Is the UN and Bernie Sanders Climate Agenda credible?

Coming Soon

Hockey Stick

The hockey stick was created in the 1990’s, it was based on tree rings in a aim to proof that it is warmer in the 1990’s then during the roman warm period which preceded the little ice age. The result was a chart showing how the earth will warm as CO2 increase. The projection shown on the hockey stick ended up being completely incorrect.

Media

Every single year the media claims its the warmest year on record. In the past it was a proven fact that the temperature increase as the solar cycle increase and decrease as the solar cycle decrease, but now since the global warming agenda started, the media claims that is no longer the case, contradicting decades worth of climate research.

Polar bears

Multiple documentary shows and Meta (facebook) claimed that the polar bears are dying out due to climate change. However once the hunting of polar bears was ended the population started to increase. It turned out it was humans killing the polar bears and not climate change.

Harbors and Snow

It was claimed that the harbors will be flooded by 2020 and that the continental USA will no longer have any snow. Both claims turned out to be false so much for the UN claims that its settled science.

Winter sea ice coverage

Since 2012 the sea ice cover started to increase, even thou the UN settled science claimed that it will disappear. Was is also interesting is the amount of climate protestors whom get stuck in sea ice, because, well they where told its gone.

Mountain Glaziers

In the late 1990’s and early 2000’s photos of Mountain Glaziers was everywhere as proof that the earth is warming, those disappeared, because multiple mountain glaziers started to recover.

Underground Water and Electricity supply

This idea has been floated years ago but enjoys zero government backing and is never suggested by so called ‘climate activist’. This brings the following questions to mind: is this a money grab or are they actually trying to move to a more environment friendly agenda.

How does Underground Water and Electricity supply work?

answer coming soon

Money

There appears to be a money aspect to the green agenda rather then a actual environmental goal.

Ban farming – allows them to buy up land and once the food run out they farm and control the food supply.

Ban meat – Animal products is the best source for protein, D3 and K2. Animal products also contain what is needed to the human body to absorb vitamins and minerals. If you ban animal products Cattle, sheep and other species will go extinct because farms has no use for them. Eggs and milk is the best source of natural vitamins and minerals for the human body and it contains what the body needs to absorb the nurturance, something i suspect they overlook when producing GMO foods and fake meat, no use it taking your vitamins and you just pee it out. Animal products is produce by multiple people spreading the wealth amounts many, while fake meat will be in the hands of a select few concentrating all the wealth in the hands of a elect few. Nature works on a energy system 1 cattle consume less food then bugs at the same weight. In nature the bigger the beast, the less energy is used on a weight principle. In other words you will need a lot more bug food to produce the same amount of food in weight. Related opinion pieces: How to reduce the rate your organs age Lasting beauty tips How to reduce bone decay #AntiAging

Not taking costly actions like planting more trees, relocating people living on flood plains, Scrubbing the atmosphere from CO2, building dams for hydro electricity and to control flooding, building Underground Water and Electricity supply, supplying homes with solar panels and batteries so that they use less electricity from the grid. None of those but instead they want carbon tax to take money from people, chop down trees to build wind farms, relocate desert wild life so they can build solar panels and sell it to people where as people can use their roof tops to supply themselves.

It all seems like a money grab and governments and the UN is helping them to grab the average persons wealth enslaving them to the elites,

Elite Actions

The elites warns that the ocean will rise and flood the harbors, then they themselves buy property on the coast spending millions, so are they actually concerned about flooding? They want you to stop using vehicles that produces carbon, yet they fly jets to their conferences producing more co2 then the average person produce in a year in just 1 day. They say they want to save nature, but then destroys it to produce ‘green energy’ from which they make money, but we saw this during the pandemic as well, you where locked down while they go to party events.

Trees

Its a well known fact that trees produce less CO2 then what they convert to O2. Yet no massive tree planting operations except in India. Why? well trees cost money and you can not chop them down to make money, they would rather build a solar plant or wind farm and force you to buy electricity from them.

Flood plains

80% of the world population lives on flood plains. In other words at some point in time 80% of the world will experience a flood, because its a flood plain, at some point in the historical past it was created by floods so at some point in the future it will flood.

They keep warning about flooding and droughts caused by CO2, yet they are not building homes out side of flood plains.

Solar

Solar for personal use is very effective, but on a industrially scale on earth not so much. Solar works very well in space, but on earth you have day and night, you have clouds, rain and snow. Solar is not that dependable and takes up a lot of space, yet they keep on pushing it.

Electric Cars

Electric cars is more efficient then combustion vehicles. Less maintenance, more torque, faster. However if everyone has a electric vehicle, you will have to generate more electricity, which means more power plants, and they can not even supply the current needs with their so called ‘green energy’ plants.

Carbon Tax

Carbon tax is just a money grab, its similar to so called sin taxes’ in South Africa where they tax Tabaco and Alcohol. People still drink and smoke, but now they just have less money to spend on the rest of the economy, completely useless and only making the poor even more so.

Censorship

Science is never settled if someone can provide evidence that is contrary to the current believe they have to be able to do so. That is how science work it is a constant debate, in order to refine and to expand current views points. This allows you to get close to the truth and drive technological advancement. However when it comes to climate the UN has approached companies like google to silent other voices in order to push their view point on science. Killing the debate and preventing the expansion of knowledge.

Censorship is not just anti-science it is also anti-free speech.

Climate History

The earth climate has never been stable, its a scientific fact. Just look up the ice core record on earths’ climate over the last 400thousand years. Its always changing. Recorded data also helps us to project future climate trends. They have change the historic data set because we moved from mercury thermostat’s to electronic thermostat’s. Many however is questioning how this was done, as on closer inspection it appears they only removed the high peaks, to make the current time period appear much warmer, and destroyed the original climate history, making forecasting a lot more difficult to do.

CO2 History

Historically warming proceeds CO2 increase in the atmosphere. Not the other way around. The warmer the planet gets, the higher the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere becomes. Historically CO2 levels was much higher and in the 1980’s a section of sciences declared that the earth is in a CO2 drought, limiting plant growth on the planet. In the 1990’s Al Gore made global warming a international political issue and everyone forgot that the earth is in a CO2 drought. However once CO2 reaches 1000 parts per million it will present a serious health risk to humans, thus CO2 should never be allowed to reach 1000 parts per million.

Dams

Dams create a environment for several species, Water birds, plant live and fish. However in same cases dams can also risk the survival of some species, like migrating fish; American paddlefish, Atlantic cod, Atlantic salmon, beluga sturgeon and so on. Selecting the rivers to use as dams, it is critical to take factors like migrating fish and seismic activity in account. Dams can produce hydro electricity, and provide towns and cities with water. Hydro electricity does not produce any gas. Yet there is no push to build more dams, instead they push solar and windfarms. Solar take up space in the deserts, because there is less clouds that blocks out the sun, destroying a already struggling eco system where the animals in that territory needs large areas to roam in order to access enough resources to survive. Solar panels on roof tops is only in areas where humans live and are the not the problematic part we are addressing in this section. Windfarms, kills predictor birds, which has a slow reproduction rate, placing stress on species whom are already fighting extinction. The blades of wind farms are massive and are not bio degradable, so every few years when the blades needs to be replace its berried polluting the natural environment. Yet Hydro electric dams is not a priority?

H2 gas

A recent study has found that there is possibly massive amounts of H2 gas in the earths’ crust. H2 gas when burned produces water. Yet there is no push to locate big H2 gas locations for the purpose of generating electricity. When one looks closer to the ‘green technologies’ most of the west and the UN is pushing, you will find that most of them helps to enrich China, as if the ‘green agenda’ is a lets make China rich project and not a lets save the planet project. Many of the politicians whom push the green agenda also happens to push socialist and/or fascist ideas. Which makes one wonder, if there is so many none CO2 producing or CO2 reducing paths that can be taking, is the whole green agenda, not just a communist plot to destroy western freedom and ultimately impose communism or fascism?

Nuclear power

Nuclear power can be a security risk, as the waste can be used in dirty bombs, it can be bombed by terrorist to create a nuclear meltdown. Another concern is the disposal of the radioactive waste material which can leak into the under ground water supply. But if climate change is really such a big threat to humanity, why not build them underground and store the waste in lead lined underground bunkers at seismic save areas? Once we have managed to decrease the cost of traveling to space, we can remove it from the environment all together. If climate change is a imminent threat to life on this planet you will do everything in your power to stop CO2 production and nuclear power is the most effective and fastest way to reduce CO2 production, but they are not doing that? Is climate change then really such a big threat as they are making it out to be? Or is it just a scare technique for people on the left to gain more votes?

Conclusion

Yes CO2 will become a problem if it raise up to a 1000 parts per million. We are only on 421 parts per million and it took almost a 100yrs to raise with a 100parts per million.

There are several actions that can be taking to slow the increase of CO2, like planting trees and using roof top solar panels to supplement homes and business, which most countries does not support because it gives individual people more freedom when they make their own electricity, instead of them buying it from a central controlled power block which can be taxed.

We will not run out of oil or gas for at least another 100yrs, they found a oil reserve in north America, which is about the size of that of Saudi Arabia, oil and gas was also discovered off the coast of Africa, stretching from Nigeria all the way to Mozambique. If the west does not want African gas, the east will take it, which will result in African alliances, and all their resources to switch from the west to east.

If one look over all these opinions you find 5 different groups: a) A group who is being played into thinking they are helping nature, which they are not since you can not destroy nature in order to save it. The natural environment has survive climate change since the earth was created, human societies, historically has crashed, not nature. b) A group of greedy business people and companies that would do anything to make money. c) Anti-humanist who hates mankind and wants to kill mankind off d) Socialist whom are planning on crashing western society with the goal of implementing socialism across the west. e) Fascists’ who wants to control every aspect of human life. f) Enemies of the west who are planning on conquering the west. This include Islamic groups and China. In my opinion this is the group that is currently winning, all you have to do is to switch on the news, and you would come to the conclusion that Islamic groups and China is currently conquering the west with out even firing a single shot, and they are doing it with wealthy western businessmen and western politicians.