All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
In a previous article I initially published in February 2023 titled ‘1500 scientists say ‘Climate Change Not Due to Co2’ – The real environment movement was hijacked,’ I provided evidences and testimonies from renowned international climate scientists that contradict the UN assertion that climate change is caused by CO2 emissions.
I also referred to the conclusion of 1500 climate scientists and climate professionals at the Climate Intelligence Foundation that the climate changes naturally and slowly in its own cycle, and that solar activity is the dominant factor in climate; and that CO2 emissions or methane from livestock, such as cows, are not the dominant factors in climate change. This is comprehensively detailed in the books Transcending the Climate Change Deception Toward Real Sustainability and in the book Climate CO2 Hoax.
The UN climate change, sustainable development and green economy policies over the past 30 years are little more than worldwide marketing tricks that have tragically brainwashed two generations of young people who do not understand what the UN actually is, and who is it is really designed to serve.
This current globalised system involves the promotion of beliefs and fake science that claim to be unchallengeable truths, but are, in fact, ideologies in which evidence is manipulated, twisted, and distorted to prove the ‘governing idea’, and thus promote its worldwide dissemination. They start with the conclusion they want and then wrench and manipulate what scant evidence they can to fit that conclusion. Man-made climate change due to anthropogenic carbon emission is a major example of this.
Institutions, including the UN, the World Economic Forum (WEF), and the World Health Organisation (WHO), are privately-motivated unelected unaccountable organisations controlled by the source of debt-money creation, i.e., the world private-banking cartel; and are just clever marketing tools and political mechanisms for implementing and maintaining a corrupt worldwide system, under the clever guise of ‘fixing the problems of the world’.
The word “sustainable” was hijacked decades ago, and it is now deceptively used to advance the agendas of globalist mega-corporate interests who couldn’t care less about the environment. The aim is to catapult humanity into the arms of UN Agenda 2030 and other deceptive marketing plans entirely aligned with the objectives of the so-called elites of the WEF Davos group.
In this article I share some of my recent experiences in relation to the seemingly endless madness and delusion in relation to the UN climate / CO2 reduction agenda. CO2 reduction is the main focus of the UN-promoted climate-change-hysteria that has been rampant among the world’s population. Due to incessant UN, government, and corporate-promoted climate change propaganda, many people are, thus, in a media-induced state of confusion, and, thus, blindly assume their pre-determined role in society under this ‘dictatorship of words’ without even being aware of it. We now have millions of so-called climate change fanatics blind to the fact that climate change is not actually caused by carbon emissions, nor methane emissions from cows.
UN Agenda 2030 is not about real environmentalism it is all to scare people into accepting totalitarian authority and limitations to their freedom and personal wellbeing. To paraphrase George Carlin: “political correctness is totalitarianism pretending to be manners”.
The brainwashed climate fanatics are the climate police of social convention – a deluded unpaid self-righteous police force criticising all and sundry who are not keeping their carbon emissions to a minimum. These narcissists want to control the behaviour of others and have no problem with the slaughter of millions of methane-producing cows to ‘stop climate change’ – this not only deluded narcissism – it is insane. What did the gentle cow, traditionally regarded as a holy animal providing sustenance to mankind in the form of milk, do to deserve this mistreatment?
Please note that I have no commercial interest in stating that climate change is not caused by CO2. In truth I am against ‘real’ pollution, and the reality is that the CO2 component is not a pollutant. Note that the UN focus is on CO2, but not on the thousands of real pollutants that corporate industrial globalisation creates.
Bona-fide climate science has been largely circumvented by decades of UN-promoted propaganda, and therefore, much of society seems to have descended into CO2 reduction hysteria, whilst real environmental issues have become sidelined. In a lecture titled The imaginary climate crisis – how can we change the message? available on the Irish Climate Science Forum website[1], Professor Richard L Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences at MIT, summarised the battle against the climate hysteria as follows:
“in the long history of the earth there has been almost no correlation between climate and CO2… the paloeclimate record shows unambiguously that CO2 is not a control knob… the narrative is absurd… it gives governments the power to control the energy sector… for about 33 years, many of us have been battling against the climate hysteria…
Elites are always searching for ways to advertise their virtue and assert their authority. They believe they are entitled to view science as a source of authority rather than a process, and they try to appropriate science, suitably and incorrectly simplified, as the basis for their movement. Movements need goals, and these goals are generally embedded in legislation. The effect of legislation long outlasts the alleged science. As long as scientists are rewarded for doing so they are unlikely to oppose the exploitation of science…
the educated masses are aware of their scientific ignorance and this leaves them very insecure… they need simple narratives it allows them to believe that they actually do understand the science, and as we see today with climate it allows them to become ignorantly proud of their alleged accomplishment… Our task is to show the relevant people the people who make decisions for us, the political people, the overall stupidity of this issue… it is likely that we have to capitalise on the insecurity of the educated elite and make them look silly instead of superior and virtuous.” – Richard L Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences, MIT
Perhaps Professor Lindzen hit the nail on the head when he stated “we have to capitalise on the insecurity of the educated elite and make them look silly instead of superior and virtuous” to save society from descending into further climate madness.
Deluded CO2 (Carbon) Emissions Activists
I can only relate my recent experiences of encountering deranged climate / CO2 activists. Last winter I rented a wood cabin in a remote part of rural Ireland. It was owned by a very nice woman skilled in gardening and growing herbs, yet when I bought wood logs for the wood stove, this climate-conscious soul almost had a heart attack! She would not allow the burning of wood logs in the stove because of, you guessed it, climate change. This is not the first time I have encountered this bizarre condemnation of people burning wood logs. What can be done? These people may mean well, but are brainwashed. Wood is a renewable resource, but God forbid the climate warrior sees anyone burning wood in a stove to keep warm during winter – even in rural locations. Thinking about the CO2 (carbon) emissions this misled environmentalist almost spontaneously combusted into angry ashes.
A few weeks, whilst writing another book, I stayed temporarily in what is known in Ireland as ‘bed and breakfast’ accommodation. It was owned by a woman who turned out to be even more of a deluded soul / ‘CO2 fanatic’. Certainly “waste not want not” is a traditional truism”, however after rabbiting on continually about CO2 emissions and lambasting anyone wasting tiny amounts of electricity by not immediately turning off small devices, the hypocritical loonytune then proceeded to fly to Switzerland on a CO2 emitting plane, and, it turned out, had recently visited Australia. Such self-entitled hypocrisy seemingly occurs amongst some of the ‘climate warriors’ and deluded ‘green’ politicians, as they castigate the people of the world for their CO2 emissions, yet will jump aboard a CO2 emitting plane to fly to the latest climate conference and shriek some more nonsense like Greta Thunberg wannabee’s.
The CO2 fanatic upon returning from Switzerland discovered that I had neglected to turn off an internet router in the property whilst it was not in use. Connection was via ethernet cable with WIFI ‘off’ and it used a very small amount of electricity, yet this discovery caused this distressed soul to shriek at me that I was “an energy squanderer!”. Meanwhile, she heated her house with electricity (no wood stoves allowed) and drove around in an electric car that used a lot of electricity – ignorantly proud that she was ‘saving the planet from climate catastrophy’. What can be done? It should be known that electric cars are actually a “squanderous” or in-efficient use of energy as the conversion of fossils fuels to electricity involves a significant energy loss – the ‘well-to-tank’ energy efficiency has been estimated to be around 37%. If this person was driving a petrol or diesel car it would be a more energy-efficient means of transport. Not to mention the vast amounts of real pollution to land, air and water systems that does occur via the industrial mining and processing of rare earth metals for the production of millions of large batteries for electric cars!
Whilst I felt some compassion for this distressed soul who seemed to be living in a mental cul-de-sac, I realised it was pointless to try to convince this fanatic of her delusion or that she was a victim of corporate and political propaganda. It dawned on me that the poor woman was suffering from ‘climate insanity’ and wouldn’t know the difference between ‘real sustainability’ and the ‘UN brand of political sustainability’ if it hit her on the head with the weight of an electric car battery. The unfortunate reality is that few people have access to bone-fide information on the climate subject, or have the time or capacity for independent mathematical or scientific analysis. Most of the population appear to be just going along with what the government, the United Nations, and TV tells them to do. Here I also include persons working for so-called sustainability organisations and government agencies worldwide that are promoting the bogus narrative that CO2 and methane emissions cause climate change, for example, the Sustainable Energy Association of Ireland.
What can be done? You can’t wake up a person who is pretending to be asleep and you can’t un- brainwash a brainwashed person simply by telling them they are wrong. This is the madness that we are now living through. Perhaps we need a new type of mental asylum – an asylum for the ‘climate deranged’ person with pictures of windmills on the walls to keep the patients calm. Okay – I’m joking of course, but it seems to be getting crazier out there.
Fake Environmentalists in Electric Cars – Suckers for Mega-corporate Advertising
The TV adverts contain smiling, good-looking people racing about in aerodynamic electric cars akin to dashing heroes saving the planet from imminent CO2-induced destruction. However, the people that have purchased these new electric cars with the misguided impression they are ‘saving the world’ have been fooled. They are unfortunate victims of emotive well-designed corporate marketing and deceptive political policies that are not actually environmentally friendly at all. For example, the manufacture of millions of electric car batteries, requires huge mining operations to acquire and refine large quantities of rare earth metals, such as lithium, rhodium and cobalt
Furthermore, these metals have to be mined out of the ground using machinery which is powered by carbon-emitting vehicles powered by diesel or petrol. More importantly, the mining and refining processes can cause significant and extensive pollution to land, air and water systems, for example in rural China and Mongolia[2]. Furthermore, these rare earth metals are a limited resource. Unlike the bogus CO2 / carbon agenda, these are real environmental problems.
Furthermore, electric cars are still driven by electricity produced from fossil fuels and will most likely continue to be. Despite decades of government subsidies wind power provides less than 5% of the world’s energy, and solar just 1 %. The use of electricity to charge vehicles and devices is also an extremely in-efficient use of energy, according to a study by the European Association for Battery Electric Vehicles commissioned by the European Commission (EC):
“The ‘Well-to-Tank’ energy efficiency (from the primary energy source to the electrical plug), taking into account the energy consumed by the production and distribution of the electricity, is estimated at around 37%.“
Given the well-to-tank efficiency and as electricity is mostly produced from fossil fuels, the electric car may actually be guzzling more fossil fuel than a traditional diesel or petrol car! Therefore, those persons buying electric cars in the belief they are saving the planet are unfortunate victims of mega-corporate advertising, corporate-owned media, corporate greenwash, and greenwash politics.
How many are actually concerned about God’s Earth? and how many are actually rabid consumerists addicted to keeping up with the neighbours, and with social norms created by the mega-corporations and political institutions of globalisation?
How many of the electric car brigade think about the environmental damage caused by the mining for rare earth metals used in electric car batteries while they cruise around self-righteously?
During my time working in UN environment, I recall a situation in Mongolia in which the rivers polluted by mining corporations reportedly caused the death and illness of hundreds of people using the water from these rivers. Living in climate change / CO2 ‘la la land’ some of these narcissists even spew verbal abuse at those people who don’t comply with their ideological insanity. What can be done?
Furthermore, some environmentalists appear to have taken the stance that “even if climate change is not caused by CO2 emissions, the UN CO2 reduction agenda is still justified as it would bring an end to the environmentally destructive globalisation paradigm”. However, this is clearly not the case, as the UN CO2 reduction agenda is clearly being used by the UN, governments, and mega-corporations to promote the sale of millions upon millions of electric vehicles with very large batteries, the production of which causes vast amounts of real pollution to land, air and water systems. The UN itself has been a bastion of environmentally destructive globalisation since its very inception – as other commentators have mentioned, now it is simply “globalisation painted green”.
Wind Energy Is a Lot of Hot Air
In relation to wind energy I note the analysis of Professor David MacKay (1967 – 2016) former Regius Professor of Engineering at Cambridge University and former Chief Scientific Advisor to the UK’s Department of Energy and Climate Change, in his book Sustainable Energy without Hot Air[3]. His analysis shows that an area twice the size of the entire country of Wales would need to be completely covered with wind turbines to meet the energy demand in the U.K., based on average energy consumption per person. The following is an important extract from his book:
“… offshore wind farms, which, filling a sea-area twice the size of Wales, would provide another 50 kWh/d per person on average. Such an immense panelling of the countryside and filling of British seas with wind machines (having a capacity five times greater than all the wind turbines in the world today) may be possible according to the laws of physics, but would the public accept and pay for such extreme arrangements? If we answer no, we are forced to conclude that current consumption will never be met by British renewables. “
“Let’s be realistic. What fraction of the country [the UK] can we really imagine covering with windmills? Maybe 10%?.. if we covered the windiest 10% of the country with windmills (delivering 2 W/m2), we would be able to generate 20 kWh/d per person, which is half of the power used by driving an average fossil-fuel car 50 km per day… I should emphasize how generous an assumption I’m making. Let’s compare this estimate of British wind potential with current installed wind power worldwide. The windmills that would be required to provide the UK with 20 kWh/d per person amount to 50 times the entire wind hardware of Denmark; 7 times all the wind farms of Germany; and double the entire fleet of all wind turbines in the world”
“The solar power capacity required to deliver this 50 kWh per day per person in the UK is more than 100 times all the photovoltaics in the whole world… today, electricity from solar farms would be four times as expensive as the market rate… paving 5% of the UK with solar panels seems beyond the bounds of plausibility in so many ways. If we seriously contemplated doing such a thing, it would quite probably be better to put the panels in a two-fold sunnier country and send some of the energy home by power lines.”
Based on Professor MacKay’s analysis, relying only on wind or solar renewable energy for the UK is mathematical madness, problematic and implausible. However, of course, most national politicians are not energy analysts or mathematicians. They naively rely on what their economists and advisors tell them, and clutch to that advice as if it were a childhood teddy bear. This is a mistake because the shocking and bizarre reality is that most economists appear to have no understanding or knowledge of Energy Returned on Energy Invested (EROEI). Most economists and policy makers are deluded by their own pseudo-science of contemporary economics and do not understand that the economy runs on energy and resources – not money! The creation of vast amounts of electronic or paper money from nothing will not the solve the energy problem. It takes vast amounts of actual fossil fuel energy to build a renewable energy production infrastructure.
“These [UN] sustainable development goals, are all driving towards a Green Agenda, capitalism painted Green, at a horrendous cost for mankind and for the resources of the world. But it is sold under the label of creating a more sustainable world… They seem to ignore the enormous fossil fuel use to convert to a green energy-driven economy. ”- Peter Koenig, former Analyst at the World Bank
If You Want to be a Fake Environmentalist in Ireland Join the Green Party
If you want to be a fake environmentalist in Ireland join the Green Party, for green politics there has been almost fully hijacked by the CO2 / carbon emissions and wind energy agenda and its financial sponsors for at least 15 years. Real environmental concerns have been side-lined by the bogus CO2 agenda. I am not so familiar with the policies of Green Parties in other countries, yet the CO2 reduction agenda appears to be a commonality. The funding of the entire world economy is now based on a dangerous net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) strategy. Note that the world’s central bankers are at the root of this decision and are fully funding the worldwide climate change ‘project’. The central bankers are the folks that are behind all this nonsense. The Bank for International Settlements created the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure, which represents the world’s mega-banks and $118 trillion of assets globally (that is 118 thousand billion dollars – a huge chunk of the assets of the entire world). As other commentators have pointed out, green politics is now just globalisation painted green. More about my correspondence with the Green Party another time.
It should be noted that for decades these same mega-banks have rampantly promoted corporate economic globalization and fossil fuel dependency. Whilst, at the same time actively hindering the funding, creation, or government support of, more self-sufficient local communities/regions, and local co-operatives.
Most of the world population thus became reliant on the globalized fossil-fuel dependent system. What about the dastardly financialists behind the CO2 hoax I may hear you say? In my experience few climate CO2 activists today are willing to contemplate the possibility that they are wrong, or that they have been lied to by the government. As the saying goes “it takes two to tango”. There will always be the cheaters and the cheated, the manipulators and the manipulated. One group cannot exist without the other.
Central Bankers Hijacked the Real Environmental Movement in 1992 Creating the Fake Climate Change Agenda
Whistleblower George Hunt served as an official host at a key environmental meeting in Denver, Colorado in 1987, and states that David Rockefeller; Baron Edmund De Rothschild; US Secretary of State Baker; Maurice Strong, a UN official and an employee of the Rockefeller and Rothschild trusts; EPA administrator William Ruccleshaus; UN Secretary General in Geneva MacNeill, along with World Bank and IMF officials were at this meeting. Hunt was surprised to see all these rich elite bankers at the meeting and questioned what they were doing there at an environmental congress.
In a video recording[4], Hunt later provided important evidence from the documents of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3-14 June 1992. This conference was the well-known UN ’92 Earth Summit and was run by UNCED. According to Hunt, via the Earth summit, the UN was setting a net, an agenda, to place the power over the Earth and its peoples into their own hands. Hunt refers to these banking families and their financial and international institutional networks as:
“The same world order that tricked third world countries to borrow funds and rack up enormous debts… and purposely creating war and debt to bring societies into their control. The world order crowd are not a nice group of people…”– George Hunt, Whistleblower speaking about the UN Earth summit of 1992
As a consequence of the UN Earth Summit, the genuine environment movement that actually cared about real pollution to land, air and water, was politically hi-jacked by powerful political and financial interests with a different agenda.
Maurice Strong, a UN official and an employee of the Rockefeller and Rothschild trusts, had convened the first UNCED congress in Stockholm, Sweden, in 1972. Then, 20 years later he was the convenor and secretary general of UNCED. Hunt also provided video evidence from the Fourth UNCED World Congress meeting in 1987 of an international investment banker, stating that:
“I suggest therefore that this be sold not through a democratic process that would take too long and require far too much funds to educate the cannon-fodder, unfortunately, which populates the Earth. We have to take almost an elitist program…”
Thus, the decrees leading to the 1992 UN Earth summit were dictated without debate or opportunity for dissent and would supersede national laws. The decrees were dictated into existence by the banker Edmund de Rothschild, who got these major decrees into the ’92 UN resolutions without debate or challenge.
Hunt asserts that he was denied the opportunity to openly challenge Rothschild’s remarks by the meeting Chairman; and describes that the Rothschild bank of Geneva is the nucleus of the World Conservation bank and the wealthy elite are integrated into the bank via the Rothschilds private offering of shares.
God’s creation
Whatever your opinion on the climate debate, I conclude by mentioning that the ancient scriptures of the world tell us a higher truth – everything we use has been provided to us by the grace of God. Whether we are eating nice food, drinking a pint of beer, building a house, flying in a plane, or even driving an electric car, the resources all came from the resources of the Earth, God’s creation. Therefore, according to scripture, in our capacity as temporary stewards of nature, we should acknowledge, and thank, God the Creator. Respect for God, and love of God being the essence of all original scripture.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Mark Gerard Keenan, is a former scientist at the UK Government Dept. of Energy and Climate Change, and at the United Nations Environment Division. He is author of the following books:
- Moon Landing 2023 – Science or Science-fiction?
- Godless Fake Science
- Transcending the Climate Change Deception Toward Real Sustainability
- CO2 Climate Hoax – How Bankers Hijacked the Real Environment Movement
- No Worries No Virus
- Demonic Economics and the Tricks of the Bankers
Notes
[1] The Irish Climate Science Forum website URL is www.icsf.ie
[2] Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/aug/07/china-rare-earth-village-pollution
[3] The book “Sustainable Energy without Hot Air” by Professor David MacKay, Regius Professor of Engineering at Cambridge University and former Chief Scientific Advisor to the UK’s Department of Energy and Climate Change, is available for free at: https://withouthotair.com/
[4] Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqlFGQQ-lTI
Featured image: Protestors at venue of Glasgow summit on climate change (Source: Indian Punchline)
