– The Guardian’s disinformation on Geoengineering and Depopulation:
The British newspaper, The Guardian has published two articles this morning where writers Dana Nuccitelli and Madeleine Summerville have attempted to feed readers propaganda regarding geoengineering and global depopulation.
While Nuccitelli starts his article claiming that geoengineering, the practice of manipulating the climate to supposedly mitigate global warming, is being considered as an alternative to lack of consensus to de-industrialize the planet, Summerville suggests that depopulation, a plan to forcibly reduce the number of people who live on Earth, should be part of the agenda to avoid “catastrophic” climate change.
Both writers lie to the readers throughout their articles. Their lies start on the debunked premise that the emissions caused by human activity are responsible for dangerous climate change.
The writers also lie when they claim that geoengineering has never been used and that, it is only being looked into in computer models, when it is of public knowledge that patents for technology used to geoengineer the climate were filed decades ago and that the practice of manipulating the climate has been used since at least the 1960’s.
In regards to depopulation, the boldest lie, which is usually echoed by eugenicists such as Bill Gates, is that reducing the world’s population by as much as 90% would make great strides in saving the world from the threat that, according to Gates, humanity represents to the planet.
When it comes to propaganda pushed by mainstream media, the devil is always in the details. In the case of depopulation, for example, the idea of forcefully reducing the number of births and increasing the number of deaths via health policy is always pegged to issues such as what it is commonly called reproductive health, access to abortions and contraception. Free abortions, free contraception pills and a clear reproductive policy, Summerville says, are key to fight climate change.
Summerville even explains how women are known for believing more in so-called Climate Change science than man, which means that women should be bombarded with more propaganda on this issue to turn them into mindless bots who will simply regurgitate the lies spewed by the media. In her article, Summerville clearly explains how it would be beneficial for the climate change alarmists to take the issue up to the level of “innate caretaking instinct” that women have.
“Nature is almost always characterized as female, after all,” says Summerville. “In Mother Nature vs the Human Race, the actions we take against her are almost always framed as male: raping, pillaging, conquering, plundering. Doesn’t it make sense that women would empathize?”
Summerville’s emphasis on getting women and men fighting each other is one of the most effective tactics being used by the elite. There is, as we speak, as movement to portray men as the cause of all evil. Anywhere from inequality to rape is all men’s fault.
Accusing men of pillaging, raping and plundering the planet while recruiting women to defend it, is a very smart move as the elite seeks to keep us all divided.
Equalling the rape of a woman by a man to the destruction of the planet by men sends a powerful message to people who do not understand the real agenda behind the climate change propaganda.
Later in her article, Summerville goes on to suggest that gender equality could also be exploited to make men and women confront each other on the climate change issue. She adds that, when it comes to climate change, women have much more to lose as if climate change were a gender-based global problem.
Summerville explains that although so-called overpopulation is a complex issue, it is not so difficult to solve. She cites the words of eugenicist David Attenborough, who claims that “wherever women are given political control over their bodies, where they have the vote, education, appropriate medical facilities and when they can read and have rights, birth rates fall.”
Attenborough is right, except that many Western European countries, as well as some in Asia, are now fighting extinction exactly because of early efforts to depopulate the planet.
On the geoengineering issue, the lies are not less significant. Dana Nuccitelli begins the article saying that “funding for geoengineering experiments was ‘mysteriously’ included in a Senate appropriation bill.” Nuccitelli is either ignorant or is lying through the teeth. Money has been provided for this kind of projects for years. As mentioned before, geoengineering is hardly a new thing.
In the article, Nuccitelli plays the fear card by citing the testimony of ‘scientists’ who as usual are raising the alarm about the ‘failure’ of humanity to deal with impending climate catastrophe.
“Climate scientists are so worried that we’re going to fail to prevent the catastrophic consequences, that some are studying how to hack the climate.” This is perhaps the most vociferous admission people will get from the scientific establishment when it comes to accepting that geoengineering is a reality today; or that it has been so for decades.
Nuccitelli continues: “Scientists have proposed various ways that we might use geoengineering to stave off a climate emergency, but one of the most popular involves pumping particles into the atmosphere.” This writer clearly never looks up into the sky, or perhaps no one has ever mentioned chemtrails to him. Aerosol spraying has been in use for decades now, It is not something that is being experimented with in computer models.
Perhaps Nuccitelli’s only positive contribution is his reporting on how the US Senate recently passed a spending bill where it includes funding for the computational study of albedo hacking. That is, in fact, what the out of control scientific elite has been doing for years.
Seeing planes flying high in the sky while spraying dark looking particles which slowly spread across the sky, forming thick veils that cover sunlight and make the planet darker every year, is nothing new to many people.
According to Nuccitelli, many are not only asking for laboratory testing but for open air experiments. They would be happy to know that such experiments have been going on for years and that the conclusion from responsible scientists is that hacking the climate for the purposes of dealing with a so-called climate emergency has proven to be a disastrous idea.
Unintended consequences from open air experiments alone would turn the planet’s climate upside down in such a way that, even the alleged consequences of any global warming, if it existed, would be a walk in the park in comparison with the risks presented by man-made weather and climate manipulation.
Unfortunately, for Nuccitelli, Summerville and the rest of clueless and deceptive mainstream writers, a great number of people are now aware of the propaganda that intends to push depopulation and climate hacking as ‘solutions’ to save us all from a non-existent planetary emergency. Neither depopulation nor climate hacking would be real solutions to contain the supposed consequences of global warming, a term that alarmists no longer use due to their incapacity to use it to swindle people into believing that they are to blame for any future disaster.
The mockingbird media is running out of words to explain how people must surrender their humanity in order to save the planet.
* * *
PayPal: Donate in USD
PayPal: Donate in EUR
PayPal: Donate in GBP