The Great Climate Change Swindle I

The Climate of Terror I

The Great Climate Change Swindle I

The Climate of Terror I

Dear Emanuel,

Ever since you argued that those who dare to question the Great Climate Change Swindle ought to be put in jail, I’ve sincerely questioned your sanity. Sadly, you aren’t alone.

Self-confessed Skull and Bones man and all-round dubious character: John Kerry is reported to have said:

“While they refuse to accept the facts behind increasingly obvious damages, which the first minister listed, they lash out at the truth-tellers instead and label indisputable evidence as hysteria…They compound the already difficult challenge of the climate crisis by promising to do more of exactly what created this crisis in the first place. So now humanity is inexorably threatened by humanity itself, by those seducing people into buying into a completely fictitious, alternative reality, where we don’t need to act and we don’t even need to care.”[1]

UNESCO Courier magazine asked more directly: “Should we use criminal law to tackle climate change? The current generation of people alive in the Anthropocene is capable of damaging and degrading the environment in ways that could make humanity go extinct. Postericide is a morally required response to humanity’s changed circumstances in the Anthropocene.”[2]

The common denominator of these statements: “humanity is inexorably threatened by humanity itself” and “The current generation of people alive in the Anthropocene is capable of damaging and degrading the environment in ways that could make humanity go extinct” put all the blame on us, the people, and none on the decision makes, states, agencies such as the EU or UN, entities such as the Trilateral Commission or Bilderberg, key corporations, such as Main Street, Vanguard or Black Rock, or the Satanist and pedophile oligarchs who run the Global Deep State. It is we, the “carbon”, who need to be eradicated, not those who have caused all the problems.

If one wants an argument for why one should introduce a “vaccine” to “reduce the population in a humane way” it can be found in the above statements. It’s difficult however to ascertain whether John Kerry or the UN actually believe the nonsense they spout about “Climate Change.” One must judge them by their actions, not their words. Thus, it’s hard to believe that Obama actually believes in “Climate Change” if he buys a house on the shore, which will presumably be swallowed up by fictitiously rising tides.

You write:

“we have always supported scientific investigation, of course.”

I’m not sure who you mean by “we” (believers in the cult of climate change?) but find it difficult to reconcile this assertion with a desire to put anyone who questions the tenets of the cult into jail. How can there be “scientific debate” in a climate of terror? How can one speak the truth in jail?

“In fact,” you assert “the whole argument for climate change came from scientists who were opposed and oppressed by big money from oil companies. This fact is easily proven.”

I’m not quite sure about how easy it is to actually prove this assertion. Just because one doesn’t investigate a question thoroughly doesn’t necessarily make it true. In fact, the most important point is that, from a scientific and philosophical standpoint, the “Climate Change Hypothesis” is exactly that: a hypothesis, nothing more, which it is next to impossible to prove one way or the other. Basing public policy on a hypothesis is, to say the least, foolhardy, and wishing to destroy the world’s economy, plunge everyone into poverty and radically reduce the population: clinically insane.

What we do know is that “climate scientists” have been regularly tampering with the data.

In September of last year, it was reported:

“A California scientist made a stunning admission, saying he left out the whole truth about climate change to get his article on wildfires published.” 

“Patrick T. Brown, a professor at Johns Hopkins University and doctor of earth and climate sciences, admitted that he stretched and left out important pieces of the truth to make his article more appealing to editors at Nature and Science magazines.” 

‘And the editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain pre-approved narratives—even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society,’ he wrote in The Free Press.”[3] 

One can argue that there are a lot of errors in reporting but, there seems to be a method in the madness.

For example:

“The UN panel on climate change warning that Himalayan glaciers could melt to a fifth of current levels by 2035 is wildly inaccurate, an academic says.”

“J Graham Cogley, a professor at Ontario Trent University, says he believes the UN authors got the date from an earlier report wrong by more than 300 years.”

“He is astonished they ‘misread 2350 as 2035’. The authors deny the claims.

Leading glaciologists say the report has caused confusion and ‘a catalogue of errors in Himalayan glaciology’.”

“The Himalayas hold the planet's largest body of ice outside the polar caps - an estimated 12,000 cubic kilometres of water.”

“They feed many of the world’s great rivers – the Ganges, the Indus, the Brahmaputra – on which hundreds of millions of people depend.”

“Catastrophic rate”

“In its 2007 report, the Nobel Prize-winning Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said: ‘Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate.”

“‘Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometres by the year 2035,’ the report said.”

“It suggested three quarters of a billion people who depend on glacier melt for water supplies in Asia could be affected.”

“But Professor Cogley has found a 1996 document by a leading hydrologist, VM Kotlyakov, that mentions 2350 as the year by which there will be massive and precipitate melting of glaciers.”

“‘The extrapolar glaciation of the Earth will be decaying at rapid, catastrophic rates – its total area will shrink from 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometres by the year 2350,’ Mr Kotlyakov’s report said.”

“Mr Cogley says it is astonishing that none of the 10 authors of the 2007 IPCC

report could spot the error and ‘misread 2350 as 2035’”.

Are these Nobel Prize winners knaves or fools?

If one studies the “Climategate” emails the answer becomes obvious. I would strongly suggest that you study them with considerable care.

You claim: “Later on, totalitarian global finance latched on to the concept of climate change as a way to enforce global dictatorship”. It seems however that the Club of Rome invented the idea to begin with:

“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and in their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which demands the solidarity of all peoples. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap about which we have already warned, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”[4]

Victor Porlier writes: “The media drumbeat for the Green New Deal agenda and the many cries for government to reduce the carbon footprint to save the planet make you wonder where all this is coming from and why.”

“Some commentators fear that this is less a grassroots initiative and more a Power Elite agenda for reducing and eventually eliminating national sovereignty and creating their long-stated goal of a collectivist One World Government.”

“One answer lies largely in the 1968 creation and agenda of the “Club of Rome” some 50 years ago. It was founded during a meeting at David Rockefeller’s private estate in Bellagio, Italy.”

“Club members, including Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, George Soros, Bill Gates, Queen Beatrix of the Netherland,s and Mikhail Gorbachev, believe humanity requires ‘a common motivation, namely a common adversary’ in order to realize their goal of world government. They choose the threat of environmental catastrophe. (Listen to: ‘The Club of Rome, Originators of the Global Warming/Climate Change Scam.’)”

“Ever since, the Club of Rome has been establishing a network of 33 national associations. and their many tentacles of influence have been systematically propagating their catastrophic future vision into the mainstream of global public opinion.”

“They have been doing this through their controlled mass media cartel as well as their philanthropic foundations and corporations to fund research grants to approved ‘scientists’ to advance their hypotheses, including man-made global warming and the dying off of the polar bears, as being ‘settled science.’”

“Today their theories and proposed action plans have entered the educational establishment, think tanks, and activist organizations, the mass media, political action committees, and Capitol Hill.”

“Leading advocates include many public figures and such prominent Beltway representatives as Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) on the Senate Committee on Appropriations and Congressman Paul Tonko (D-NY) the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change.”

“What is veiled from the inattentive majority is the role of elitists, who are leaders in finance, corporations, foundations, think tanks, universities, and mass news and entertainment media, as well as in civil government.”

“Sociologist G. William Domhoff’s book, ‘Who Rules America,’ demonstrates that public policy agenda-setting, ‘begins informally in corporate boardrooms, social clubs, and discussion groups, where problems are identified as ‘issues’ to be solved by new policies. It ends in government, where their policies are enacted and implemented.’”

“The initial impetus for policy change and initial resources for research, planning, and formulation come from corporate and personal wealth channeled into tax-free foundations, universities, policy-oriented think tanks, and non-governmental organizations in the form of endowments, grants, and contracts.”

“Moreover, corporate presidents, directors, top wealth holders, key advisors, and their lawyers also sit on the governing boards of many such institutions to guide and monitor the progress of their plans.”

“Some observers say that what appears to be an organic, grassroots, bottom-up movement is actually a well-oiled, top-down machine. They point out that funding is selectively provided by their philanthropic foundations and charities. One of the many Council on Foundations’ Affinity Groups, namely the Environmental Grantmakers Association, is the funding epicenter of the environmental movement.”

“This has been documented by a report from the Congressional Committee on Environment and Public Works on how a club of billionaires and their foundations control the environmental movement.”

“According to its own website, the Club of Rome is composed of “scientists, economists, businessmen, international high civil servants, heads of state and former heads of state from all five continents who are convinced that the future of humankind is not determined once and for all and that each human being can contribute to the improvement of our societies.”

The Club of Rome is advancing the agenda of Thomas Malthus who argued that population was held within resource limits by two types of checks: 1) positive ones, which raised the death rate, and 2) preventative ones, which lowered the birth rate. The positive checks included hunger, disease and war; the preventative checks, abortion, birth control, prostitution, homosexuality, postponement of marriage, and celibacy.”

“Their vision, as stated in their 1991 publication, ‘The First Global Revolution: A Report to the Club of Rome,’ reads ‘In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.’”[5]

---

[1] https://www.theepochtimes.com/opinion/climate-crisis-proponents-want-to-criminalize-climate-change-doubts-5503123?fbclid=IwAR3qPnX3L425VPnLvMxlGugBBlGUHJRcNoQ4cghnGYwHyzJ652x8lX4oMkU

[2] Ibid

[3] https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2023/09/09/california-scientist-makes-stunning-admission-about-climate-change-n2628194?fbclid=IwAR0UjoP9DM-tu_vditBksc0lzlb3zfQrRV5iXnUPXFbrdAN4xqKBOhEozZY

[4] p.115 The First Global Revolution: A Report to the Club of Rome,

[5] https://altamontenterprise.com/09252019/elitists-have-created-myth-climate-change-eliminate-national-sovereignty