Excellent analysis. But it overlooks one important factor: people are getting fatter. Fat is a thing. It's trendy. Fat chicks on magazine covers. Criticism is forbidden. All that added weight and the law of conservation of angular momentum means the speed of the earth around the sun is slowing. We see this in the addition of leap seconds most years. The slower velocity causes the earth to drift closer to the sun, increasing the flux density of solar radiation, raising the temperature. My theory is as good as theirs, and my model agrees more closely with observed temperatures than theirs do. I would get it published in Science or Nature but observations of fat people are censored.
Sep 6, 2022·edited Sep 6, 2022Liked by John Carter
A brilliant piece of writing, as usual. One of the problems I have with you is that it's often quite difficult to pick out a favorite line to quote, and this one is filled with humdingers. But for whatever reason, I think this hit me hardest:
"They want us to freeze in the dark, and starve to death while doing it."
This, man.
It feels like this is the enemy's purest version of its own Final Solution, buried in the darkest corner of its mind. Beneath the Grand Guignol horrors of mass biomedical experiments and witch hunts; beneath the perpetual gaslighting and transhumanist freakshow exhibits; beneath even the sexual sale and mutilation of children. It's almost as if I can hear those two thoughts churning away: "Starve them. Freeze them. "
And thanks so much for your recommendation, John. Coming from you, it's one hell of a compliment (pun intended?).
Keep at it, bro, I want to read the rest of your series.
What's happening in Europe now really brings it all into focus. They're staring disaster in the face and laughing like demented children. Avoiding it is the easiest thing and the world, yet they refuse to pull back. Hard to understand it as anything but the workings of a death cult.
It's like the 1930s when "peace in our time" was just around the corner. Maybe their persistent miserable weather degrades their thinking. Global dementia.
Guilt has long been am easily manipulated emotion, organized religion has known how to use guilt for thousands of years to gain compliance and servitude. This is why Climate lies work so well, especially against the richer nations of the world where guilt is inculcated on a daily basis.
Guilt & Shame are the ultimate strings with which to control the human puppet...
if you can climb to the top of Mt. Morality and dictate to the plebs what should make them feel guilt and/or shame, you can lay a trail of narrative bread crumbs and lead them wherever u want.
Well put, I have developed a fine tuned guilt trip sensor in myself over the years. Anyone who tries to push the guilt trip button is immediately called out in my life. Its truly weird that the progressive left pushes the accept everyones lifestyle without shame argument while shaming anyone who doesn't support that idea. in our upside down world those who should feel the most shame for their life choices are the ones showing their pride !
cs lewis' 'that hideous strength' illustrates this irrational drive. the directors of N.I.C.E. are actually desirous of exterminating all life....they see organic life as somehow, dirty, chaotic, messy....something to be superseded by science and technology.
"It's like the West is some kind of Oedipus figure, one that blinded itself once it became aware of its own complicity in the abuse of others. The rest of the world does not operate like this. The death wish of the West is overwhelmingly powerful. We are desperate to be delivered from ourselves, to be released into the servitude of reclaimed innocence."
I think he was referring to race/immigration (or maybe child castrations) but it holds for the climate cult too...
I've always felt the Wormtongue/Theoden symbolism is the most appropriate. It's not so much that we became aware of the abuse of others, as that we've been hypnotized into thinking that abuse is the only thing of consequence that we've ever done.
It seems our overlords in their great wisdom have embarked on a depopulation plan to remove 90% of the population of the world, all us useless eaters. The blunt instruments of Famine, war and disease appear to be the plan. The trouble is a functioning society Is kinda like jenga, and try pulling out 90% of the blocks has predictable results. Lots of stuff works because a few people know how to do each of the millions of little things that keep it running. I fear a planed 90% cull will result in a complete collapse, through loss of know how to keep it running. Practice flintknapping.
It’s very odd that for all their globalist bs blah, blah, blah they fail to grasp the interconnectedness of the world as it now stands. Once they knock that critical domino down they will ALL fall, with no place for them to scurry off to to avoid being taken down by what they’ve started.
Speaking of death cult, there is a genuine ecological emergency with pollinators, the numbers of which have collapsed apocalyptically here in the Midwest. I've been saying it repeatedly, but I can't seem to get anyone to care, and I haven't heard mention of it anywhere else. I suppose that is nothing to our parasitic elite who mean to starve us anyway. It also seems as nothing to those defending modern farming, neither soy nor corn requiring pollinators.
My concern about nuclear is, why do we assume future generations are going to have the capacity to manage what we have built?
It appears that there is an end goal/agenda by those pushing all the various themes at various times. Probably safe to say that there will be much collateral damage of lives lost in the mass of humanity because of this target end goal of tptb. How sick that they have so much control and most of us never consented.
"The Dutch government, however, is not interested: nitrogen is merely the excuse; the goal is to drive the farmers out of business. The goal is less food."
Aha!! Here! Here we have it. This is why ive run out of patience w otherwise smart and reasonable people like The Duran and a host of others in the Free Media who keep insisting that these evil policies are merely incompetence rather than malevolence.
No. The absolute refusal of the Oligarchs, everywhere, always, in unison to consider or negotiate at all their subjects' good faith attempts to solve the purported threats is ironclad proof that it is a concerted effort to do that which is the natural and obvious consequence of said policies, namely, our death and immiseration.
Interesting screed, with some great lines, such as the following:
"...the goldfish memories of the educated portion of the tax cattle extend just as far as the most recent iteration of the ongoing psyops campaign."
I found this statement puzzling, on the other hand:
"So it is that they talk of literally blocking the sight of the Sun – spraying clouds of sulfates in the upper atmosphere, to chill the world ..."
Could this clearly attentive author really not be aware that this has already been going on for at least a generation? Has he not read the internal US govt document: "Owning the Weather by 2025," written back in the prior century?
Indeed, extending his own logic, it is not hard to see how the vast weather modification programs (whose most salient long-term effect, according to Dane Wigington of geoengineeringwatch.org, is drought) are a tailor-made tool for using climate as yet another weapon of state terrorism?
Without an acknowledgement of these far-reaching programs, there can be, for me, no serious discussion of "climate change" or "emergency." For, if the ghouls are able to continue with their seemingly never-ending campaign of psychological terror, we will surely see, sooner or later, an admission of these programs as one way to mitigate the "crisis" (when in fact they are used to create it). There has already been extensive limited hangout on the issue for at least the past 15 years, and lately, as the author implies above, they are now proposing it fairly openly.
Another excellent read, John. You hit all the right points, but I'm sure there are many more. I have been saying for quite some time that climate is the next step of control in the big picture of things. This will be my lead link tomorrow @https://nothingnewunderthesun2016.com/ under the NEWS ( THE BIG PICTURE EDITION ) category. Don't know if you remember the old tv show, but hats off to My Favorite Martian!!!
Having grown up in an era in which an incipient ice age was clamourously deemed inevitable, and the winters were indeed frigid (1940 - 1979 cold period), dreams of the Mayan, Roman and Medieval warm periods were fantastical escapades into balmy breezes and tilting palms and free flowing wine. Given the current absurd social and politically engineered obsession with falsified warming that segued into 'climate change', merely reviewing the IPCC et al. definitions of the latter informs one regarding its ideological centred unfalsifiablity and its removal from science. The manifest requirement is the expunging of humanity from the face of Gaia. Further, the definition furnishes infinite justification to meddle infinitely in the affairs of man. Ditto, health and safety. Climatism and Safeism, two apocalyptic horsemen, the other two being Racism and Healthism.
A thought struck me that brainwashing the people and political class with the WaterMelon narrative ensured that the continued descent into the coming ice age and the current embrace of the grand solar minimum, in which crop yields will decline and a demand for domestic warmth and energy will escalate, would serve to quietly and purposefully erase another portion of unprepared, dozing humanity.
Yes, I've had the same thought - a species putting all of its energies into trying to prevent a warm world rather than preparing for a cold one, is going to get hit by the cold much more severely. Like selecting one's entire wardrobe for summer and throwing out all winter clothing in late October.
Carbon emissions are a wonderful proxy for any kind of economic activity which is why the fixation. A perfect excuse to starve the unworthy and deprive them of any real resources. To be honest I didn’t really pay the Georgia guidestones much attention but given that Japan still has competent planning meanwhile politicians in the west are intentionally causing an energy crisis in a pretty obvious way this winter, it’s looking more and more like these kind of prophecies are being followed.
There is a death cult, and it is using the global warming threat as an excuse to do bad things. But the death cult did not invent the issue. It's been around for at least a century. John von Neumann -- as staunch an anti totalitarian is as humanly possible -- mentioned the threat of global warming in a paper written in the 1950s. http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~kite/doc/von_Neumann_1955.pdf He was a member of the Atomic Energy Commission, not exactly anti nuke.
And yes, there were concerns about global warming in the 1970s. See the movie "Soylent Green."
With that being said, human CO2 emissions may well be offsetting a coming ice age. And maybe human release of fossil carbon has actually saved life on this planet, as Patrick Moore has suggested. Life has been sequestering carbon for a rather long time. Some boost in CO2 levels is likely a good thing.
Significant boosting has been accomplished. And as the rest of the world industrializes, the boost factor grows. It is possible to have too much of a good thing. Too much fertilizer kills crops. Too much CO2 has the potential to cause a positive feedback effect, by releasing dissolved CO2 from the oceans and methane from the permafrost. These are the things that have real scientists concerned.
It is not a crisis that needs to be solved in the next decade. But it is a good idea push the development of viable alternatives to fossil fuels so we have them available to but the brakes on CO2 emissions should problems arise. That means nuclear for the north, and solar for the sunny, but politically unstable regions of the world.
Just because demoncrats are running with the global warming threat issue doesn't mean solving the problem is an inherently demoncratic or lefty thing. Conservatives and/or libertarians could use the issue to push their agendas. To quickest way to reduce fossil fuel use it to make cities safe enough that workers with families can live near their workplace. You can argue welfare reform, drug legalization, more gun ownership, more funding the police, or caning shoplifters and muggers for anti global warming reasons. To my mind, solar energy is ideal for those of us with a survivalist mentality -- if the energy gets stored in batteries vs. using solar to supplement the grid. (But for long haul transportation, batteries are a terrible solution. Green electricity to synthetic methanol is a much better solution.)
A conservatarian approach would be radically different from what AOC and company are pushing. I intend to push a Green Old Deal in future posts on my site.
Hi, very nice article, but if you would have time, please bear with me here for a few of my thoughts. I have to say, that I am the one who fall into the category of: "and if you’re in the group that thinks it does, well, you’re probably fully boosted and looking forward to consooming next booster, so I don’t really know what to tell you." but I am not boosted and covid was thing which I didn't fall for some reason.
Nevertheless, I was born in the 90s and I noticed the disappearing ozone layer story and then the global warming story. I am not so sure, that it's not real. I mean, truth is that we consume a lot of more than our grandparents, we have much more people here, and we do a lot of stuff in mass scale. That's true. This should be the focus of science to tell us how it will affect us in the future, and that's very easy. Just make some ecosystem which is closed, like in science-fiction stories, put there some cows and burn some coil or oil to see, how it will handle that.
Back to main topic. I want to propose a different explanation for this "death" cult or this shift in people thinking. My explanation for so obsession with climate change is lost of purpose for many people due to industrialization and outsourcing work to different countries. I also think it matches the time frame. Basically, after WW2 and collapse of USSR there was only one dominant superpower which was America. There was no more enemy or threat which would give people meaning - before it was expansion and colonization of America, then WW1, then WW2 and then Cold War. People in America were always used to have some meaning regarding threat outside. That disappeared and people become unhappy. That is reason, why also with climate change there was war on terror. Since then, basically, nobody wanted to get into a fight with America - even when they tried really hard. Nobody till this day's want’s to fight with America. This is the reason, why people inside of country used to abuse other nations (remember slaves, black people, colonization) started to abuse their own people. The reason for this is, that there is no outside threat, and they don't have any enemy to fight against. Still, they need some uniting idea or ideology and simple capitalism or to be first, when you are already winner and global leader doesn't make sense. This is reason, why we have woke and the death cult. America (USA) has lost it's meaning.
Imagine, that you play a computer game - for example, Zoo Tycoon. You made great Zoo, you have the most precious animals, you made best routes, you made millions with tourists and everything is working fine. They don't need you anymore, there is nothing more to build - it would cost a lot of effort and results will be worse than before. What will you do, when you are the player who control this? You will be bored, you can make some silly stuff, but you will have nothing meaningful to build anymore. So you will start to do some crazy stuff, like put lions inside zebras cage. Or you take tourists and make a silly road to nowhere, or start fire. You are just bored, and you need some action or destruction to have some building opportunity to exercise your powers.
That's exactly what is happening now. They stopped any competition, they made everyone feel like a winner, and now they have a perfect world, where everyone is happy, no fighting, but people are bored and without meaning. This is the story of global warming and other theories which penetrate society this day's. It's life without meaning and empty space, they're trying to fill. They're just looking for meaning of their life.
That makes one wonder if, as a first approximation, anyone trying to make the world a better place via anything other than making money ought not to be trusted. Perhaps actively reviled. Put another way, being suspicious of anyone who doesn’t seem to have something better and more selfish to do.
Some people try to make the world a better place by showing a better alternative. If they're wrong, the only people who suffer are them, and whoever follows them of their own free will.
Others use force. If they're wrong, everyone suffers (except, funnily enough, the people forcing their views on others).
It's the latter that should be chucked overboard from any sane ship of state.
Heartily agree on the force part, and on the "we will do our thing and show you how much better it works" part.
What I had in mind, although didn't specify, was sort of like the EA people. The bailey of "if you are going to give money, give it to more effective causes" makes sense, but the motte curiously never seems to contain "use that money to start a business to sustainably employ poor people in a useful way" or "raise a small army and overthrow the shit kleptocracy government stopping you from starting that business in the poor country." Granted, ok, the second is a bit spicy (but logically consistent by their lights) but the former should be job 1. "I am going to make the world so much better people are going to pay me to do it and keep doing it," sounds highly likely to work; if you have to beg people to give you money to solve huge world problems, it seems like a strong sign the problem isn't relevant.
Ah. Well, in the case of EA, we're in telescopic philanthropy terroritory. The purpose isn't making the world a better place. It's self-aggrandizement via conspicuous altruism and the creation of dependents.
True, there is an important distinction between saying you want to make the world better and actually trying to do so. I think a lot of EA people, and people who donate to charities in general, do mean to do good for the world. Its just that it tends to go very badly, often by being coopted by those with no interest in good so much as control.
Maybe this is just a really roundabout way of saying altruism is bad, if only because it isn't real and very nasty things wear its representation as a mask.
Just to clarify, I mean "sustainably employ" in the sense that the goods or services produced by employing the people sell for enough to keep covering the worker's salaries, as opposed to having to beg for donations to pay them to do something no one values enough to pay them to do out of self interest.
Agreed, but they never admit that, and it seems relevant. If I start a business or get a new job, I am going to talk about how it is good for me. I am going to feel the need to justify the decision as good for me, even if it is just "I think it is worthwhile."
Causeheads seem to need to justify the decision as good for everyone else, and not them. You never hear them saying "I am a climate change activist because I own stock in a lot of green tech companies." That would be tacky and gross, even if true. Especially if true. Instead we are supposed to approve of them doing good for others with no regard to their personal benefit.
Maybe a shorter rule of thumb would be "Distrust anyone claiming to be an altruist."
Remember the good old days when people showed how much holier than thou they were by abstaining from anything fun and living in a hole somewhere? Maybe we could bring that back.
Not so clear-cut as mostly everywhere in human affairs:
What about doing good for the selfish reason of feeling good? Or for the sake of living in happier community with its obvious benefits for yourself? Selfishness once removed, as it were—is it still altruism? Or no-true-Scotsperson rears its/zer stubborn head here? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I sometimes wonder if the choice of heat isn't related to the reiigion-replacement function. Something akin to an epigenetic memory of tradcath depictions of a fiery Hell, bouncing around like an echo in the limbic system.
That merely moves the locus of the question. However, when it comes to climate science, or any other highly politicized field, the academics tend to follow power rather than vice versa.
You are probably right. When we are discussing this issue here, I wanted to ask you. What exactly is now belief, vision, ideology or uniting idea in America? Is there some? Besides woke, transgender, bitcoin, musk and LGBT community.
And I am asking seriously, what are kids thought in school, when they ask what makes them American? Or how old people answer question, what will be fate of America in next years? And how students at university answer the question, what will be America in 10 - 20 years? Do they even talk about this? And when no, isn't that strange?
The short answer is, there is no uniting idea - America is too deeply divided for that to be possible. Longer answer: there are two Americas. One is the heritage America, the real America, which is much as it was always presented: liberty, life, etc. The other is pseudo-America, the neo-marxist, managerial liberalism state, which seeks to supplant the original. The woke stuff is a cultural weapon deployed by the latter against the former.
I hope nobody will kill me for commenting on my own comment, but the more I read writing from others, I suspect it's kind of our fault also. Should we create some new religion or some secret island, story or ideology for bored, rich and stupid elites? I mean it seriously, if it's true that this is just because they feel useless, but they have all the money, power and influence, shouldn't we do some kind of game for them to have something to chase?
Some secret language or place without map which they can conquer? Should we, as the plebs, really put our resources to create some ideological framework how to keep our elites busy and not to mess with us? I mean, some racing for them and some prices - they for sure love to win, they love to be smart, and they love to help people, but everything has been already discovered. Maybe, they need some adrenalin and when you are super rich, there is not much of it. Just an idea for thinking, but I feel, it might have some point
So far as A/B testing goes, they do that, too. Obviously global warming was the winner there. But why? That's what I was trying to get at - I doubt it's just random. There has to be a reason it's preferred. Hence my suspicion that the appeal is at symbolic level: get the cattle to accept a rejection of life.
Perhaps "elemental" symbolism offers a clue. Fire vs. Ice and the instinctive, visceral reactions living creatures demonstrate. Freezing and burning are both horrific prospects, but most would choose the slow cold route over rising flames. A world "in flames" would as such have greater potential to inculcate the required fear response preceding any narrative and/or memetic injection into the targeted space.
Indeed, they're generally cunning and clever, but not necessarily highly intelligent.
They've clearly gotten caught up in some form of ideological possession. However, the ideology they follow is almost certainly not the ideology they tell the masses to follow.
That's why I hedge - is what we think we're seeing, real? Maybe it's just an emergent phenomenon, with sinews of greed and nerves of graft. And honestly for the overwhelming majority of the participants in the egregore, that's almost certainly exactly what it is.
But then there's shit like Epstein, and one wonders just what kinds of nasties have wormed their way into the soft tissues of the halls of power.
Excellent analysis. But it overlooks one important factor: people are getting fatter. Fat is a thing. It's trendy. Fat chicks on magazine covers. Criticism is forbidden. All that added weight and the law of conservation of angular momentum means the speed of the earth around the sun is slowing. We see this in the addition of leap seconds most years. The slower velocity causes the earth to drift closer to the sun, increasing the flux density of solar radiation, raising the temperature. My theory is as good as theirs, and my model agrees more closely with observed temperatures than theirs do. I would get it published in Science or Nature but observations of fat people are censored.
That was the funniest thing I've read all day. Pinned.
Perhaps fatties are merely prepping for the next incoming agenda of starvation 🤷🏻♀️ 😂
It’s happening. The CIA is warning us: https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/food-insecurity/
A brilliant piece of writing, as usual. One of the problems I have with you is that it's often quite difficult to pick out a favorite line to quote, and this one is filled with humdingers. But for whatever reason, I think this hit me hardest:
"They want us to freeze in the dark, and starve to death while doing it."
This, man.
It feels like this is the enemy's purest version of its own Final Solution, buried in the darkest corner of its mind. Beneath the Grand Guignol horrors of mass biomedical experiments and witch hunts; beneath the perpetual gaslighting and transhumanist freakshow exhibits; beneath even the sexual sale and mutilation of children. It's almost as if I can hear those two thoughts churning away: "Starve them. Freeze them. "
And thanks so much for your recommendation, John. Coming from you, it's one hell of a compliment (pun intended?).
Keep at it, bro, I want to read the rest of your series.
What's happening in Europe now really brings it all into focus. They're staring disaster in the face and laughing like demented children. Avoiding it is the easiest thing and the world, yet they refuse to pull back. Hard to understand it as anything but the workings of a death cult.
It's like the 1930s when "peace in our time" was just around the corner. Maybe their persistent miserable weather degrades their thinking. Global dementia.
Was "demented children" a dig at Princess Greta? How DARE you!
So many candidates.
Guilt has long been am easily manipulated emotion, organized religion has known how to use guilt for thousands of years to gain compliance and servitude. This is why Climate lies work so well, especially against the richer nations of the world where guilt is inculcated on a daily basis.
don't forget Shame!
Guilt & Shame are the ultimate strings with which to control the human puppet...
if you can climb to the top of Mt. Morality and dictate to the plebs what should make them feel guilt and/or shame, you can lay a trail of narrative bread crumbs and lead them wherever u want.
Well put, I have developed a fine tuned guilt trip sensor in myself over the years. Anyone who tries to push the guilt trip button is immediately called out in my life. Its truly weird that the progressive left pushes the accept everyones lifestyle without shame argument while shaming anyone who doesn't support that idea. in our upside down world those who should feel the most shame for their life choices are the ones showing their pride !
Got 3 of the 4. Need Elk Steaks.
The goldfish memories of the educated portion of the tax cattle.
This was pure poetry.
...flanked by
💬 COVID mask formation &
💬 painted in the colour scheme of a murder scene
😁
thanatos - unconscious death drive
cs lewis' 'that hideous strength' illustrates this irrational drive. the directors of N.I.C.E. are actually desirous of exterminating all life....they see organic life as somehow, dirty, chaotic, messy....something to be superseded by science and technology.
sound familiar?
technological immortality....
Exactly.
i read this recently by Rod Dreher:
"It's like the West is some kind of Oedipus figure, one that blinded itself once it became aware of its own complicity in the abuse of others. The rest of the world does not operate like this. The death wish of the West is overwhelmingly powerful. We are desperate to be delivered from ourselves, to be released into the servitude of reclaimed innocence."
I think he was referring to race/immigration (or maybe child castrations) but it holds for the climate cult too...
I've always felt the Wormtongue/Theoden symbolism is the most appropriate. It's not so much that we became aware of the abuse of others, as that we've been hypnotized into thinking that abuse is the only thing of consequence that we've ever done.
It seems our overlords in their great wisdom have embarked on a depopulation plan to remove 90% of the population of the world, all us useless eaters. The blunt instruments of Famine, war and disease appear to be the plan. The trouble is a functioning society Is kinda like jenga, and try pulling out 90% of the blocks has predictable results. Lots of stuff works because a few people know how to do each of the millions of little things that keep it running. I fear a planed 90% cull will result in a complete collapse, through loss of know how to keep it running. Practice flintknapping.
It’s very odd that for all their globalist bs blah, blah, blah they fail to grasp the interconnectedness of the world as it now stands. Once they knock that critical domino down they will ALL fall, with no place for them to scurry off to to avoid being taken down by what they’ve started.
Forgive me if I mentioned this before. These people are psychopaths. It’s not money and the death agenda only makes sense to them. I explain: https://robertyoho.substack.com/p/149-testing-for-psychopathsthe-stuff
I think I showed you just my first psychopath post. Here's another with some ideas.
https://robertyoho.substack.com/p/9e861054-b7f2-453d-8f22-0a10c7b6d2e6
I don't comment about religion. Not sure where you mean.
Speaking of death cult, there is a genuine ecological emergency with pollinators, the numbers of which have collapsed apocalyptically here in the Midwest. I've been saying it repeatedly, but I can't seem to get anyone to care, and I haven't heard mention of it anywhere else. I suppose that is nothing to our parasitic elite who mean to starve us anyway. It also seems as nothing to those defending modern farming, neither soy nor corn requiring pollinators.
My concern about nuclear is, why do we assume future generations are going to have the capacity to manage what we have built?
It appears that there is an end goal/agenda by those pushing all the various themes at various times. Probably safe to say that there will be much collateral damage of lives lost in the mass of humanity because of this target end goal of tptb. How sick that they have so much control and most of us never consented.
I think Bill Gates is likely just a front man. He's a hateable face thrown up in front of us as a lightning rod.
"The Dutch government, however, is not interested: nitrogen is merely the excuse; the goal is to drive the farmers out of business. The goal is less food."
Aha!! Here! Here we have it. This is why ive run out of patience w otherwise smart and reasonable people like The Duran and a host of others in the Free Media who keep insisting that these evil policies are merely incompetence rather than malevolence.
No. The absolute refusal of the Oligarchs, everywhere, always, in unison to consider or negotiate at all their subjects' good faith attempts to solve the purported threats is ironclad proof that it is a concerted effort to do that which is the natural and obvious consequence of said policies, namely, our death and immiseration.
Interesting screed, with some great lines, such as the following:
"...the goldfish memories of the educated portion of the tax cattle extend just as far as the most recent iteration of the ongoing psyops campaign."
I found this statement puzzling, on the other hand:
"So it is that they talk of literally blocking the sight of the Sun – spraying clouds of sulfates in the upper atmosphere, to chill the world ..."
Could this clearly attentive author really not be aware that this has already been going on for at least a generation? Has he not read the internal US govt document: "Owning the Weather by 2025," written back in the prior century?
Indeed, extending his own logic, it is not hard to see how the vast weather modification programs (whose most salient long-term effect, according to Dane Wigington of geoengineeringwatch.org, is drought) are a tailor-made tool for using climate as yet another weapon of state terrorism?
Without an acknowledgement of these far-reaching programs, there can be, for me, no serious discussion of "climate change" or "emergency." For, if the ghouls are able to continue with their seemingly never-ending campaign of psychological terror, we will surely see, sooner or later, an admission of these programs as one way to mitigate the "crisis" (when in fact they are used to create it). There has already been extensive limited hangout on the issue for at least the past 15 years, and lately, as the author implies above, they are now proposing it fairly openly.
Another excellent read, John. You hit all the right points, but I'm sure there are many more. I have been saying for quite some time that climate is the next step of control in the big picture of things. This will be my lead link tomorrow @https://nothingnewunderthesun2016.com/ under the NEWS ( THE BIG PICTURE EDITION ) category. Don't know if you remember the old tv show, but hats off to My Favorite Martian!!!
Having grown up in an era in which an incipient ice age was clamourously deemed inevitable, and the winters were indeed frigid (1940 - 1979 cold period), dreams of the Mayan, Roman and Medieval warm periods were fantastical escapades into balmy breezes and tilting palms and free flowing wine. Given the current absurd social and politically engineered obsession with falsified warming that segued into 'climate change', merely reviewing the IPCC et al. definitions of the latter informs one regarding its ideological centred unfalsifiablity and its removal from science. The manifest requirement is the expunging of humanity from the face of Gaia. Further, the definition furnishes infinite justification to meddle infinitely in the affairs of man. Ditto, health and safety. Climatism and Safeism, two apocalyptic horsemen, the other two being Racism and Healthism.
A thought struck me that brainwashing the people and political class with the WaterMelon narrative ensured that the continued descent into the coming ice age and the current embrace of the grand solar minimum, in which crop yields will decline and a demand for domestic warmth and energy will escalate, would serve to quietly and purposefully erase another portion of unprepared, dozing humanity.
Yes, I've had the same thought - a species putting all of its energies into trying to prevent a warm world rather than preparing for a cold one, is going to get hit by the cold much more severely. Like selecting one's entire wardrobe for summer and throwing out all winter clothing in late October.
Carbon emissions are a wonderful proxy for any kind of economic activity which is why the fixation. A perfect excuse to starve the unworthy and deprive them of any real resources. To be honest I didn’t really pay the Georgia guidestones much attention but given that Japan still has competent planning meanwhile politicians in the west are intentionally causing an energy crisis in a pretty obvious way this winter, it’s looking more and more like these kind of prophecies are being followed.
There is a death cult, and it is using the global warming threat as an excuse to do bad things. But the death cult did not invent the issue. It's been around for at least a century. John von Neumann -- as staunch an anti totalitarian is as humanly possible -- mentioned the threat of global warming in a paper written in the 1950s. http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~kite/doc/von_Neumann_1955.pdf He was a member of the Atomic Energy Commission, not exactly anti nuke.
And yes, there were concerns about global warming in the 1970s. See the movie "Soylent Green."
With that being said, human CO2 emissions may well be offsetting a coming ice age. And maybe human release of fossil carbon has actually saved life on this planet, as Patrick Moore has suggested. Life has been sequestering carbon for a rather long time. Some boost in CO2 levels is likely a good thing.
Significant boosting has been accomplished. And as the rest of the world industrializes, the boost factor grows. It is possible to have too much of a good thing. Too much fertilizer kills crops. Too much CO2 has the potential to cause a positive feedback effect, by releasing dissolved CO2 from the oceans and methane from the permafrost. These are the things that have real scientists concerned.
It is not a crisis that needs to be solved in the next decade. But it is a good idea push the development of viable alternatives to fossil fuels so we have them available to but the brakes on CO2 emissions should problems arise. That means nuclear for the north, and solar for the sunny, but politically unstable regions of the world.
Just because demoncrats are running with the global warming threat issue doesn't mean solving the problem is an inherently demoncratic or lefty thing. Conservatives and/or libertarians could use the issue to push their agendas. To quickest way to reduce fossil fuel use it to make cities safe enough that workers with families can live near their workplace. You can argue welfare reform, drug legalization, more gun ownership, more funding the police, or caning shoplifters and muggers for anti global warming reasons. To my mind, solar energy is ideal for those of us with a survivalist mentality -- if the energy gets stored in batteries vs. using solar to supplement the grid. (But for long haul transportation, batteries are a terrible solution. Green electricity to synthetic methanol is a much better solution.)
A conservatarian approach would be radically different from what AOC and company are pushing. I intend to push a Green Old Deal in future posts on my site.
Hi, very nice article, but if you would have time, please bear with me here for a few of my thoughts. I have to say, that I am the one who fall into the category of: "and if you’re in the group that thinks it does, well, you’re probably fully boosted and looking forward to consooming next booster, so I don’t really know what to tell you." but I am not boosted and covid was thing which I didn't fall for some reason.
Nevertheless, I was born in the 90s and I noticed the disappearing ozone layer story and then the global warming story. I am not so sure, that it's not real. I mean, truth is that we consume a lot of more than our grandparents, we have much more people here, and we do a lot of stuff in mass scale. That's true. This should be the focus of science to tell us how it will affect us in the future, and that's very easy. Just make some ecosystem which is closed, like in science-fiction stories, put there some cows and burn some coil or oil to see, how it will handle that.
Back to main topic. I want to propose a different explanation for this "death" cult or this shift in people thinking. My explanation for so obsession with climate change is lost of purpose for many people due to industrialization and outsourcing work to different countries. I also think it matches the time frame. Basically, after WW2 and collapse of USSR there was only one dominant superpower which was America. There was no more enemy or threat which would give people meaning - before it was expansion and colonization of America, then WW1, then WW2 and then Cold War. People in America were always used to have some meaning regarding threat outside. That disappeared and people become unhappy. That is reason, why also with climate change there was war on terror. Since then, basically, nobody wanted to get into a fight with America - even when they tried really hard. Nobody till this day's want’s to fight with America. This is the reason, why people inside of country used to abuse other nations (remember slaves, black people, colonization) started to abuse their own people. The reason for this is, that there is no outside threat, and they don't have any enemy to fight against. Still, they need some uniting idea or ideology and simple capitalism or to be first, when you are already winner and global leader doesn't make sense. This is reason, why we have woke and the death cult. America (USA) has lost it's meaning.
Imagine, that you play a computer game - for example, Zoo Tycoon. You made great Zoo, you have the most precious animals, you made best routes, you made millions with tourists and everything is working fine. They don't need you anymore, there is nothing more to build - it would cost a lot of effort and results will be worse than before. What will you do, when you are the player who control this? You will be bored, you can make some silly stuff, but you will have nothing meaningful to build anymore. So you will start to do some crazy stuff, like put lions inside zebras cage. Or you take tourists and make a silly road to nowhere, or start fire. You are just bored, and you need some action or destruction to have some building opportunity to exercise your powers.
That's exactly what is happening now. They stopped any competition, they made everyone feel like a winner, and now they have a perfect world, where everyone is happy, no fighting, but people are bored and without meaning. This is the story of global warming and other theories which penetrate society this day's. It's life without meaning and empty space, they're trying to fill. They're just looking for meaning of their life.
That makes one wonder if, as a first approximation, anyone trying to make the world a better place via anything other than making money ought not to be trusted. Perhaps actively reviled. Put another way, being suspicious of anyone who doesn’t seem to have something better and more selfish to do.
I think of it this way.
Some people try to make the world a better place by showing a better alternative. If they're wrong, the only people who suffer are them, and whoever follows them of their own free will.
Others use force. If they're wrong, everyone suffers (except, funnily enough, the people forcing their views on others).
It's the latter that should be chucked overboard from any sane ship of state.
Heartily agree on the force part, and on the "we will do our thing and show you how much better it works" part.
What I had in mind, although didn't specify, was sort of like the EA people. The bailey of "if you are going to give money, give it to more effective causes" makes sense, but the motte curiously never seems to contain "use that money to start a business to sustainably employ poor people in a useful way" or "raise a small army and overthrow the shit kleptocracy government stopping you from starting that business in the poor country." Granted, ok, the second is a bit spicy (but logically consistent by their lights) but the former should be job 1. "I am going to make the world so much better people are going to pay me to do it and keep doing it," sounds highly likely to work; if you have to beg people to give you money to solve huge world problems, it seems like a strong sign the problem isn't relevant.
Ah. Well, in the case of EA, we're in telescopic philanthropy terroritory. The purpose isn't making the world a better place. It's self-aggrandizement via conspicuous altruism and the creation of dependents.
True, there is an important distinction between saying you want to make the world better and actually trying to do so. I think a lot of EA people, and people who donate to charities in general, do mean to do good for the world. Its just that it tends to go very badly, often by being coopted by those with no interest in good so much as control.
Maybe this is just a really roundabout way of saying altruism is bad, if only because it isn't real and very nasty things wear its representation as a mask.
Just to clarify, I mean "sustainably employ" in the sense that the goods or services produced by employing the people sell for enough to keep covering the worker's salaries, as opposed to having to beg for donations to pay them to do something no one values enough to pay them to do out of self interest.
Agreed, but they never admit that, and it seems relevant. If I start a business or get a new job, I am going to talk about how it is good for me. I am going to feel the need to justify the decision as good for me, even if it is just "I think it is worthwhile."
Causeheads seem to need to justify the decision as good for everyone else, and not them. You never hear them saying "I am a climate change activist because I own stock in a lot of green tech companies." That would be tacky and gross, even if true. Especially if true. Instead we are supposed to approve of them doing good for others with no regard to their personal benefit.
Maybe a shorter rule of thumb would be "Distrust anyone claiming to be an altruist."
Remember the good old days when people showed how much holier than thou they were by abstaining from anything fun and living in a hole somewhere? Maybe we could bring that back.
Not so clear-cut as mostly everywhere in human affairs:
What about doing good for the selfish reason of feeling good? Or for the sake of living in happier community with its obvious benefits for yourself? Selfishness once removed, as it were—is it still altruism? Or no-true-Scotsperson rears its/zer stubborn head here? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Indeed, for the plebs it's an ersatz religion, just as wokism and covidianism. Obvious.
The question is - why did the elites choose THIS and not something else? The precise nature of the environmental threat is arbitrary.
I sometimes wonder if the choice of heat isn't related to the reiigion-replacement function. Something akin to an epigenetic memory of tradcath depictions of a fiery Hell, bouncing around like an echo in the limbic system.
Maybe because the elites come from academia, or they get their ideas there? I mean, if you don't know, who will you go to ask?
That merely moves the locus of the question. However, when it comes to climate science, or any other highly politicized field, the academics tend to follow power rather than vice versa.
You are probably right. When we are discussing this issue here, I wanted to ask you. What exactly is now belief, vision, ideology or uniting idea in America? Is there some? Besides woke, transgender, bitcoin, musk and LGBT community.
And I am asking seriously, what are kids thought in school, when they ask what makes them American? Or how old people answer question, what will be fate of America in next years? And how students at university answer the question, what will be America in 10 - 20 years? Do they even talk about this? And when no, isn't that strange?
The short answer is, there is no uniting idea - America is too deeply divided for that to be possible. Longer answer: there are two Americas. One is the heritage America, the real America, which is much as it was always presented: liberty, life, etc. The other is pseudo-America, the neo-marxist, managerial liberalism state, which seeks to supplant the original. The woke stuff is a cultural weapon deployed by the latter against the former.
I hope nobody will kill me for commenting on my own comment, but the more I read writing from others, I suspect it's kind of our fault also. Should we create some new religion or some secret island, story or ideology for bored, rich and stupid elites? I mean it seriously, if it's true that this is just because they feel useless, but they have all the money, power and influence, shouldn't we do some kind of game for them to have something to chase?
Some secret language or place without map which they can conquer? Should we, as the plebs, really put our resources to create some ideological framework how to keep our elites busy and not to mess with us? I mean, some racing for them and some prices - they for sure love to win, they love to be smart, and they love to help people, but everything has been already discovered. Maybe, they need some adrenalin and when you are super rich, there is not much of it. Just an idea for thinking, but I feel, it might have some point
Certainly. There's no honor amongst thieves.
So far as A/B testing goes, they do that, too. Obviously global warming was the winner there. But why? That's what I was trying to get at - I doubt it's just random. There has to be a reason it's preferred. Hence my suspicion that the appeal is at symbolic level: get the cattle to accept a rejection of life.
Perhaps "elemental" symbolism offers a clue. Fire vs. Ice and the instinctive, visceral reactions living creatures demonstrate. Freezing and burning are both horrific prospects, but most would choose the slow cold route over rising flames. A world "in flames" would as such have greater potential to inculcate the required fear response preceding any narrative and/or memetic injection into the targeted space.
Indeed, they're generally cunning and clever, but not necessarily highly intelligent.
They've clearly gotten caught up in some form of ideological possession. However, the ideology they follow is almost certainly not the ideology they tell the masses to follow.
That's why I hedge - is what we think we're seeing, real? Maybe it's just an emergent phenomenon, with sinews of greed and nerves of graft. And honestly for the overwhelming majority of the participants in the egregore, that's almost certainly exactly what it is.
But then there's shit like Epstein, and one wonders just what kinds of nasties have wormed their way into the soft tissues of the halls of power.
Why no flame thrower for graft?
Asking for a friend.