More and more normal people are realising that there's something VERY wrong with the global elite's tale about 'man-made climate change'. But if it's all a huge lie, the question has to be asked: "Why?"
To know the answer to this is to banish any remaining doubt. Actually, it's "answers", because the elite's climate hoax is based not on one agenda, but two.
The first is purely material - it's about power and profit. By screaming "climate crisis", the elite provide themselves with an excuse for rafts of new and higher taxes, vast transfers of wealth from hard-working citizens to their corporate cronies and donors, and with enormous increases in government power.
Claims of over-polluting fossil fuels, rising seas, floods, hurricanes, fires, and world destruction turn into the power to eliminate gas operated stoves, water heaters, fireplaces, lawnmowers, even banning internal combustion cars and putting us all into the extended house arrest of so-called 15 Minute Cities.
The second agenda is even darker. “Climate change” is ultimately not about fossil fuels and EV sales. Instead, it’s a means to an end, a diabolical and sinister objective of control for the benefit of the elite: depopulation.
Books have been written on this maliciousness. Space here doesn’t allow for in-depth exploration; however, the main points are evident and important to consider.
The environmental movement blossomed at the end of World War II, led by activists determined to change our world.
Harrison Brown, a scientist, worked on the Manhattan project. In 1954, he wrote “The Challenge of Man’s Future” stating there were “too many people and we’re going to use up all the resources of the Earth; that we were essentially squandering the future of the Earth because there’s not enough to go around.”
Another was Paul Ehrlich. In writing “The Population Bomb” in 1968, he argued that the human population was too great. His view: “We can no longer afford to treat the symptoms of the cancer of population growth, the cancer itself must be cut. Population control’s the only answer.”
In today’s modern abortion mill, Planned Parenthood, you see Margaret Sanger’s selective, eugenics-driven depopulation plan in action.
Obama appointee John Holdren voiced his population positions. In 1977 Holdren and his colleagues – yes, Paul and Anne Ehrlich – published the book “Ecoscience,” in which Holdren and his co-authors endorse the serious consideration of radical measures to reduce the human population.
To meet their goals of depopulation, they needed a hammer powerful enough to scare the public into action, and this was – climate change.
Ehrlich and Holdren focused on the climate, deciding that utilizing hydrocarbon fuels, which emitted carbon dioxide, was an empirical, dangerous greenhouse-gas environmental threat. It would cause the Earth to become either too cold or too warm. “We can force people to stop using hydrocarbon fuels.” (See it coming?)
They went as far as to say that people who “contribute to social deterioration can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility.”
The “Kissinger Report,” of December 10, 1974, (once classified and known as National Security Study Memorandum 200) promoted global depopulation under the guise of American interest. Kissinger argues what Ehrlich maintained in 1968, that there are too many people, saying, “We’ve got to cap it.”
You don’t hear much of the U.N.’s Agenda 21 as it’s morphed into Agenda 2030. It digs deep into societies with intrusive, global aspirations with smaller “15 minute” towns, outlawing the sale of gas vehicles and taking away gas operated appliances. All for ultimate control?
When your life depends on a power source for travel, work, entertainment, and living, you’re vulnerable to the whims of the person who controls the switch. And if he lives a better, freer life in the comfort of his lofty abode, separated from the serfs of the world, then he’s rewarded for his “protective, progressive thinking” of saving the world from greenhouse gas.
The con game being played out on us all is not about cleaner air, eliminating natural disasters, or protecting society. It’s about control, total and absolute, over every aspect of one’s life, work, and pleasures – even our mere existence on this planet.
Weather changes. Climate is fairly constant and not to be used as a battering ram for social change or political manoeuvring. The Earth has been hotter and cooler, and will continually change in the future, but man’s attempt to control it? Insignificant efforts which will have no impact on the climate whatsoever, but which - unless resisted and defeated - will destroy our civilisation and deliver us to slavery and death.