Change: The New Fear Porn (Consolidated Thread)

[schwartzie]

Top Experts Expose WEF’s Anti-Carbon Agenda as a Hoax: ‘Pure Junk Science’

Frank Bergman
February 21, 2024 - 12:38 pm


Several world-renowned experts have dropped the hammer on the anti-carbon agenda pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the United Nations, warning that the globalist agenda is based on a hoax.



“Decarbonization” is one of the key goals of the WEF’s “Net Zero” agenda.



To reach these targets, members of the general public will need to make significant cuts to their quality of life.



Achieving “Net Zero” by the year 2030 requires bans on air travel, private car ownership, an end to privacy, and the introduction of digital IDs, vaccine passports, 15-minute cities, and “cashless societies” that only facilitate central bank digital currency (CBDC) instead of physical cash.



It will also require most of the farming industry to be eliminated with major restrictions on the food supply enforced that include banning meat and dairy products and replacing them with lab-grown alternatives and insect-based “foods.”



Additionally, the introduction of large global carbon taxes would need to be introduced to cover the cost of the globalist agenda.



Each year from 2023 to 2030, climate change sustainable development goals will cost every person in economies such as the United States $2,026, the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development estimates.



In lower-income economies, the per-person annual cost ranges from $332 to $1,864.



In total, the global price tag comes to about $5.5 trillion per year.



Separately, a report from the left-aligned nonprofit Climate Policy Initiative found that in 2021 and 2022, the world’s taxpayers spent $1.3 trillion each year on climate-related projects.



It also found that the “annual climate finance needed” from 2031 to 2050 is more than $10 trillion each year.



While announcing $6 billion in new investments through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Democrat President Joe Biden said on November 14, 2023:



“Anyone who willfully denies the impact of climate change is condemning the American people to a very dangerous future.


“The impacts we’re seeing are only going to get worse, more frequent, more ferocious, and more costly.”



At its signing in August 2022, Biden said the IRA “invests $369 billion to take the most aggressive action ever—ever, ever, ever—in confronting the climate crisis and strengthening our economic—our energy security.”



A report from Goldman Sachs put the dollar amount much higher, however.



“Critical funding for this next energy revolution is expected to come from the IRA, which will provide an estimated $1.2 trillion of incentives by 2032,” the bank revealed.



The trillions of dollars being poured into new initiatives stem from the goals set by the WEF in the United Nations’ Paris Climate Agreement’s legally binding international treaty.



The WEF/UN goal is to “substantially reduce global greenhouse gas emissions” in the hope of maintaining a temperature of no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.



However, even a dramatic decrease in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, far higher than the “Net Zero” goals, wouldn’t have any effect for hundreds to thousands of years.



Even under the most restrictive circumstances, “Net Zero” would have zero impact, according to leading experts.



In a report on its website, the Royal Society claims that it would take “many thousands of years” to undo carbon dioxide’s alleged contribution to so-called “climate change,” even if “Net Zero” is achieved



“If emissions of CO2 stopped altogether, it would take many thousands of years for atmospheric CO2 to return to ‘pre-industrial’ levels,” the Royal Society states.



The organization describes itself as a “fellowship of many of the world’s most eminent scientists.”



“Surface temperatures would stay elevated for at least a thousand years, implying a long-term commitment to a warmer planet due to past and current emissions,” the report notes.



“The current CO2-induced warming of Earth is therefore essentially irreversible on human timescales.”



A frequently asked questions page on NASA’s website holds the same position.



“If we stopped emitting greenhouse gases today, the rise in global temperatures would begin to flatten within a few years,” NASA states.



“Temperatures would then plateau but remain well-elevated for many, many centuries.”



However, other scientists caution that “decarbonization” won’t make any difference at all because CO2 is not causing “global warming” in the first place.



Leading experts warn that the anti-carbon claims pushed by the WEF and UN are a hoax designed to usher in the globalist agenda.



“CO2 does not cause global warming,” said Edwin Berry, a theoretical physicist and certified consulting meteorologist.



“Global warming causes more CO2.”



He called the WEF’s claims about CO2 “pure junk science.”



Ian Clark, emeritus professor for the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Ottawa, agreed that if all greenhouse gas emissions ceased today, the Earth would continue warming.



However, this warming would continue because it has nothing to do with CO2, he notes.



He said that contrary to popular opinion, temperature doesn’t follow CO2.



Instead, CO2 follows temperature, which, itself, is due to solar activity.



One of Clark’s areas of research is paleoclimatology (the study of climate conditions using indirect records such as tree ring data, ice cores, and other proxy records), and in particular, Arctic paleohydrogeology, which is the study of the Earth’s water throughout history.



“During the ice ages, we had great temperature variations, and this has to do with, not straight-up solar activity, but the amount of solar activity that is hitting the Earth at certain important latitudes, all caused by celestial events,” Clark said.



“The Earth, in our solar system, is moving around and being jostled.



“And we have different orbiting patterns that affect solar input, and that creates ice ages and interglacial periods—which we’re in now.



“And CO2 tracks that,” he notes.



“So we’ll see enormous temperature changes, going from ice ages to interglacials, and CO2 gets very low during ice ages and very high during interglacials.



“And that gives the appearance that CO2 is driving the climate, but it’s actually following.



“It lags by about 800 years.”



Clark said that during ice ages, and particularly the past 10,000 years, scientists have a fairly good idea of the temperature, thanks to proxy records.



He said those records show that the Medieval Warm Period was likely much warmer than today, and agriculture and civilization flourished.



But the Little Ice Age followed that from the 1400s to 1800s.



“And that’s when we had difficulty with agriculture,” Clark said.



“The Thames [river in London, England] froze over.



“We have all sorts of recollections about how cold, and some would say miserable, it was back then.



“But then it started warming up again.



“So, about every 1,000 years or so, we seem to have these fluctuations.



“This is due to solar activity, and that’s where we see the importance of the sun, which is the ultimate source of energy beyond geothermal and nuclear energy. Solar drives climate.”



Another peer-reviewed study, by scientist William Jackson, examined the relationship between CO2 levels and temperature over the past 425 million years.



Jackson is a distinguished research and emeritus professor for the Department of Chemistry at UC–Davis who specializes in understanding the role that molecules such as CO2, nitrogen, and carbon monoxide play in planetary atmospheres.



His paper, published in 2017, found that “changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration did not cause temperature change in the ancient climate.”



Similarly, a group of researchers whose report was published in the world-renowned peer-reviewed Nature Journal found that when looking at carbon isotope compositions at the million-year scale, long-term atmospheric carbon dioxide was unrelated to temperature.



The report even showed an inverse trend, especially after major events such as volcanic eruptions.



They further found that when temperature and atmospheric CO2 reached a certain level, organic carbon burial drastically increased, eventually resulting in a significant decrease in atmospheric CO2 levels.



That activity, Berry said, is nature balancing the levels of CO2—which is an ongoing process.



CO2 flows from the atmosphere into plants through photosynthesis and soil through decomposition, is absorbed by the oceans, and is then released through respiration, evaporation, and fossil fuel combustion.



The entire process is called the carbon cycle.



Moreover, Berry said that once CO2 in the atmosphere increases to a certain level, nature automatically increases the outflow.



“It’s almost like a bathtub, which may have a spout open so that water can flow out of it if it reaches a certain level,” he said.



“A certain setting of the inflow will raise the level to a certain point.



“And as the [water] level goes up, the faster it’ll flow out.



“There’s a balance level for any inflow setting—a balance level where it all stays the same.



“In other words, the outflow equals the inflow.



“And when the outflow reaches the inflow, it’s at its balance level, and it no longer accumulates.”



Berry said the premise that humans are solely responsible for increasing CO2 is problematic.



According to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), since 1750, CO2 concentration has increased from 280 parts per million (ppm) to more than 420 ppm.



The IPCC claims that this increase is caused by humans.



“Current concentrations of atmospheric CO2 and CH4 [methane] far exceed pre-industrial values found in polar ice core records of atmospheric composition dating back 650,000 years,” the IPCC states.



“Multiple lines of evidence confirm that the post-industrial rise in these gases does not stem from natural mechanisms. …



“Emissions of CO2 from fossil fuel use and from the effects of land use change on plant and soil carbon are the sources of increased atmospheric CO2.”



Berry called the IPCC’s statement “totally garbage.”



“I used the IPCC’s own carbon cycle data, which IPCC says is accurate to about 20 percent,” he said.



“The model doesn’t give humans producing 140 ppm.



“It comes out closer to 30 ppm.



“Which essentially means the IPCC is wrong.”



Berry said there’s no scientific basis for the claim that a “certain amount of carbon dioxide in the air causes a certain amount of temperature increase.”



“They say we have to reduce (CO2) to 350 ppm to cool it down to where the temperature was a while ago? There’s no physics to that,” he said.



“That whole claim is totally garbage.



“CO2 doesn’t cause a change in temperature; temperature causes a change in CO2.”



“If we completely cut out emissions, CO2 would stop rising at its current rate,” Clark said.



“But it would probably continue to rise to a certain point, and then it could come down.



“But that would be driven by temperature.”



Clark said that in different parts of the world and at different times of the year, CO2 fluctuates “between 15 and 20 percent,” and that’s driven by the temperature of the seasons.



“If we start having cooler summers and colder winters, those fluctuations would start driving CO2 further down,” he said.



“But overall, climate is going to do whatever the sun dictates.



“We have a fairly good understanding of the different cycles the sun can go through and how they pile up.



“Sometimes, they amplify each other. Sometimes they cancel each other.



“So, we get kind of a chaotic signal, but some come through quite strongly—this 1,000-year cycle seems to be quite strong.



“We had the Roman Warm Period, then the Medieval Warm Period, and now we have the Modern Warm Period; one, two, three.



“And history and the records tell us they only last a couple hundred years, and we’re already a hundred-some-odd years into this one.”



In addition to not affecting temperature, Clark said the attempts to reduce CO2 are dangerous because of the anticipated effect on plants.



“C4 plants, like corn, evolved just 20–30 million years ago,” he said.



“And they evolved in response to the declining CO2 in the atmosphere.



“So, they’re a relative latecomer to our biosphere and reflect the danger of decreasing CO2.”



A majority of plants, such as trees, wheat, and rice, are what’s known as C3 plants, which thrive at higher CO2 levels of 800 to 1500 ppm.



Clark said one of the benefits of increasing CO2 is improved global grain yields and the general greening of the planet.



He concluded that the entire narrative of manmade “global warming” is a hoax.



“Anybody who’s a climate realist recognizes that the money we’re spending on mitigation—where we think that we are turning back the CO2 thermostat or trying to turn back to the thermostat and save the world 1.5 degrees of warming—knows that it’s a fantasy,” Clark said.



“There’s no way we will affect climate with what we’re doing.”



link

[schwartzie]

Canada Backs Bill Gates’ Scheme to Block the Sun

Frank Bergman
February 22, 2024 - 12:59 pm


The Canadian government has announced that the country will be investing millions of dollars in taxpayer money into a scheme championed by Bill Gates that seeks to “fight climate change” by blocking out the Sun.



The government’s Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) released a 5-year plan for tackling so-called “global warming.”



As part of the plan, the ECCC revealed that major investments will be made into technologies that block the Sun’s light and heat from reaching the surface of the Earth.



According to Gates and other globalist scientists promoting the plan, the idea involves “saving the planet” from the alleged threat of “manmade global warming” by cooling the Earth instead.



Gates and his allies, including billionaire George Soros and the World Economic Forum (WEF), believe they can “reverse global warming” by blocking out the Sun.



The idea was outlined in the Canadian government’s “Science Strategy 2024 to 2029” plan released by the ECCC.



The report from the country’s ruling Liberal Party reveals the plan seeks to “Understand the potential for climate engineering and determine the implications of technologies that aim to deliberately alter the climate system, typically to counteract climate warming (e.g., solar radiation modification, marine geoengineering, carbon dioxide removal techniques).”

Environment Canada is also experimenting with cloud whitening, which uses sea salt to brighten the clouds above the ocean to increase electricity and reduce solar absorption.



As Slay News recently reported, these methods have now started being deployed around the world as part of efforts to promote “global cooling.”



Gates’s radical plan was officially launched last week as scientists began pumping chemicals into the sky.



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.



“Our civilization is in danger of collapsing because of the inexorable advance of climate change,” Soros warned while announcing investments in Sun-blocking schemes.



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



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



JOIN THE FIGHT - DONATE TO SLAY NEWS TODAY!

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



Unfortunately for Gates, his 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.”



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 now receiving taxpayer funds and private investments to advance Gates’s ideas for “global cooling.”



Some critics claim that the use of aerosols in our stratosphere could make climate change worse, damage the ozone layer, or pose other unknown health concerns.



The Carnegie Climate Governance Initiative warned that if the process suddenly stopped, it “could cause rapid temperature rise that would be disruptive to human society and be dangerous for many species.”



Other risks include changes to rain patterns, UV levels, animal life cycles, and plant growth.



Others, like Daniel Schrag, director of the Harvard University Center for the Environment, admit that the idea of blocking out the Sun could be a terrible idea — but still insist that it’s needed.



“Doing this sounds like a terrible idea, and it may be a terrible idea — except for the alternative, which is that we’re going to let the Earth roast,” Schrag said last year.

link

[schwartzie]

Corporate Media Calls for Bans on Public Eating Meat to ‘Address Climate Change’: ‘Cows Are the New Coal’

Frank Bergman
February 22, 2024 - 12:39 pm


Corporate media outlets are ramping up their attacks on the food supply by promoting the globalist anti-farming agenda in the name of “addressing climate change.”



Sky News, the UK’s left-wing propaganda sister network of Fox News, has launched “The Daily Climate Show.”



The show pushes green agenda talking points promoted by the World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations (UN), and globalist politicians and unelected bureaucrats around the world.



During a recent broadcast of the show, the host, Anna Jones, and her guests discussed how the war on food could help to tackle “global warming.”



After declaring that “cows are the next coal,” Jones argued that it’s “time we all went vegan to help address climate change.”



The host and her guests then promoted the WEF’s claims that farming causes “climate change” because meat and dairy production produces “emissions.”



WATCH:




rumble.com/v4eywsf-sky-news-wonders-if-we-all-need-to-go-vegan-to-appease-climate-change-culti.html


However, what Jones and her green agenda guests failed to mention is that the WEF, Bill Gates, and the UN couldn’t care less about the environment.



While globalists may claim they want to “save the planet,” shutting down the farming industry is about seizing control of the food supply for money and control, nothing else.



Agriculture is one of the oldest industries in the world.



Because of this, it is spread thinly between multiple small stakeholders, i.e. family-owned farms.



This makes it incredibly difficult for outside interests to take control of it through honest means.


To combat this, WEF elites are attempting to demonize farming through claims of “global warming” so traditional farming can be shut down and replaced.



By banning meat and dairy products, globalists such as the WEF and Bill Gates (America’s largest farmland owner) can fill these large gaps in the food supply with their own manmade products.



In recent years, Gates has been busy promoting his lab-grown “meat” products that allow fake “beef” and “chicken” to be produced in factories with the need for livestock and farms.



The WEF, meanwhile, is pushing the meat and dairy products to be banned to “fight climate change.”



According to the WEF, the solution is to replace meat with insect-based “foods.”



link

[ExquisiteGerbil]

Top Climate Scientist: ‘Global Warming Emergency’ Is a ‘Lie’

Frank Bergman
February 28, 2024 - 12:49 pm


One of the world’s most prominent and highly respected climate scientists has just dropped the hammer on the entire “global warming” fearmongering narrative by warning the public that it is all a “lie.”



Politicians and activists alike have warned of a looming “climate catastrophe” for decades.



“Biden urged to declare climate change a national emergency,” reported NBC last year.



“Climate Changes Threatens Every Facet of U.S. Society, Federal Report Warns,” announced Scientific American.



Cambridge University climate scientist Mike Hulme disagrees.



“Declaring a climate emergency has a chilling effect on politics,” he tells Public.



“It suggests there isn’t time for normal, necessary democratic process.”



Climate activists may dismiss Hulme as a “climate denier,” but he agrees the planet is warming due to human activities and specifically says we should prepare for more heat waves.



Moreover, Hulme’s credentials are undeniably impressive. He is a Professor at the University of Cambridge and founding Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research.



Hulme has advised everyone from the United Nations to the UK Government and earned a personalized certificate from the Nobel Peace Prize committee for his work with the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).



Now, in his new book, Climate Change Isn’t Everything, Hulme strongly denounces “climatism,” which he describes as the “unyielding belief that stopping climate change is the pre-eminent yardstick against which all policies must be measured.”



Hulme isn’t alone, however, and is just the latest in a long line of renowned experts and climate scientists who have recently come forward to expose the “climate crisis” narrative.



As Slay News reported, Dr. Judith Curry, one of the world’s most cited climate scientists, recently blew the whistle on the true motivations behind alarmism about so-called “global warming.”


Curry, who was once celebrated by the corporate media, the United Nations (UN), and other “climate crisis” narrative advocates, has lifted the lid on the green agenda “industry” during a recent interview.



She revealed that her once-celebrated climate alarmist study, which said “global warming” was causing an increase in hurricanes and other extreme weather, was based on false data.



Curry revealed that she fabricated elements of her study to get funding from the United Nations and recognition from academia because the “climate industry” only rewards climate alarmism.



The bombshell admission from Curry also came after Slay News reported that over 1600 scientists from around the world joined forces by signing a declaration stating that claims of a “climate emergency” threatening the Earth are a hoax.



JOIN THE FIGHT - DONATE TO SLAY NEWS TODAY!

The massive group of scientists, which includes two Nobel Prize winners, signed the World Climate Declaration (WCD).



The WCD dismisses the existence of a “climate crisis” and insists that carbon dioxide is beneficial to Earth.



The declaration directly conflicts with the popular alarmist narrative that claims humans are destroying the planet with their carbon output.



Among those to sign the WCD is Dr. John Clauser, a world-renowned, Nobel Prize-winning scientist.



As Slay News recently reported, Clauser sent shockwaves through the “global boiling” alarmism industry by declaring that the “climate crisis” narrative is a hoax.



The co-winner of the 2022 Nobel Physics prize, and one of the world’s leading authorities on quantum mechanics, blasted “climate emergency” claims as a “dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people.”



Clauser, who was also awarded the 2010 Wolf Prize in Physics, the second most prestigious physics award after the Nobel, warns that misguided climate science is a hoax that is being driven by “massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience.”



As Slay News has reported, claims of a “climate crisis” are being promoted around the globe by governments and their media accomplice 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.”



In another recent blow to the globalist agenda, however, a group of leading experts recently went public to warn that the WEF’s claims of a “climate crisis” are based on “pure junk science.”



link

[schwartzie]

NY AG Letitia James Sues World’s Largest Beef Producer for Failing ‘Net Zero’ Pledge

Frank Bergman
February 29, 2024 - 11:57 am


New York’s Democrat Attorney General Letitia James has just filed a lawsuit against JBS USA over claims the company has failed to meet its so-called “Net Zero” pledge.



The get-Trump prosecutor accuses JBS, the world’s largest beef producer, of allegedly contributing to “global greenhouse gas emissions” as “families continue to face the daily impacts of the climate crisis.”



In an announcement, James blasted the agriculture industry and argued that beef production has the largest “greenhouse gas footprint” of any major food commodity.



The NY AG also claimed that animal agriculture accounts for 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions.



According to James, JBS is failing to comply with various “Net Zero” pledges for 2030 and 2040.



Ironically, James argues that it is “not feasible” for JBS to meet the “Net Zero” goals given the scope of its worldwide beef production operations.



“As families continue to face the daily impacts of the climate crisis, they are willing to spend more of their hard-earned money on products from brands that are better for the environment,” James said in a statement.



“When companies falsely advertise their commitment to sustainability, they are misleading consumers and endangering our planet.”



“JBS USA’s greenwashing exploits the pocketbooks of everyday Americans and the promise of a healthy planet for future generations,” she added.



“My office will always ensure that companies do not abuse the environment and the trust of hardworking consumers for profit.”



The lawsuit was applauded by state Democrats and national climate advocacy organizations like Earthjustice, Mighty Earth, Friends of the Earth US, Citizens Campaign for the Environment, and Stand Earth.



“JBS repeatedly claims that it will reach net zero by 2040,” said Peter Lehner, an attorney at Earthjustice.



“This claim was found to be misleading and yet JBS continues to assert it.


“While it is critical for every company to reduce its climate change impact, JBS would need to implement enormous operational changes to achieve this goal.



“However, JBS is doing very little and is not taking anywhere close to the steps that would be required.”



In her announcement and lawsuit, James pointed to several instances in which JBS and its executives made pledges to reduce the company’s impact on the environment.



She also stated the company has acknowledged consumers are becoming more interested in sustainable products.



“JBS takes its commitment to a more sustainable future for agriculture very seriously,” JBS spokesperson Nikki Richardson said statement.



“We disagree with the action taken today by the New York Attorney General’s office.”



“JBS will continue to partner with farmers, ranchers, and our food system partners around the world to help feed a growing population while using fewer resources and reducing agriculture’s environmental impact,” she continued.



“Our belief that American agriculture can help sustainably feed the world is undeterred.”



James’s lawsuit comes as environmental groups and lawmakers worldwide increasingly set their sights on the agriculture industry.



The global food system has come under increasing attacks from globalist green agenda advocates.



The “Net Zero” agenda behind the war on farmers is being pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations (UN), and their unelected bureaucratic allies.



On behalf of the United States, Democrat President Joe Biden’s so-called “climate czar” John Kerry has been leading the charge.



The unelected and unregulated bureaucrat warned last year that “decarbonization” would be impossible without a major crackdown on the agriculture industry to achieve green agenda goals.



“We can’t get to Net Zero, we don’t get this job done unless agriculture is front and center as part of the solution,” Kerry said.



“So all of us understand here the depths of this mission.”



link

[schwartzie]

WEF Pushes Ban on Home-Grown Food to ‘Fight Climate Change’

Frank Bergman
March 1, 2024 - 12:59 pm



The World Economic Forum (WEF) is calling on governments to ban the general public from growing their own food at home by arguing that they are causing “climate change.”



According to so-called “experts” behind a recent WEF study, researchers apparently discovered that the “carbon footprint” of home-grown food is “destroying the planet.”



As a result, the WEF and other globalist climate zealots are now demanding that governments intervene and ban individuals from growing their own food in order to “save the planet” from “global warming.”



The research indicated that resorting to garden-to-table produce causes a far greater carbon footprint than conventional agricultural practices, such as rural farms.



This research, conducted by WEF-funded scientists at the University of Michigan, was published in the journal Nature Cities.



The study looked at different types of urban farms to see how much carbon dioxide (CO2) was produced when growing food.



On average, a serving of food made from traditional farms creates 0.07 kilogram (kg) of CO2, according to the study.



However, the WEF-funded researchers claim that the impact on the environment is almost five times higher at 0.34kg per portion for individual city gardens.



The paper’s first author Jake Hawes said:



“The most significant contributor to carbon emissions on the urban agriculture sites we studied was the infrastructure used to grow the food, from raised beds to garden sheds to pathways, these constructions had a lot of carbon invested in their construction.”



The study recruited 73 urban agriculture sites around the world.



Those farms included some in Europe, the United States, and the United Kingdom.



The researchers say they conducted a comprehensive life cycle assessment on the site’s infrastructure, irrigation, and supplies.


Hawes and his teammates grouped urban agriculture sites into three categories: individual or family gardens, including allotments; collective gardens, such as community gardens; and larger, commercial-orientated urban farms.



The researchers also found other factors that they claimed are “hazardous” when it comes to impacting the alleged “climate crisis.”



Poorly managed compost and other synthetic inputs contribute to “global warming,” they warned.



They further advised that fruit was 8.6 times more “eco-friendly” when grown conventionally compared to in a city.



Vegetables, meanwhile, were 5.8 times better for the environment when left to the professionals, they claim.



Moreover, two-thirds of the “carbon footprint” of allotments is created by the garden itself, as per their data.



Nevertheless, they insist that people should be limited when it comes to keeping plants inside their homes, as well as growing food in their gardens.



Urban gardeners used to have no qualms about greening their indoor spaces.



For one, this reduces city living anxieties and emotional stress.



Also, being able to take care of plants inside their offices and homes could be part of interior design and a slight improvement in air quality.



However, climate alarmists are not going to give city dwellers peace of mind.



According to the WEF researchers, greening indoor spaces can also come at an environmental cost.



They cite “carbon emissions” from the trucks that transport plants, plastic pots, and synthetic fertilizers.



These, they said, are made from petroleum and the harvesting of soil components like peat can “tear up slow-forming habitats.”



Susan Pell, the director of the U.S. Botanic Garden in Washington, D.C., downplayed the narrative.



Pell argues that members of the general public should at least still be able to grow potted plants at home, even if they can’t buy them.



They just need to consider the “environmental harm of indoor gardening,” she claims.



The news comes amid a growing war against the food supply to supposedly fight “global warming.”



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



The agreement also seeks to ban private car ownership and place other restrictions on public freedoms to meet the WEF’s “Net Zero” goals.



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”

Earlier this week, New York’s anti-Trump Democrat Attorney General Letitia James advanced this agenda by filing a lawsuit against the world’s largest beef producer, as Slay News reported.



NY AG James is suing JBS USA over claims the company has failed to meet its so-called “Net Zero” pledge.



The get-Trump prosecutor accuses JBS of allegedly contributing to “global greenhouse gas emissions” as “families continue to face the daily impacts of the climate crisis.”



In an announcement, James blasted the agriculture industry and argued that beef production has the largest “greenhouse gas footprint” of any major food commodity.



James also claimed that animal agriculture accounts for 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions.



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



link

[schwartzie]

‘Net Zero’ Is WEF Plot to Destroy Food Supply

Frank Bergman
March 4, 2024 - 12:59 pm

The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) “Net Zero” agenda is actually a plot to destroy the food supply and eliminate the working class, a new report has warned.



An investigation by the Institute for Community Studies (ICS) found that unelected globalists at the WEF and United Nations (UN) are using “climate change” fears to seize control of the masses.



While establishing the UN as a single-world government to tackle “global warming,” the WEF is seeking to destroy the food supply as we know it and replace traditionally farmed meat and dairy with products for mass public consumption that are controlled by globalists.



In recent years, WEF elites have been attempting to demonize farming through fearmongering about “global warming.”



WEF members, such as Democrat President Joe Biden’s outgoing “climate czar” John Kerry, insist that traditional farming can be shut down and replaced because it fails to comply with “Net Zero” goals.



By banning meat and dairy products, globalists such as the WEF and Bill Gates (America’s largest farmland owner) can fill these large gaps in the food supply with their own manmade products.



In recent years, Gates has been busy promoting his lab-grown “meat” products that allow fake “beef” and “chicken” to be produced in factories without the need for livestock and farms.



The WEF, meanwhile, is pushing the meat and dairy products to be banned to “fight climate change.”



According to the WEF, the solution is to replace meat with insect-based “foods.”



A report from the ICS, titled “Our Journey to Net Zero,” concluded that the WEF is pushing “Net Zero” to “make the poor poorer, and push struggling communities further into deprivation and exclusion.”



The ICS report shows that the transition to Net Zero will cause a rise in unemployment, as carbon-intensive industries are forcibly restructured.



As a result, food will become limited and more expensive.



Meat and dairy products will become a luxury only the wealthy can enjoy while the general public will be forced to consume manmade processed “foods.”


The report warns that the “eco-friendly” changes that the public will be forced to make, such as insulating our homes or switching to electric cars, will be extremely difficult “for low-income households.”



The ICS concludes that the poorest 40 percent of households are at risk of “falling into transition poverty.”



As shocking as this statistic is, the report is no rant.



A team of researchers from ICS, Trinity College Dublin, and the universities of Leeds and York have thoroughly reviewed the policy changes and instruments – subsidies, taxation, and so on – most likely to prove effective in reducing emissions of CO2.



And they have concluded that these Net Zero measures will push down living standards for a lot of people in the United States and other Western nations.



Meanwhile, nations such as Communist China, which get a free pass on green agenda policies, won’t be affected by the “Net Zero” changes and their economies will be free to thrive.



Essentially, the general effect of Net Zero is similar to that of regressive taxation.



Just as a tax that is the same for everyone will most hurt those who earn the least, Net Zero policies mete out more pain to those who are least well-off.



This won’t just affect the very poorest though.



As the ICS warns, even “middle-income households that were not previously experiencing financial precarity” might struggle.



The report also highlights the other depredations brought about by Net Zero.



For instance, the added cost and difficulty of car travel will reduce people’s leisure opportunities.



The report certainly pulls no punches about the downsides of Net Zero.



But it does not challenge the green transition itself.



It instead calls for a “just” transition to ease the socio-economic pain caused – a spoonful of sugar to help the medicine go down.



The report even complains that the disadvantages brought about by Net Zero policies are being exploited “by those who are against the transition to Net Zero.”



Mentioning populist opposition to anti-car schemes like low-emission zones and low-traffic neighborhoods, it says that some activists are “provoking political flashpoints and civic revolts concerning ‘rights and freedoms’.”



To get around such opposition, the report calls for more popular participation in Net Zero policymaking.



The transition, it says, can be “managed more fairly with the voice and participation of the households and communities it affects.”



Yet in the context of a report exposing the terrible privations Net Zero will visit on society, this call for greater participation rings hollow.



It sounds like an attempt to mobilize the poor for their own impoverishment.



In truth, Net Zero will be an immiserating objective, no matter how it’s dressed up.



We are sleepwalking towards economic and social disaster.



It’s high time we woke up.


link

[schwartzie]

Scientists Raise Alarm over Bill Gates-Led Geoengineering Plans to ‘Reverse Global Warming’

Frank Bergman
March 4, 2024 - 12:44 pm


Several geoengineering projects around the world have led to scientists voicing major concerns about the irreversible impacts of drastic weather modification plans that seek to “reverse global warming.”



Several projects are being led by Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates who argues that the so-called “climate crisis” can be avoided by triggering “global cooling.”



For several years, Gates has been advancing several methods of modifying Earth’s atmosphere, many of which involve blocking the Sun’s heat and light from reaching our planet.



In 2021, Gates and several other wealthy globalist elites poured millions into a scheme to spray the stratosphere with chalk to combat “climate change.”



The chalk would be calcium carbonate, the same material that is the component of egg shells, snail shells, seashells, and pearls.



Gates claimed his plan would deflect some of the Sun’s radiation from reaching the Earth’s surface, resulting in “less-warm conditions” here.



The billionaire has already been conducting tests of this over the Swedish town of Kiruna.



He hopes to soon win approval from global governments to begin spraying tens of millions of pounds of chalk into the atmosphere.



During the tests above Sweden, a balloon carried 2 kg of chalk and 600 kg of scientific equipment 12 miles up above the Earth’s surface.



Once it reached its target altitude in the stratosphere, it released the chalk in a plume that stretched out around two miles long.



During this test, scientists tied to Gate’s experiment at Harvard University measured what impact, the plume has on solar radiation attempting to reach the surface.



This data will be used for computer-modeled simulations of much grander planned dispersions.



However, scientists are concerned such experiments could backfire.


The stratosphere is also the home of the ozone layer which protects Earth from harmful radiation.



It is possible the chalk could interfere with the ozone, allowing harmful radiation that could cause cancer and other health concerns, to reach the surface.



The University of Cambridge’s Sir David King, who has served as a chief scientific advisor to the UK Government in the past, told a reporter at The Times that such an endeavor should not be pursued, saying this could be disastrous for weather systems in ways nobody can predict.



Meanwhile, other programs have been launched around the world that seek to advance Gates’s plans to block out sunlight.



As Slay News reported, 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 now receiving taxpayer funds and private investments to advance Gates’s ideas for “global cooling.”



Some critics claim that the use of aerosols in our stratosphere could make climate change worse, damage the ozone layer, or pose other unknown health concerns.



The Carnegie Climate Governance Initiative warned that if the process suddenly stopped, it “could cause rapid temperature rise that would be disruptive to human society and be dangerous for many species.”



Other risks include changes to rain patterns, UV levels, animal life cycles, and plant growth.



Others, like Daniel Schrag, director of the Harvard University Center for the Environment, admit that the idea of blocking out the Sun could be a terrible idea — but still insist that it’s needed.



“Doing this sounds like a terrible idea, and it may be a terrible idea — except for the alternative, which is that we’re going to let the Earth roast,” Schrag said last year.



Meanwhile, István Szapudi, an astronomer at the University of Hawaii Institute for Astronomy, has turned to essentially geoengineering a giant parasol, or what he calls, a “tethered solar shield” to shield the Earth from a portion of the sun’s energy.



“Any sunshield works by blocking a small fraction, circa 1 percent to 2 percent, of sunlight reaching Earth,” Mr. Szapudi told The Epoch Times. “This is an almost undetectable amount by looking at the sun, but it would still cool the atmosphere to pre-industrial temperatures according to climate models.



“Specifically, the tethered sun shield is a solution that is lighter, thus cheaper, by many orders than traditional designs.”



But scientists such as Christopher Essex, emeritus professor of applied mathematics and physics at the University of Western Ontario and former director of its theoretical physics program, said carbon dioxide (CO2) isn’t the driver of Earth’s warmer temperature and that such geoengineering measures are “extraordinarily dangerous.”



“I used to run a climate panel for the World Federation of Scientists,” he said.



“And we had one session where we presented on exactly why geoengineering is extraordinarily dangerous. It’s a crazy idea.”



Ian Clark, emeritus professor for the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Ottawa, echoed Essex.



“Geoengineering the climate is a very scary prospect,” he warns.



“It’s something that should be relegated to the fantasy realm and science fiction.”

link

[schwartzie]

Expert Warns of Secret Plan to ‘Ration’ Meat to ‘Fight Climate Change’

Frank Bergman
March 5, 2024 - 12:59 pm


A leading American green agenda expert has raised the alarm about secret government plans to eliminate meat from the food supply in order to supposedly stop the so-called “climate crisis.”



According to Marc Morano, Democrat President Joe Biden is planning to drive the price of meat up and then ration it.



Morano warns that the goal is to make real meat a luxury that can only be enjoyed by wealthy elites.



Meanwhile, the general public will be fed with lab-grown “meats” and insect-based “foods” instead.



However, these plans are not just limited to meat products.



Morano warns that Biden and his globalist allies are planning to use “global warming” fears and “Net Zero” targets to ration the entire food supply.



“A historian who described the totalitarian regimes as using bureaucracy to enforce “magical beliefs,” Morano told Fox News anchor Sean Hannity during an interview.



“And that’s what we’re witnessing in America today with the climate agenda.”



“The idea is to make meat more expensive, to ration it, to make food more expensive, to ration it.”



Morano explains that the war on farmers is a key part of this agenda.



“They’re coming after nitrogen-based fertilizer — high-yield agriculture,” he notes.



“They’re coming after methane which impacts meat.



“Agriculture has been around for 1000s of years and suddenly, in 2024, they claim the Earth can’t handle it.


“And this is what bureaucracy is doing now: just shutting it down.”



Morano revealed that the Biden admin is using the might of the federal government to shut down anyone who opposes the plans.



“They’re using taxpayer money to go after these companies,” Morano explains.



“They’re suing them.



“And then the companies have to defend themselves.



“When you hear Joe Biden call anyone who disagrees a Neanderthal and he says that we’re fighting climate change.



“What does that even mean?



“All we’ve done is outsourced emissions to China, to India, to Brazil, to the Middle East, to Venezuela, all these other countries.



“We’re not fighting squat — even by their own climate standards.



“Make no mistake:



“The idea is to make meat more expensive to ration it, to make food more expensive, to ration it.



“And this is what bureaucracy is doing now is just shutting it down and we’re miserable for the people.”


The warning from Morano comes after Slay News recently reported on calls from the World Economic Forum (WEF) to ban members of the general public from growing their own food at home.



The unelected globalist WEF is calling on governments to ban people from growing food by arguing that they are causing “climate change.”



According to so-called “experts” behind a recent WEF study, researchers apparently discovered that the “carbon footprint” of home-grown food is “destroying the planet.”



As a result, the WEF and other globalist climate zealots are now demanding that governments intervene and ban individuals from growing their own food in order to “save the planet” from “global warming.”



The research indicated that resorting to garden-to-table produce causes a far greater “carbon footprint” than conventional agricultural practices, such as rural farms.



This research, conducted by WEF-funded scientists at the University of Michigan, was published in the journal Nature Cities.



The news comes amid a growing war against the food supply to supposedly fight “global warming.”



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



The agreement also seeks to ban private car ownership and place other restrictions on public freedoms to meet the WEF’s “Net Zero” goals.



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”

Just last week, New York’s anti-Trump Democrat Attorney General Letitia James advanced this agenda by filing a lawsuit against the world’s largest beef producer, as Slay News reported.



NY AG James is suing JBS USA over claims the company has failed to meet its so-called “Net Zero” pledge.


The get-Trump prosecutor accuses JBS of allegedly contributing to “global greenhouse gas emissions” as “families continue to face the daily impacts of the climate crisis.”

Video at link

[schwartzie]

What an absolute moron! 🙄


John Kerry: Public Would ‘Feel Better’ about Ukraine War If Russia Tried to ‘Reduce Emissions’

Frank Bergman
March 7, 2024 - 12:00pm


Democrat President Joe Biden’s outgoing “climate czar” John Kerry has claimed that people around the world would “feel better” about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine if Moscow would “make a greater effort to reduce emissions.”



During a foreign press briefing on Tuesday in Washington, D.C., Kerry, Biden’s Special Presidential Envoy for Climate (SPEC), made a weak attempt to link the endless foreign war to his globalist green agenda.



The event was the last presser Kerry gave a “climate czar” as he departed from the position Wednesday to reportedly join President Biden’s presidential re-election campaign.



Kerry shockingly claimed that people are against the war Russia doesn’t do enough to fight “climate change.”



However, Kerry failed to explain why he believes the two are linked.



“If Russia wanted to show good faith, they could go out and announce what their reductions are going to be and make a greater effort to reduce emissions now,” Kerry said during the presser.



“Maybe that would open up the door for people to feel better about what Russia is choosing to do at this point in time,” he said.



Kerry’s remarks came after a Russian news agency reporter, Igor Naimushin, asked him about the U.S. relationship with Russia on his climate agenda.



“I believe that Russia has the ability to be able to make enormous changes if it really wanted to,” Kerry said.



FIGHT THE WAR ON FOOD WITH SLAY BEEF!

- Get your GMO, mRNA, WEF, & Bill Gates-free beef HERE -

“I mean, if Russia has the ability to wage a war illegally and invade another country, they ought to be able to find the effort to be responsible on the climate issue.



“And unfortunately, because of the actions that Russia took in an unprovoked, illegal war against another nation, we have not been engaged in discussions with Russia, sadly,” he continued.



“I say “sadly” because it’s a loss for the world not to be able to have Russia acting constructively on this issue.”



The comments were the latest example of Kerry’s warning about the “climate change” implications of war in Ukraine.


Kerry previously came under fire after saying that a key consequence of the ongoing Ukraine war stemming from Russia’s invasion last year is increased global greenhouse gas emissions.



“Lots of parts of the world are exacerbating the problem right now, but when you have bombs going off, and you have damage to septic tanks or to power centers, etcetera, you have an enormous release of greenhouse gas, methane, all of the family of greenhouse gasses and the result is it’s adding to the problem,” Kerry said during a July 2023 interview with MSNBC.



Shortly before Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Kerry told multiple media outlets that he was concerned about emissions from a potential military conflict.



“Equally, importantly, you’re going to lose people’s focus,” Kerry told BBC in February 2022.



“You’re going to lose certainly big country attention because they will be diverted, and I think it could have a damaging impact.



“Hopefully [Russian President Vladimir Putin] would realize that in the northern part of his country, they used to live on 66% of a nation that was over frozen land. Now, it’s thawing.”



“I am concerned in terms of the climate efforts that a war is the last thing you need with respect to a united effort to try to deal with the climate challenge,” Kerry told Reuters in a separate interview that same day.



“Obviously, we hope that we can compartmentalize, but it’s just made that much more difficult without any question.”



In 2021, Biden appointed Kerry to be the U.S. SPEC, a position that he invented for his old friend.



The bureaucratic role had not previously existed and did not require Senate approval.



Kerry has also been operating without regulation in the powerful position, despite blowing vast sums of taxpayer cash and making major decisions on behalf of the American people that could impact lives for generations to come.



In the role, Kerry traveled worldwide on taxpayer-funded private jets, attending high-profile climate summits and diplomatic engagements.



The jet-setting was supposedly part of a push for a global transition from fossil fuels to “green” energy alternatives.


link

[schwartzie]

Bill Gates’ ‘Net Zero’ Plan Pumps Compressed CO2 Underground with Energy of 35 Nuclear Bombs

Frank Bergman
March 10, 2024 - 12:16 pm


A new Bill Gates-funded scheme has emerged that seeks to pump compressed carbon dioxide (CO2) underground with ferocious force in order to meet “Net Zero” targets.



In the UK, the government’s Climate Change Committee (CCC) has approved the plan to “decarbonize” the country’s energy.



The CCC’s plan for “Net Zero” is to shift transport and heating from using fossil fuels to using electricity.



After this shift is complete, the government will then “decarbonize” the electricity grid.



To decarbonize the grid, it is assumed that electricity will be generated using nuclear and renewables.



During periods when nuclear, wind, and solar cannot meet demand, Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) will be deployed to remove CO2 emissions as the electricity must be generated using gas.



CCS is being championed by Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates.



A startup backed and incubated by Gates’ Breakthrough Energy Ventures has engineered a hybrid technology that combines engineering with natural photosynthesis processes to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it underground.



“It’s important to understand that carbon removal is not an excuse to keep emitting, or to slow down our transition to a clean energy economy — we need to keep innovating as fast as we can,” Gates wrote in his firm’s “State of the Transition 2023” report in November.


“But it’s become clear that carbon removal will be a necessary tool to have in our toolkit.”



Carbon Capture and Storage is a new and untested technology that has never been deployed at scale anywhere on Earth.



However, it is clear from the CCC’s report that CCS plays a major role in allegedly “saving the planet” from so-called “climate change.”



The UK government alone envisages significant CCS capacity at 50Mt annually.


Carbon Capture and Storage involves filtering CO2 from the exhaust produced by gas turbines used to generate electricity, and then piping the captured CO2 to plants that compress the gas into a liquid.



It is then injected into underground storage areas.



Compressed CO2 is currently being commercialized as a way to store energy for use in periods when nuclear and renewables are unavailable.



Another Bill Gates-funded company called Energy Dome has developed a working 4MWh system in Sardinia, Italy.



The company says its technology has an energy storage density 10-20 times higher than other compressed air energy storage (CAES) solutions and two-thirds that of liquid air energy storage (LAES).



The CCC’s plan requires vast quantities of CO2 to be compressed and stored underground across the UK.



Given this potential energy could be released at any time should something go wrong, it seems sensible to consider the safety implications of Carbon Capture and Storage.



Energy Dome is currently building a larger 100MWh system.



Its 100MWh store requires about 2,000 tonnes of CO2.



This means the company is expecting to store 0.05MWh of energy per tonne of compressed CO2.



Using this energy density, the CCC’s plan to store 176Mt per year will mean 8.8TWh of potential energy is being trapped beneath the UK annually.



The bomb dropped on Hiroshima exploded with an energy of about 15 kilotons of TNT or 0.0174TWh.



A standard modern nuclear bomb has a yield of around 500 kilotons.



Therefore the energy stored underground is equivalent to roughly 35 nuclear bombs, or the energy released by 16 magnitude seven earthquakes, every year.



Fracking is currently banned in the UK due to the risk of triggering earth tremors.



However, the planned Carbon Capture and Storage facilities pushed by Gates are of an altogether different magnitude.



Fracking can be stopped in an instant if a problem is detected.



However, if there is an issue with 35 nuclear bombs worth of compressed carbon underground, it wouldn’t be possible to simply release this vast amount of trapped energy.



No one knows what the effects may be of creating a whole series of high-pressure areas underground as it has never been done at this scale.



There are other issues too as CO2 is a colorless and odorless gas that is toxic to humans in high concentrations.



In addition to the asphyxiation hazard of CO2 displacing oxygen in the air, the inhalation of elevated concentrations of CO2 can increase the acidity of the blood, triggering adverse effects on the respiratory, cardiovascular, and central nervous systems.



A CO2 concentration of around 5% by volume in the air may cause headaches, dizziness, increased blood pressure, and difficulty breathing within a few minutes.



If concentrations above 17% by volume in the air are inhaled, this could cause loss of purposeful activity, unconsciousness, convulsions, coma, and death within one minute.



The Lake Nyos disaster saw a massive release of carbon dioxide in Cameroon on August 21, 1986.



The 1.6 million ton cloud of magmatic gas was deadly, and a count of the fatalities indicated that 1,746 people, most from villages by the lake, had been asphyxiated by it, along with some 3,000 cattle and innumerable birds, insects, and other animals.



The bodies of the dead showed no signs of trauma or struggle; these people had simply died where they were.



The CCS plan means vast quantities of CO2 are going to be piped around the UK and ultimately injected into the ground.



By 2050 we will be dealing with over 110 times the amount of CO2 released in the volcanic event that took place at Lake Nyos, every single year.



In order to meet the goal of “Net Zero,” the CCC plans to store 176Mt of CO2 by 2050.

link

[Midnight]

Climate Protesters Try Disrupting Polish Philharmonic Orchestra, Crowd Applauds When Conductor Ends Their Stand in One Move

By Connor Cavanaugh, The Western Journal
Mar. 10, 2024 10:30 pm

If radical climate activists know how to do anything, it’s disrupting unrelated events and being extremely annoying.



Luckily for this Polish orchestra, their conductor was smart enough not to allow their on-stage antics.



A beautiful concert was taking place at the National Philharmonic in Warsaw, Poland when two climate extremists rushed onto the stage to disrupt the performance.



The pair of lunatics began irrationally screaming that the “world is burning” and demanded “radical investment in public transport” according to Polish Opera Now.



The two also held a sign on stage that read “Last Generation,” but they didn’t get to display it for long.



The conductor of the orchestra turned around as the pair began to rant, and ripped the sign away from them while the music continued.



They both attempted to hold onto the sign the best they could, but apparently the two young people were no match for an angry elderly gentleman.

This action seemed to take all the wind from the activists’ sails as the audience applauded the conductor for stripping the climate alarmists of their banner.



Both activists were escorted out by security shortly after.



A post was made on the group’s Instagram account where it applauded the ridiculous actions of the two protesters, posting the message of one who screamed at the event.

https://www.instagram.com/p/C4EHiZXOpWq

It also stated that “Both people were identified by the police. They’re prepared for the possible consequences.”



Moments like these continue to prove that these extremist activists have little rapport with the public, only being applauded within their echo chambers.



Perhaps if they were instead focusing on protesting against the government, which has the power to effect change, people would be more sympathetic to their causes.



But alas, if your movement relies on disrupting cultural events and people trying to go about their lives, it’s unlikely the majority of people will give any concern to the cause.



Instead, acts like what occurred at the concert only work to damage the reputation and cause of these individuals. Now, their beliefs are negatively associated with disruption and anger rather than meaningful change.



Of course, their movements have never relied on logic or reason, so it makes sense these groups would engage in acts such as these.



On the positive side, at least there are people like the conductor who aren’t afraid to stand up to these demonstrators who are happy to inconvenience others.

link

[maybetoday]

Here We Go: Scientists Now Want to Dehydrate the Stratosphere to Combat Global Boiling

By Jim Hᴏft
Mar. 14, 2024 10:15 am




Scientists have proposed an audacious novel geoengineering technique: intentionally dehydrating the stratosphere.



A study published in Science Advances involves the ambitious and contentious idea of seeding the upper atmosphere with particles to prevent water vapor from entering in the stratosphere.



Water vapor is important because it’s the most abundant greenhouse gas on Earth. The greenhouse effect occurs when gases in the atmosphere trap heat from the sun, keeping the planet livable. Water vapor is made up of complex molecules that absorb heat radiated from the Earth’s surface and re-radiate it back to the planet.



Water vapor is constantly cycling through the atmosphere, evaporating from the Earth’s surface, condensing into clouds, being blown by the wind, and then falling back to the Earth as rain or snow.



Researchers, led by Shuka Schwarz of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), argue that water vapor in the stratosphere plays a critical role in trapping heat from the Earth’s surface.



Science.org reported:



By targeting rising, moist air and seeding it with cloud-forming particles right before it crosses into the stratosphere, geoengineers could cool the world with an intervention far more delicate than other schemes. Drying the stratosphere might take as little as 2 kilograms of material a week, says Shuka Schwarz, the study’s lead author and a research physicist at the Chemical Sciences Lab of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). “That’s an amount of material that helps open the mind to imagine a whole bunch of possibilities.”



“Intentional stratospheric dehydration,” as it’s called, could only cool the climate moderately, offsetting roughly 1.4% of the warming caused by increased carbon dioxide over the past few hundred years. But for geoengineers who have talked about cooling the planet by loading the stratosphere with thousands of tons of reflective particles, “it’s clearly a new idea,” says Ulrike Lohmann, an atmospheric physicist at ETH Zürich. “This is something that could work.”



The scheme relies on a key fact: Only a few places in the world are hot enough to generate the powerful updrafts needed to lift air into the stratosphere, which begins between 9 and 17 kilometers above the surface, depending on latitude. The most important of these portals is found above the western equatorial Pacific Ocean, in a region roughly the size of Australia.



Along its upward journey, much of the water condenses into clouds and rains out of the air. But in the past decade, NASA used a high altitude, jet-powered drone to study the cold layers just below the stratosphere and found plenty of air masses moist enough to form clouds, but lacking in particles that would allow the moisture to condense into ice crystals and ultimately rain. “It’s a question of chance, whether they get to this coldest spot on their journey and there’s enough cloud nuclei left to do anything,” Schwarz says. The NASA studies also found that this moisture was concentrated: Just 1% of the air parcels explored accounted for half of the water that could end up in the stratosphere.



In a simple model, the team simulated injecting bismuth triiodide, a nontoxic compound that has been used in lab studies of ice nucleation, into the 1% areas most ripe for water harvesting. In an optimistic scenario, just 2 kilograms a week of seeds 10 nanometers in diameter would be enough to convert those moist air parcels into clouds, they found. Such an amount could be sprayed by balloons or drones, with no airplane needed.



The prospect of manipulating the stratosphere in such a manner is not without its critics.



Critics argue that the potential risks associated with stratospheric manipulation could outweigh the moderate climate cooling benefits that Schwarz’s study suggests.



Experts like Daniel Cziczo, an atmospheric chemist at Purdue University, caution against the unforeseen impacts such as the inadvertent formation of cirrus clouds which could exacerbate warming instead of mitigating it.



“You’re basically exploring a technique that could have a warming effect and not a cooling effect,” Cziczo wrote.



Mark Schoeberl, a respected atmospheric scientist, echoes the need for caution and comprehensive analysis before adopting such techniques, noting the importance of understanding the full range of potential impacts and the actual cooling effect that might be achieved.

link

[schwartzie]

WEF Is Dictating Canada’s ‘Climate Change’ Policies, Documents Show

Frank Bergman
March 16, 2024 - 12:24 pm


Newly revealed documents show that the globalist World Economic Forum (WEF) has been dictating Canada’s radical “climate change” policies.



Additionally, the docs show that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s far-left government has been paying the WEF with taxpayer money.



The documents were unsealed in response to an Order Paper Question sent by Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis.



The documents reveal Trudeau’s “Environment and Climate Change” (ECCC) department paid the WEF to produce a report to draft the government’s environmental agenda.



The report included the economic policies for Canada’s ever-increasing carbon tax.



In August 2019, the ECCC department’s then-minister, Catherine McKenna, gave $493,937 of taxpayer dollars to the WEF to produce the report, the docs show.



Specifically, the documents reveal the ECCC gave money “to enable [the WEF] to produce and disseminate a report that will establish the business and economic case for safeguarding nature.”



“This report will be directed at senior decision-makers in governments and businesses who have the influence and ability to shift business-as-usual approach,” the ECCC stated.



Six months later, the WEF provided the Canadian government with updates to the nation’s “climate” policies.


In its report New Nature Economy Report Series, the WEF sourced papers to justify favoring a carbon tax.



Furthermore, the report’s policy recommendation stated “Carbon pricing should also be introduced.”



The report highlighted Colombia’s carbon scheme and pointed out that the taxes yielded revenues.



Colombia’s carbon scheme involves taxing liquid fossil fuels at $5/ton.


“What is required is bold policy ambition and decisive political leadership to signal that business-as-usual is no longer viable,” the report concluded.



Despite being published only in June 2020 – just months after the Covid virus emerged from Wuhan, China — the WEF pressured Canada to begin ushering in its “Great Reset” agenda.



The WEF urged global governments to “use their fiscal recovery programs to reset the economy on more resilient, equitable, and sustainable terms.”



Just months later, in December 2020, Trudeau announced a significant hike in his government’s carbon tax scheme.



The scheme would raise the tax on fuels to $170 a ton by 2030.



The government’s statement “Proposed to strengthen Canada’s approach to reducing methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by establishing new targets and associated regulations for 2030 and 2035, based on international best practices.”



Currently, the carbon tax is at $65 per carbon ton and will increase yet again on April 1 to $80 to comply with the WEF’s demands.



This comes despite the majority of Canadians and Premiers expressing opposition to the tax.



As Slay News has previously reported, PM Trudeau is listed as one of the WEF’s “Young Global Leaders.”



WEF founded and chairman Klaus Schwab openly brags about having “penetrated” governments around the world, including half of Trudeau’s Liberal cabinet.



Adding further evidence to their alignment, The Epoch Times uncovered an undated letter earlier this week.



The letter was sent to the WEF from Canada’s former Finance Minister Bill Morneau.



In it, Morneau praises the WEF and thanks the group for its support.



“I would also like to take this opportunity to express my sincere appreciation to the WEF staff, for the support provided to the Government of Canada,” he wrote.


link

[schwartzie]

Top Scientists Debunk ‘Global Warming’ Hoax: ‘No Increase’

Frank Bergman
March 24, 2024 - 1:54 pm


A group of leading scientists has debunked a popular “global warming” hoax that is regularly peddled to promote the “climate crisis” narrative.



Climate alarmists and their corporate media allies are increasingly attempting to link weather events to so-called “climate change.”



As we’ve seen repeatedly in recent years, heat waves, heavy rain, dry weather, and wind are frequently blamed on the alleged “climate crisis.”



This year’s hurricane season officially starts on June 1.



It has already been predicted by WeatherBELL as the “hurricane season from hell,” with weather patterns similar to those of 2005, 2017, and 2020.



However, a new study just debunked claims that “global warming” has caused an increase in hurricanes.



According to the researchers, “there’s been no increase” in hurricanes at all.



The study, conducted by WeatherBELL’s team of climate scientists and weather experts, found that hurricanes have never increased since records began.



WeatherBELL’s meteorologist and chief forecaster Joe Bastardi warns that climate alarmists will misleadings attempt to blame this year’s hurricanes on “global warming.”


However, Bastardi says the link to “climate change” is a false narrative.



In 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana, killing an estimated 1,833 people and causing approximately $161 billion in damages.



In 2017, Hurricane Harvey hit Texas, Irma hit the Caribbean, and Maria hit the Caribbean and Puerto Rico, resulting in at least 3,364 fatalities and a combined cost of over $294 billion in damages.



In 2020, six major hurricanes landed, resulting in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) dubbing 2020 the “most active season in recorded history.”


Following each season, government officials, committees, and scientists were quick to blame “climate change.”



“There is perhaps no better example of the potential for devastating global warming impacts than the Gulf Coast and Hurricane Katrina,” the then-Democrat-led U.S. House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming stated after Katrina.



“While the contribution of human-caused warming to Hurricane Katrina is difficult to quantify, scientists have unearthed a trend towards larger, more intense storms as oceans around the world warm.”



After Irma, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres called the 2017 season “the most violent on record.”



“Changes to our climate are making extreme weather events more severe and frequent, pushing communities into a vicious cycle of shock and recovery,” he stated.



After the 2020 season, Jim Kossin, an atmospheric research scientist at NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information, blamed “warmer-than-average ocean temperatures” for the hurricane’s “hyperactivity.”



He said an increase in more ferocious hurricanes over the past 40 years was linked to climate change.



Bastardi said he expects to hear similar messaging this year if it pans out like he’s predicting, saying:



“If you hang around people constantly spouting negative stuff and how bad it is, guess what you’re going to believe? …



“It’s a great strategy for pushing this thing—if I wanted to argue the CO2 [carbon dioxide] argument, I’d do exactly what they’re doing.



“But there’s been no increase.



“And the size of the storms is getting smaller.



“That’s the other thing: hurricanes are smaller and more compact.”



Oceanographer and certified consulting meteorologist Bob Cohen concurred.



He said there’s currently a transition from El Niño patterns to La Niña, which is “correlated with higher-than-normal hurricane activity.”



“Right now, the subsurface temperatures are much cooler than during El Niño,” Cohen told The Epoch Times.



“The immediate near-surface temperatures are still warmer, but the subsurface water pool and the warm water pool have dissipated, and so once that pops to the surface, it becomes La Niña.



He said he expects “we’ll hear a lot more alarmist messaging” if 2024 is a busy hurricane season, as predicted.



But, like Bastardi, Cohen said hurricanes aren’t getting bigger or more intense.



He said that as temperatures naturally warm coming out of the Little Ice Age, hurricanes and weather events will get less intense—not exponentially worse.



The Earth endeavors to exist in a state of equilibrium; it tries to equalize the temperature between the equator and the poles, which drives weather, according to Mr. Cohen.



“When you look at the 50,000-foot big picture, the Earth is a heat engine,” he said.



“The tropics remain fairly constant in temperatures, and it’s the poles that have the greatest change.



“The gradient drives the storms. …



“If the poles warm, the temperature gradient decreases, which would mean less of a requirement for more intense storms from Mother Nature. It’s basic physics.”



Bastardi agrees with Choen’s assessment,



“Look at Ida versus Betsy,” Bastardi said.



“Betsy’s hurricane-force winds extended out 150 miles to the west and 250 miles east.



“Ida 50 miles to the west, and 75 miles to the east.



“They’re both category 4. They both had similar pressures.



“Which was the worst storm? The bigger storm. But they don’t tell you that.”



NOAA’s hurricane division shows Hurricane Betsy hitting Florida and Louisiana in 1965 with a central pressure of 946 millibars and a maximum wind speed of 132 miles per hour.



Hurricane Ida hit Louisiana in 2021 with a central pressure of 931 mb and a maximum wind speed of 149 miles per hour.



However, NOAA data doesn’t include the overall size of a hurricane.



“Hurricanes now are like fists of furry rather than giant bulldozers that come in and plow the coast,” Bastardi said.



“But [NOAA] won’t show the entire picture.



“Because if they did, people would say, ‘What the heck!’”



He said the reason hurricanes are more costly now is because of increased infrastructure along the coasts, not because of increased severity.



NOAA’s historical hurricane data dating back to 1851 supports the premise that hurricanes aren’t getting worse.



It adds as a caveat to its data that “because of the sparseness of towns and cities before 1900,” hurricanes may have been missed or their intensity underestimated.



NOAA’s data also shows hurricanes are getting less severe in terms of central pressure.



Even with possible missing data, the NOAA data show an average central pressure decline of 0.00013mb per year between 1851 and 2022 (2023 data isn’t included yet), and max wind had a marginal average increase of 0.00011mph per year for that same period.



Government agencies, such as NOAA, often lead with an alarming statement about increased weather severity, but beyond the headlines, the data show a different story, Cohen said.



For example, in its 2023 State of the Science fact sheet titled “Atlantic Hurricanes and Climate Change,” NOAA asks the questions:



“Has human-caused climate change had any detectable influence on hurricanes and their impacts?” and “What changes do we expect going forward with continued global warming?”



It answers itself by stating that “Several Atlantic hurricane activity metrics show pronounced increases since 1980.”



A few paragraphs later, NOAA states that if the data from the 1900s to the present is considered, “There has been no significant trend in annual numbers of U.S. landfalling tropical storms, hurricanes, or major hurricanes.”



Instead, there’s a “decreasing trend since 1900 in the propagation speed of tropical storms and hurricanes over the continental U.S.”



Cohen said NOAA’s approach is problematic.



Its initial statements are “scary” and then “it discounts these same statements.”



“It’s very confusing because it goes back and forth between blaming climate change and blaming natural variability,” he said.



The reliance on climate modeling instead of observed reality is one of the problems with government reports, Cohen said.

link

[schwartzie]

John Kerry’s Daughter Pushes WEF’s ‘Net Zero’ Agenda: Public Compliance ‘No Longer a Choice’

Frank Bergman
April 1, 2024 - 12:54 pm


The daughter of Democrat President Joe Biden’s former “climate czar” John Kerry has warned that the days of allowing the general public to decide whether or not to comply with the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) “Net Zero” agenda are now over.



Although her jet-setting father left his role as the 1st United States Special Presidential Envoy for Climate last month, Vanessa Kerry still serves as the Special Envoy for Climate Change and Health for the World Health Organization (WHO).



Both Vanessa and John Kerry also serve as key “agenda contributors” at the unelected WEF.



Vanessa Kerry is now warning that globalists must up the ante in order to force the taxpaying public into complying with “Net Zero.”



According to the younger Kerry, complying with green agenda goals to “save the planet” from the “climate crisis” is “no longer a choice.”



As Slay News has previously reported, to comply with the WEF’s “Net Zero” targets, all members of the general public will need to stop eating meat and dairy products, give up air travel and private car ownership, live in “cashless societies,” use digital IDs to partake in society, consume only lab-grown or plant and insect-based “foods,” ration purchases of items such as clothing, pay huge taxes, accept a global government, and many other majors restrictions on freedom.



In a statement on meeting the WEF’s targets, Vanessa Kerry said:



“We can and must make different decisions.



“We must accept that there is no other way forward than to phase out our reliance on fossil fuels.



- Get your all-American beef HERE - Free from GMO, mRNA, WEF, & Bill Gates -

“A study was released just a few days ago, that shows that more than 8 million people a year die from air pollution, more than in the entire Covid pandemic,” she claimed.



“One person dies every four seconds.



“So by the time I finish this sentence, another person will have died, and 61% of those deaths are directly attributable to fossil fuels.”



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


Vanessa Kerry then declared:



“Simply mitigation and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions — is no longer a choice.”



WATCH:

Vanessa Kerry—daughter of jet-setting climate con man, John Kerry—speaking at COP28 in December 2023: “The climate crisis is a health crisis, and it’s killing us… We must accept that there is no other way forward than to phase out our reliance on fossil fuels.”



“A study was… pic.twitter.com/f4F0LGOJ8s



— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) February 29, 2024



While serving in his unelected and unregulated role as Biden’s “climate czar,” John Kerry heavily pushed for taxpayers to fund the WEF’s “Net Zero” agenda.



As Slay News reported, Kerry led the United States in joining twelve other nations from around the world in signing an agreement to crack down on the agriculture industry to fight “global warming.”



International governments agreed to sign the pact pledging to target food production by shutting down farms to reduce “methane emissions.”



The agreement, led by the United States under Kerry, has been signed by several major cattle and food-producing states including Australia, Germany, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Spain.



The nations signed onto a commitment to place farmers under new restrictions to reduce emissions of methane gas.



The Global Methane Hub announced in a press release that agriculture and environmental ministers and ambassadors from 13 countries, including the U.S., have signed the anti-agriculture pledge.



Interestingly, China and Russia are not mentioned at all in these anti-food policies that claim to “save the planet” from “climate change.”



According to the press release issued by these nations:



…the Global Methane Hub collaborated with the Ministries of Agriculture of Chile and Spain to convene the first-ever global ministerial on agricultural practices to reduce methane emissions.



The ministerial brought together high-ranking government members to share global perspectives on methane reduction and low-emission food systems.



The gathering led to a statement in which the nations committed to support efforts to improve the quality and quantity of, and access to, finance for climate change adaptation and mitigation measures in the agriculture and food sectors and to collaborate on efforts aimed at lowering methane emissions in agriculture and food systems.



The thirteen nations that signed the Global Methane Pledge are:



Argentina

Australia

Brazil

Burkina Faso

Chile

Czech Republic

Ecuador

Germany

Panama

Peru

Spain

The United States

Uruguay


The move seeks to drastically cut meat and dairy supply around the world to allegedly “fight the climate crisis.”



The U.S., Australia, Brazil, and Argentina, nations that are signing the pact, are among the world’s largest producers of meat.



As Slay News recently reported, John Kerry has been calling for farmers to stop growing food in order to meet the radical “Net Zero” goals for lowering “emissions.”



Kerry issued a warning about the supposed threat from farmers during a green agenda conference in Washington D.C. last year.



During the Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) AIM for Climate Summit, 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 global elites’ “lives depend” on farmers ceasing their operations.



He insists that stopping farmers from growing food is essential for meeting the globalist goals to lower agriculture “emissions.”



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



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



link

[maybetoday]

New United Nations ‘Youth Adviser’ Blames Climate Change on Capitalism and White Men

By Mike LaChance
Apr. 5, 2024 9:20 pm




The United Nations has selected a new ‘youth adviser’ named Ayisha Siddaqa. She is openly socialist and Marxist and blames climate change on capitalism and white men.



In other words, she is a perfect fit for the UN.



Siddaqa is from Pakistan. Has she ever examined the pollution created by her neighboring nation of India?



The New York Post reports:



UN adviser says the ‘white man has brought life as we know it to the verge of extinction’: ‘Racial harmony is fallacy’



A United Nations youth climate adviser has a history of social media posts that call for the destruction of capitalism, claim “terrorism” is used as a Western smear to justify its imperialism and attack White people for purportedly fueling humanity’s extinction vis-à-vis the climate crisis.



The United Nations’ Secretary-General António Guterres personally selected Pakistani-American Ayisha Siddiqa as one of his advisers to help “accelerat[e] the implementation of his climate action agenda,” a 2023 UN announcement stated. Siddiqa was a Time Woman of the Year in 2023 who has co-founded two youth climate activist organizations…



Siddiqa attributes a simple cause to climate change – White people.



In March 2021, she posted, “[T]he white man has brought life as we know it, to the verge of extinction.”



“The white man sits at the highest level of power in the world, the same way he has killed, looted and abused black and brown people for profit so has he the earth,” she posted in May 2022…



“We’re allowing White people to have too much space,” she said. “[W]hite people have absolutely no prerogative or authority to lead the movement.”



So she is openly racist?

Why are we even funding the UN?



link

[schwartzie]

Bill Gates’ Secret Scheme to Block Sun in American Skies Begins

Frank Bergman
April 8, 2024 - 12:54 pm


Shocking details have emerged to reveal that a Bill Gates-funded scheme is already underway that involves blocking out the Sun in American skies to fight “global warming.”



Alarmingly, the secretive project has already begun but it has been kept hidden from the American people to “avoid a public backlash.



Scientists have started spraying trillions of aerosol particles into the sky from the deck of an aircraft carrier in the San Francisco Bay.



The scheme aims to increase cloud cover to block sunlight from reaching the Earth and supposedly prevent “global warming.”



The vessel is currently out at sea and spraying the sky to create clouds, when the weather permits, according to Scientific American.



“The Coastal Atmospheric Aerosol Research and Engagement, or CAARE, project is using specially built sprayers to shoot trillions of sea salt particles into the sky in an effort to increase the density — and reflective capacity — of marine clouds,” the outlet reports.



“The experiment is taking place, when conditions permit, atop the USS Hornet Sea, Air & Space Museum in Alameda, California, and will run through the end of May, according to a weather modification form the team filed with federal regulators.”



The project is being funded by Microsoft co-founder Gates, who has long advocated for geoengineering to “fight climate change.”



Gates has been funding the technology that transforms the sea salt particles into clouds.


A Silicon Valley engineer, who had previously worked at Xerox and developed a nozzle to spray ink particles for printers, was hired to develop a nozzle to spray sea salt aerosols, according to journalist Peter Sweden.



The engineer has been funded by Gates since 2009, Sweden notes.



He received a $300,000 investment from Gates to work on developing the sea salt cloud project.



The development team completed work on the sprayer last year before the project was launched recently.


The Scientific American report notes that there is little data on the potential negative effects of such geoengineering projects as most of the studies lean toward the alleged “benefits” of blocking the Sun to cool the planet.



Gates argues that “climate change” can be reversed by blocking sunlight light from reaching the Earth’s surface to trigger “global cooling.”



However, the report notes that such experiments “could also harm communities and ecosystems in unexpected ways.”



Shuchi Talati, the executive director of the radical “climate justice” group Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering, admitted that the test had been “kept under wraps.”



Despite the implications of such experiments, the project had no public engagement whatsoever.



As Slay News previously reported, Gates had also collaborated with Harvard University on a separate project to modify the weather in Sweden to fight the alleged “climate crisis.”



However, the experiment in the skies above Sweden, which also sought to block the Sun with aerosols, was canceled after opposition from campaigners and Indigenous groups.



The Scientific American report warns that artificially creating cloud cover “could alter weather patterns in unclear ways and potentially limit the productivity of fisheries and farms.”



Nevertheless, the experiment is already underway, despite the concerns.



Participants in the Bill Gates-funded project in San Francisco have refused to respond to requests for information about the experiment.



According to a report by the New York Times, the secrecy is based on concerns that if the public knew the full scope of what was happening, “critics would try to stop them.”



“History has shown us that when we insert ourselves into modification of nature, there are always very serious unintended consequences,” said Greg Goldsmith, the associate dean for research and development at Chapman University.



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.



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



Additionally, several Gates-funded projects have already started pumping aerosols into the air around the world.



Earlier this year, ships 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 in Australia and Israel.



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.


link

[schwartzie]

Germany Considering WEF’s Driving Ban to Fight ‘Climate Change’

Frank Bergman
April 17, 2024 - 12:54 pm


The German government is considering plans to implement new laws that would ban members of the general public from driving privately owned vehicles during the weekends.



The plan was revealed by Germany’s Transport Minister Volker Wissing who argues that the drastic measures may be necessary in order to meet the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) “Net Zero” targets for “fighting climate change.”



According to Reuters, Wissing is threatening to introduce the ban through the Summer months before gradually expanding it.



The calls come despite the fact that official data shows that “greenhouse emissions” in Germany, Europe’s biggest economy, fell to the lowest level in 70 years in 2023.



Nevertheless, the transport sector has still been consistently failing to meet its “Net Zero” goals.



In order to meet these targets, Germany is considering expanding its so-called “climate protection law” with amendments that the public would be forced to abide by.



As Slay News has reported, the WEF has been pushing for driving bans and for the public to be prohibited from owning private vehicles.



The WEF is calling on global governments to agree to new green agenda goals that will significantly reduce the number of cars that are privately owned by the public.



The unelected globalist organization has been pushing for a staggering 75 percent reduction in the private ownership of cars by 2050.


Alarmingly, the WEF call for reductions in car ownership also includes electric vehicles.



Klaus Schwab’s globalist organization argues that most of the world’s population will be “urban” by 2050 and the public won’t be able to justify the need for a private car or the use of commercial air travel.



In America, several major cities have signed a treaty agreeing to implement bans on private car ownership along with outlawing meat and dairy consumption.



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.



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


In Germany, however, it appears the nation is planning to slowly introduce driving bans in stages, starting with Summer weekends and gradually expanding.



Volker Wissing’s liberal Free Democratic Party (FDP) party wants the law amended because the polluting transport sector will fail to meet the WEF’s “carbon emissions” reduction targets.



However, by banning the general public from driving, Germany as a whole may still be able to reach them.



But the change is opposed by the Green Party, surprisingly.



The Greens are part of the three-way coalition with the pro-business FDP and the Social Democrats (SPD), led by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, a WEF “agenda contributor.”



Negotiations over the law have dragged on since September last year.



In a bid to heap pressure on his coalition partners to amend the law, Wissing said that he would have to enforce a ban on weekend driving to abide by the law unless it was changed before mid-July.



The Greens accused Wissing of stirring up unfounded fears at a time when German enthusiasm for climate-friendly legislation is at a low ebb during the cost of living crisis.



Julia Verlinden, the Green’s parliamentary group leader, said there were other ways to tackle pollution.



Such proposals include introducing a speed limit on the nation’s autobahns, large sections of which are currently completely unrestricted.



However, a speed limit on the highways is controversial and Wissing has ruled it out, as have opposition parties the CDU and right-wing Alternative for Germany.



According to Germany’s “current climate protection law,” the ministry responsible for underperforming sectors must launch an immediate program to put them back on track.



Wissing has not yet done so, however.



His ministry claims reforming the sector is more challenging than other areas of the economy because it affects people’s everyday lives and cannot be changed quickly.



“A corresponding reduction in traffic performance would only be possible through restrictive measures that are difficult to communicate to the population, such as nationwide and indefinite driving bans on Saturdays and Sundays,” he wrote in a letter to coalition parliamentary group leaders.



The letter has triggered a backlash from coalition partners and environmental groups, however.



“It is not responsible for a minister to stir up unfounded fears,” Katharina Droege, the Green Party parliamentary group leader, said on Friday.



Detlef Mueller, the SPD deputy parliamentary group leader, said the gambit would not move the negotiations forward.



“Scaremongering through absurd proposals does not help climate protection in the transport sector at all, on the contrary,” he said.



Clara Thompson, mobility expert at Greenpeace, told the German Press Agency:



“Wissing has wasted two years blocking every climate protection measure in road traffic – now he is coming up with horror scenarios so that he won’t have to do anything in the future either.”



However, Christian Lindner, the FDP party leader and finance minister, supported the threat.



“The climate protection law of the previous government could soon lead to driving bans,” he wrote on social media.



The transport ministry said that parliament should live up to its responsibilities and agree upon the amendment.



A spokesman for the ministry said: “It is a minister’s responsibility to point out the dangers.”



Wissing defended himself on German radio on Friday, saying:



“I told the citizens the truth.



“You can only save such large amounts [of pollution] by giving up cars and trucks.



“Those like Greenpeace and the Greens, who always say that the climate protection law must remain as it is, may now be frightened by the consequences of their policies.”



The climate protection law was introduced when the government was led by former Chancellor Angela Merkel.

link

[schwartzie]

Canada Ushers In WEF’s ‘Global Carbon Tax’ Agenda

Frank Bergman
April 18, 2024 - 12:55 pm


The Canadian government has signed an agreement with the World Economic Forum (WEF) that will see Canada begin paying taxes to the unelected globalist organization to supposedly “fight climate change.”



Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government signed the WEF’s Global Minimum Tax agreement.



The plan is part of the WEF’s New Global Tax Agenda.



Once the agreement has been signed by globalist nations worldwide, governments will be paying billions of dollars a year into the WEF’s Global Carbon Tax program.



The deal involves over 140 countries that have agreed to sign a multilateral international treaty consisting of two pillars.



The first stage is the goal of taxing multinational corporations wherever they do business.



The program is being facilitated by the WEF and its “Young Global Leaders” overseen by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).



The OECD is another globalist international organization that integrates corporate agendas with government policies.



As Slay News has reported, WEF found and chairman, Professor Klaus Schwab, often boats that his so-called “Young Global Leaders” have “penetrated the cabinets” of major governments around the world.



PATRIOTS ARE FIGHTING THE WAR ON FOOD BY STOCKING UP ON REAL ALL-AMERICAN BEEF!

- Get 15% off today with promo code: CLEANCOWS -

PM Trudeau is listed as one of the WEF’s “Young Global Leaders” along with several other world leaders.



Schwab gloats that Trudeau, France’s President Macron, and even Russian President Vladimir Putin are under the WEF’s control.



WATCH:

The “Young Global Leaders” are supposedly trained by the WEF before they are placed in government positions, remaining loyal to the unelected Switzerland-based organization.



In Canada alone, Trudeau, Deputy PM Chrystia Freeland, and the New Democratic Party leader Jagmeet Singh are all known to be “Young Global Leaders.”



According to Schwab, however, “over half” of Trudeau’s cabinet is under the WEF’s control.



Under the WEF’s Global Minimum Tax agreement, multinationals would be subject to a 15% tax rate regardless of the country in which they operate.



The stated goal of this tax is to prevent multinationals from taking advantage of so-called tax havens like Switzerland and Ireland.



The tax haven practice is when a company will have its headquarters in a low-tax nation while making the majority of its profits in countries like the U.S.



Unsurprisingly, Canada is among the first to commit to signing the agreement.



The WEF’s New Global Tax Agenda will be rolled out in stages, first targeting international corporations before eventually expanding into a universal global tax system that is funded by the public.



Pillar One of the scheme involves branding the WEF’s tax as the Digital Services Tax, which Canada will use to target companies utilizing Canadians’ data before expanding it to other areas.



As per Budget 2024, “Canada reaffirms its commitment to Pillar One and will continue to work diligently to finalize a multilateral treaty and bring the new system into effect as soon as a critical mass of countries is willing.



“However, in view of consecutive delays internationally in implementing the multilateral treaty, Canada cannot continue to wait before taking action.”



Pillar Two will involve rolling out the rest of the scheme which establishes a global minimum corporate tax rate.



As per the budget, “Pillar Two of the plan is a global minimum tax regime to ensure that large multinational corporations are subject to a minimum effective tax rate of 15 percent on their profits wherever they do business.



“The federal government is moving ahead with legislation to implement the regime in Canada, following consultations last summer on draft legislative proposals for the new Global Minimum Tax Act.”



The government plans to introduce this legislation in Parliament soon.



On its surface, a global tax on multinational corporations doesn’t sound too concerning.



However, this move is just a stepping stone of the WEF’s far larger agenda that will push the general public into globalization.



The WEF’s goal is to establish a global body dictating domestic tax policy to sovereign nations around the world.



Citizens around the world will be paying a “Global Carbon Tax” to an unelected corporatocracy organization that claims to be “fighting climate change” while serving as a single global government.



Indeed, the WEF has stated as much as part of its broader New Global Tax Agenda.



The organization seeks to have this agenda adopted by countries around the world and has already “penetrated the cabinets” of sovereign nations with operatives who will make it happen.



During a recent panel discussion, WEF members laid out plans for the global corporate tax.



When asked whether this could lead to other international taxes being adopted, WEF members agreed that the end goal is the establishment of a global carbon tax.



WATCH:







During the WEF annual summit in January, 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.

link

[ExquisiteGerbil]

White House Considers Invoking "Unprecedented" Climate Emergency

BY TYLER DURDEN

THURSDAY, APR 18, 2024 - 10:10 PM


How best to grab power when there's no convenient emergency to use as excuse? Invent one!



That's right: if you had 'climate emergency' on your 'list of disasters to prompt mail-in balloting' bingo card, you may soon be able to cross that square off. That's because the Biden administration is reportedly renewing discussions "about potentially declaring a national climate emergency," according to Bloomberg.



Such an "unprecedented" declaration could "unlock federal powers to stifle oil development", among other things, the report says.



Bloomberg reports, according to sources who requested anonymity as a final decision has not been reached, top advisers to President Joe Biden are reconsidering the possibility of declaring the emergency.



This action could lead to restrictions on crude exports, a suspension of offshore drilling, and a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, sources say.



Within the White House, opinions are split on this issue. Some advisers believe that declaring a climate emergency wouldn't grant Biden sufficient new powers to enact significant changes. Others, however, contend that it could energize voters who prioritize climate issues.

“President Biden has treated the climate crisis as an emergency since day one and will continue to build a clean energy future that lowers utility bills, creates good-paying union jobs, makes our economy the envy of the world and prioritizes communities that for too long have been left behind,” said White House spokesperson Angelo Fernandez Hernandez.



Historically, U.S. presidents, including former President Donald Trump, have declared national emergencies for various reasons. A climate emergency declaration would be unprecedented and likely face legal challenges.



The Biden administration considered this in 2022 amidst a deadlock on clean-energy legislation, but shelved the idea after the Inflation Reduction Act passed. Last year, President Biden said he had effectively used his authority for climate action by imposing conservation and clean-energy measures, and this year he halted new natural gas export licenses.



Environmental groups, however, are pushing for more aggressive actions. Emergency declarations could allow the president to halt crude exports, suspend offshore drilling, and restrict oil and gas transportation.



Youth environmental organizations like the Sunrise Movement, Fridays For Future USA, and the Campus Climate Network are planning Earth Day protests to demand that Biden declare a national climate emergency.



Aru Shiney-Ajay, the Sunrise Movement’s executive director, said Biden must "use every tool at his disposal to tackle the climate crisis and prepare our communities to weather the storm" of "another summer of floods, fires, hurricanes and extreme heat".



link

[schwartzie]

Bill Gates Unveils Plan to Fight ‘Climate Change’ by Targeting Food Supply

Frank Bergman
April 22, 2024 - 12:24 pm

Billionaire Bill Gates has unveiled his latest plan to wage war on the food supply as part of an alleged effort to “fight climate change.”



The Microsoft co-founder is specifically setting his sights on meat consumption among the general public.



According to Gates and his globalist “green agenda” allies, beef cattle herds are “destroying the planet” due to their alleged “emissions.”



Gates argues that the only solution to stop the claimed impact of cattle on “global warming” is to either “modify” cows or eliminate them.



In a recent episode of his podcast “Unconfuse Me With Bill Gates,” the host unveiled his plans for using artificial intelligence (AI) to target the food supply.



Gates said he believes that AI would have a clear role to play in fighting “climate change.”



Regarding the food supply, Gates revealed that AI will be able to develop a solution to solve the “problem” of meat consumption.



He revealed plans to use AI to genetically modify cows to produce less methane.



According to Gates and other globalist groups such as the United Nations (UN) and the World Economic Forum (WEF), methane from cows is one of the main contributors to the so-called “climate crisis.”

However, Gates revealed that the long-term plan is to use AI to eliminate cows altogether by developing a way to manufacture “meat without the cow.”



Gates laid out his plans while speaking to Hannah Ritchie, a data scientist and researcher at the University of Oxford, UK.



He expressed his astonishment at the speed of AI advancement.



“I was very stunned how the AIs went from basically not being able to read or write at all, to doing that in a very facile way.”


Ritchie sounded a less optimistic note about the future of food technology after hearing Gates’ plans, however.



She pointed to the difficulties currently faced by globalists in trying to convince the public to change their food-consumption habits by switching to plant-based diets, lab-grown “meats,” and insect-based “foods.”



In one example, a study from Australia showed that 73% of men would rather lose ten years of their lives than give up eating meat.



Manufacturers of plant-based “meats” like Beyond and Impossible continue to suffer drastic setbacks in their aim to replace traditional meat products, as sales continue to fall.



JOIN THE FIGHT - DONATE TO SLAY NEWS TODAY!

The hype behind Gates’s so-called “lab-grown meat” has also largely disappeared amid mounting concerns about the safety of the products.



A recent New York Times opinion piece called it “the revolution that died on its way to dinner.”



A series of unfavorable revelations about the companies producing lab-grown meat, such as Josh Tetrick’s GOOD Meat, also drew attention to false claims about the products’ alleged environmental benefits.



As Slay News reported, studies found that lab-grown meat is 25 times worse for the environment than traditionally farmed beef.



Meanwhile, the threat of product bans in states including Florida, has left lab-grown meat producers and advocates in an unenviable position.



Gates has been one of the key players in the war on food and has been pushing several plans to alter the food supply while pouring millions of dollars into projects to advance his agenda,



He often uses his podcast to unveil these plans while making his pitch for how they will “save the planet.”



In an episode last year, for example, he noted the difficulties of informing people about the true cost of traditional agriculture, especially livestock grazing.



“Of all the climate areas, the one that people are probably least aware of is all the fertilizer and cows, and that’s a challenge,” said Gates, America’s largest private farmland owner.



Despite these difficulties, Gates expressed his hope that his plans will help fight “global warming.”



“Something told me plant-based is going to be the future… and I want to be the person that plants the seed,” he declared.


link

[schwartzie]

Chaos Erupts as Climate Protesters Storm Murkowski Speech, Bodies Sent Flying off Stage

Nick R. Hamilton
April 23, 2024 - 9:28 am


A group of leftist climate protesters stormed the stage during a speech by Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), causing chaos to erupt.



Protesters from climate activist group Climate Defiance disrupted Murkowski’s speech at the Bryce Harlow Foundation gala and awards dinner on Thursday.



Video of the incident has now emerged online and shows several people tumbling off the stage during the scuffle that ensued.



The chaos was captured on video and Climate Defiance posted it on X.



The group was seemingly elated to have shut down the speech.



WATCH:

Murkowski is regarded as a moderate Republican and not the type of lawmaker climate activists would normally target.



She is from the state of Alaska, however, which means she necessarily supports fossil fuel production.



Climate Defiance defines itself as “resisting fossil fuel production” on its X profile.


The climate group also posted a statement about its actions.



“We just shut down a gala honoring U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski,” Climate Defiance said in a social media post.



“Murkowski is a murderer.



“She incinerates us to enrich her cronies.


“As Chevron’s top lobbyist gave her an award, we stepped in and stopped the ceremony.



“Respect us or expect us.”



The Bryce Harlow Foundation gala intended to reward “contributions to business-government relations.”



Murkowski was making remarks after accepting an award in that vein.


Climate Defiance seemed proud of the chaos it created, even though its members ended up dumped unceremoniously off the stage and were not really able to complete the disruption they no doubt intended.



Murkowski didn’t comment about the disruption.



The group called Murkowski an “ecocidal pyromaniac” for her support of the Willow Project.



The project is a massive oil drilling scheme in Alaska that the group has called “cruel and barbaric beyond description.”



According to Fox Digital, the activist group was invited to a private meeting with Democrat President Joe Biden’s senior “clean energy czar” John Podesta in December.



Podesta met with the group despite its disruption of White House events.



Climate Defiance has disrupted the events pf senior White House officials including Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo.



After the meeting with Podesta, the group posted a letter it shared with him on social media.



“Thank you for taking the time to meet with us today,” the group wrote.



“We appreciate your willingness to heed our deeply-held concerns.



“Echoing the voices of millions of Americans, we write to you in the eleventh hour of the greatest threat that humanity has ever faced: planetary and societal collapse due to the continued burning of fossil fuels.”



“We urge you to wield your utmost authority to implement a swift end to any federal support for new fossil fuel infrastructure.



“Both the urgency of this action and the severe consequences of further delay cannot be overstated,” it continued.



“Climate Defiance recognizes your commitment to climate action and commends you on your vital work developing and implementing the Inflation Reduction Act.”



Conveniently, the radical climate group’s demands perfectly align with Biden’s green agenda.



link

[schwartzie]

Top Study: Carbon Emissions CANNOT Cause ‘Global Warming’

Frank Bergman
April 24, 2024 - 12:55 pm


A bombshell new peer-reviewed study has provided conclusive scientific evidence proving that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in Earth’s atmosphere cannot cause “global warming.”



Dr. Jan Kubicki led a group of world-renowned Polish scientists to study the impact of increases in CO2 emissions on the Earth’s global temperatures.



However, not only did they find that higher levels of CO2 made no difference, but they also proved that it simply isn’t possible for increases in carbon dioxide to cause temperatures to rise.



Kubicki and his team recently published three papers which all conclude that Earth’s atmosphere is already “saturated” with carbon dioxide.



This saturation means that, even at greatly increased levels of CO2, the “greenhouse gas” will not cause temperatures to rise.



Kubicki et al. summarize their evidence by noting that as a result of saturation, “emitted CO2 does not directly cause an increase in global temperature.”



Current levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are around 418 parts per million (ppm) but the scientists state that past 400 ppm, “the CO2 concentration can no longer cause any increase in temperature.”



The saturation of CO2 in the atmosphere is the hypothesis that dares not speak its name in mainstream media, politics, and across much of climate science.



The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) “Net Zero” collectivism agenda is doomed without the constant fearmongering of a so-called “climate crisis.”


One of the key propaganda messages behind this “green agenda” is that humans are responsible for the ever-warming climate by burning hydrocarbons and releasing CO2 into the atmosphere.



The saturation hypothesis is complex, but in simple terms, it can be described by the example of loft insulation in a house.



After a certain point, doubling the lagging will have little effect since most of the heat trying to escape through the roof has already been trapped.



Carbon dioxide traps heat only within narrow bands of the infrared spectrum.


Levels of the gas have been up to 20 times higher in the past without any sign of runaway “global warming.”



At current levels, the Polish scientists suggest that there is “currently multiple exceedances of the saturation mass for carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere.”



The latest study is published in the prestigious Elsevier’s Science Direct peer-reviewed journal.



Many other scientists are attracted to the saturation hypothesis because it provides more plausible explanations to fit past changes in the climate.



JOIN THE FIGHT - DONATE TO SLAY NEWS TODAY!

Last year, three scientists led by Atmospheric Professor Yi Huang of McGill University stated that:



“Transmission in the CO2 band center is unchanged by increased CO2 as the absorption is already saturated.”



Despite over 50 years of trying, climate modelers and scientists in the anthropogenic camp are no nearer putting a temperature rise on a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere.



Estimates from 0.5°C up to around 6°C, with some outliers as high as 10°C, are little more than guesses, yet they form the “scientific” bedrock for promoting global fear of human-caused climate change.



The figures are too wild and imprecise to make any reasonable scientific predictions, yet the claim is constantly repeated that the science is “settled,” the “consensus” proof is in and it is all beyond debate.



The Polish scientists quote the author of Idso 1998 that “currently used models do not yet provide a suitable basis for the development of rational policies related to potential climate changes.”



Science outlet No Tricks Zone notes that the Polish authors are concerned about the recent push to rely on modeling and assumptions about CO2’s capacity to drive changes in global temperatures rather than observational evidence.



“This unequivocally suggests that the officially presented impact of anthropogenic CO2 increase on Earth’s climate is merely a hypothesis rather than a substantiated fact.”



The online science site also reports on other recent scientific work that backs up the saturation hypothesis.



In Chen et al. 2023 it was reported that CO2 had severely reduced warming effect past pre-industrial concentrations.



It was also noted that water vapor and cloud influences overlap, thus dominating absorption in the CO2 infrared band.



In 2022, German Physics Professor Dieter Schildknecht set the saturation level of CO2 at just 300 ppm and concluded that beyond this, further increases cannot affect the Earth’s climate.



At this low level, absorption is said to reach levels close to 100%, so further human-caused CO2 emissions cannot lead to appreciable stronger absorption of radiation.



Emeritus Professor William Happer of Princeton is another leading proponent of the saturation hypothesis.



Happer was recently featured in Martin Durkin’s Climate: The Movie.



In the film, he responds to the current “science” enforcing the WEF’s “Net Zero” agenda.



He said he could live with the descriptive suggestion “hoax,” although he preferred the word “scam.”



Several other world-renowned scientists have also blasted the globalist “climate crisis” narrative as a “scam” and a “hoax.”



As Slay News reported, 2022 Nobel physics laureate Dr. John Clauser blasted the climate narrative in no uncertain terms:



“I assert there is no connection whatsoever between climate change and CO2 – it’s all a crock of crap, in my opinion.”



Clauser, a modern science giant, has also signed a declaration asserting as much, as Slay News reported.



He joined over 1600 scientists from around the world, including another Nobel Prize winner, by signing a declaration stating that claims of a “climate emergency” threatening the Earth are a hoax.



The massive group of scientists signed the World Climate Declaration (WCD).



The WCD dismisses the existence of a “climate crisis” and insists that carbon dioxide is beneficial to Earth.



The WCD was created by the Global Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL) and was first published in early August, as Slay News reported at the time.



Since it was published, hundreds of scientists have signed the WCD.



“There is no climate emergency,” the WCD declares.



“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific.



“Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.”



The coalition points out that Earth’s climate has varied as long as it has existed.



They stress that there is “no statistical evidence” to support these claims.



“There is no climate emergency,” the scientists assert.



“Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm.



“We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic Net Zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050.”



During a separate speech, Clauser warned the public that the “climate crisis” narrative being pushed by the global elite and their allies in the corporate media is a hoax.



Clauser, who was also awarded the 2010 Wolf Prize in Physics, the second most prestigious physics award after the Nobel, warns that fearmongering climate science is nothing more than “massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience.”



“The popular narrative about climate change reflects a dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people,” Clauser said in a May 5, 2023 statement.



“Misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience.



“In turn, the pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated ills.



“It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies, and environmentalists.



“In my opinion, there is no real climate crisis.”

 link

[schwartzie]

Of course, these scumbags are so egotistical they believe they should be among the ones who are left alive. I sure wouldn't want to be any of them on Judgment Day!

Climate Scientist Calls for Mass Depopulation to Fight ‘Global Warming’

Frank Bergman

May 14, 2024 - 12:54 pm

A top government climate scientist has called for a major “culling of the human population” in order to fight “global warming.”

Professor Bill McGuire argues that a “pandemic with a very high fatality rate” is required to wipe out a large portion of the human race.

According to McGuire, a mass depopulation event is “the only realistic way” to “avoid a catastrophic climate breakdown.”

McGuire, a Professor of Geophysical & Climate Hazards at University College London (UCL), said the quiet part out loud in a post on X on Sunday.

“If I am brutally honest, the only realistic way I see emissions falling as fast as they need to, to avoid catastrophic #climate breakdown, is the culling of the human population by a pandemic with a very high fatality rate,” he wrote.

A backlash to the comments quickly ensued as social media users blasted the professor over the comments.

McGuire responded to the blowback by deleting the post.

In a follow-up post, McGuire claimed that people were deliberately taking his words out of context.

He then responded to angry comments by gaslighting people about what he said.

McGuire tried to claim he was talking about the economy and not death, despite specifically calling for “the culling of the human population by a pandemic with a very high fatality rate.”

McGuire clearly hoped he could convince people not to believe their lying eyes, but the Internet is forever and screenshots of his post quickly went viral.

Alarmingly, McGuire was a member of a British government body that advised politicians on the COVID-19 response.

He also co-authored a report for the globalist United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

As Slay News has reported, the IPCC dictates climate policy to governments worldwide.

McGuire is also not the first radical globalist to suggest wiping out the human population to “save the planet” from “climate change,” however.

Members of the unelected World Economic Forum (WEF) have long been pushing this anti-human agenda, as Slay News reported.

The Switzerland-based globalist organization recently revealed details of a so-called “Noah’s Ark” that will supposedly “save the elite” during an event that would wipe out most humans on Earth.

The WEF has assured global “elites” that they will be saved from depopulation while “the rest” are left “to drown.”

Details of the stomach-churning plan were revealed by senior WEF official Yuval Noah Harari, a senior advisor to the group and its founder Klaus Schwab.

According to Harari, most of humanity will become “useless” and a “burden” for the handful of elites who control the “new” AI-driven world.

Speaking during a recent WEF panel, Harari laid out the plans for a mass depopulation event, assuring globalist “elites” that they would be spared.

If bad comes to worse,” Harari explains.

“When the ‘Flood’ comes, the scientists will build a ‘Noah’s ark’ for the elite – leaving the rest to drown.”

Harari acknowledged that the plan “doesn’t benefit the vast majority of civilization.”

More recently, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink also argued that countries that depopulate will be “big winners” in the New World Order.

Fink, who also serves on the board of directors at the WEF and is listed as one of the organization’s “agenda contributors,” made the comments during the WEF’s annual summit in Saudi Arabia earlier this month.

He declared that nations with “shrinking populations” are the “big winners” because globalists are pushing to “substitute humans with machines.”

“The social problems that one will have when substituting humans for machines is going to be far easier in those countries that have declining populations,” he concluded.

WATCH:

rumble.com/v4v3si9-aaron-rodgers-epsteins-death-psychedelics-fake-vax-cards-in-the-nfl-and-pat.html

In 2017, a celebrated member of the WEF 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 considered an architect of the WEF’s agenda with his theories on population numbers being central to the organization’s anti-human agenda.

He 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.

He then warned that “we have to get back down” to just one billion people on earth.

However, a one billion global population is still too many humans for some globalists.

Another WEF member upped the ante by calling for more than a 90 percent reduction in humans, as Slay News reported.

English primatologist and anthropologist Jane Goodall, who the WEF lists as one of its “agenda contributors,” pushed the shocking suggestion for meeting the globalist organization’s “Net Zero” targets.

Goodall told her fellow globalists that they could “save the planet” from “global warming” if the Earth’s population was over 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.

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.

“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.”

As of May 2024, Earth’s human population is estimated to be 8.1 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,” 94.6% of humanity would need to go.

link