Johns Hopkins University keeps a tracker of covid cases around the world and the US. This site is used to scare people into staying in their homes and shut off from the real world. So when a study from Johns Hopkins comes out, showing no increase in deaths in 2020 related to prior years, the study has to be taken down.
The Gateway Pundit reported back in August that according to the CDC only 6% of all deaths labeled as COVID deaths are solely related to the virus. The remaining deaths have on average at least 2 – 3 comorbidities present.
Our report on the actual COVID numbers went viral and was even retweeted by President Trump.
Genevieve Briand, assistant program director of the Applied Economics master’s degree program at Johns Hopkins University, critically analyzed the impact that COVID-19 had on U.S. deaths. According to her, the impact of COVID-19 on deaths in the United States can be fully understood by comparing it to the number of total deaths in the country.
According to study, “in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States.”
The report says:
After retrieving data on the CDC website, Briand compiled a graph representing percentages of total deaths per age category from early February to early September, which includes the period from before COVID-19 was detected in the U.S. to after infection rates soared.
Surprisingly, the deaths of older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19. Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, experts expected an increase in the percentage of deaths in older age groups. However, this increase is not seen from the CDC data. In fact, the percentages of deaths among all age groups remain relatively the same…
…When Briand looked at the 2020 data during that seasonal period, COVID-19-related deaths exceeded deaths from heart diseases. This was highly unusual since heart disease has always prevailed as the leading cause of deaths. However, when taking a closer look at the death numbers, she noted something strange. As Briand compared the number of deaths per cause during that period in 2020 to 2018, she noticed that instead of the expected drastic increase across all causes, there was a significant decrease in deaths due to heart disease. Even more surprising, as seen in the graph below, this sudden decline in deaths is observed for all other causes.
August 16, 2020
(updated October 24, 2020)
Published by LeeF
(Mercola.com) The Doctors for Disaster Preparedness lecture above, given August 16, 2020 in Las Vegas, Nevada, features Dr. Lee Merritt, an orthopedic spinal surgeon with a medical practice in Logan, Iowa.
In her presentation, she discusses how geopolitical power can be swayed in the absence of an identifiable army or declared war. She talks about the cognitive dissonance we’re currently facing, when what we’re told no longer corresponds with known facts or logical thinking.
And she reviews how medical technocrats — the so-called medical experts and political leaders who have turned the world upside-down in response to COVID-19 — have been 100% wrong about everything they’ve been telling us.
They’ve been wrong about the initial risk assessment, testing, preventive measures, mask wearing and social distancing. They’ve conflated “cases” or positive tests with the actual illness. They’re also guilty of errors of omission — not telling us what medical doctors and scientists know to be helpful.
“I can give you the benefit of the doubt when you’re wrong about one or two things, but when you’re wrong 100% of the time, consistently, that is not by accident,” Merritt says. “They should have come up with something that was in our best interest if they really cared about us.”
The Rise of Technocracy
Merritt credits her understanding of technocracy to reading Patrick Wood’s book, “Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation.” Wood is also the editor in chief of Technocracy News & Trends. I recently interviewed Wood. His interview is featured in “The Pressing Dangers of Technocracy.”
As explained by Wood and Merritt, technocracy is an economic ideology built around totalitarian rule by unelected leaders. It got its start in the 1930s during the height of the Great Depression, when scientists and engineers got together to solve the nation’s economic problems. At the time, it looked like capitalism and free enterprise were going to die, so they decided to invent a new economic system from scratch.
They called this system “technocracy.” The word comes from the word “techn,” which means “skill,” and the god “Kratos,” which is the divine personification of power. As explained by Merritt, a technocrat is someone who exercises power over you on the basis of their knowledge.
As an economic system, technocracy is resource-based. Rather than basing the economic system on pricing mechanisms such as supply and demand, the technocratic system is instead based on energy resources. In a nutshell, under this system, companies would be told what resources they’re allowed to use, when, and for what, and consumers would be told what to buy.
Former President Obama’s implementation of economic fines for those unwilling or unable to purchase health insurance could be viewed as an example of this system, in which you do not have the freedom to choose whether you want to buy a service or not. Your only choices are to purchase that which is mandated, or pay a fine.
The technocratic system also involves, indeed requires, social engineering, which relies on massive data collection and the use of artificial intelligence. Technocrats have silently and relentlessly pushed this agenda forward ever since those early days in the ‘30s, and signs of its implementation are becoming increasingly visible.
Evidence of technocratic rule has also become evident during the pandemic. The censoring and manipulation of medical information are part and parcel of the social engineering part of this system.
The Lies We’ve Been Told About COVID-19 Death Risk
In her lecture, Merritt reviews several lies we’ve been told by the technocratic elite, starting with the actual risk of death. Based on deaths per capita, the death rate for COVID-19 is 0.009% (709,000 people have died from or with COVID-19 around the world, and the global population is 7.8 billion). That then means the average person’s chance of surviving this disease is 99.991%.
The area with the highest death rate, New York, has a death per capita rate of 0.17%, yet Dr. Anthony Fauci publicly lauded New York for its excellent COVID response. This is just one example that has caused cognitive dissonance, as praising the area with the highest death rate (even if low overall) as having one of the best responses simply isn’t logical.
Ironically, five of the six countries with the lowest death rates (ranging between 0.00003% and 0.006%) did very little in terms of pandemic response; they didn’t shut down or order people to stay home.
Yet, we’re told these measures are absolutely necessary, and must continue, perhaps indefinitely. This too creates massive cognitive dissonance, as it goes against all logic. If an action doesn’t result in an observable benefit, it simply doesn’t make sense to continue, let alone claim that was and is necessary.
Purposeful Conflation of ‘Positive Tests’ With ‘Cases’
Furthermore, instead of comforting everyone and opening the world back up when the death toll started falling, the narrative suddenly shifted focus to “cases,” meaning people who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 — regardless of whether they had symptoms. More cognitive dissonance, as the primary measure of disease threat is its lethality.
As noted by Merritt, since ancient times, a “case,” medically speaking, has referred to a sick person. It never ever referred to someone who had no symptoms of illness.
Now all of a sudden, this well-established medical term, “case,” has been completely and arbitrarily redefined to mean someone who tested positive for the presence of viral RNA. “That is not epidemiology. That’s fraud,” Merritt says.
What’s more, most of the tests used have no benchmarks, meaning we don’t know what the rates of false positives and false negatives are. And, many areas are tacking on extra “cases” when someone tests positive and relays that they’ve been around other people. Again, “that’s fraud,” Merritt says.
Evidence that the technocratic propaganda is working can be seen in a recent poll by Harvard, Oxford and Universita Boconi, which found Millennials believe 2% of their generation will die from COVID-19. “That’s 10,000 times more than the reality,” Merritt says. “It’s just completely out of proportion to reality.”
The Lies We’ve Been Told About Mask Wearing
Lie No. 2 is about the benefits of mask wearing. “It’s not scientifically sound, so why are we doing it?” Merritt asks. It’s “just a symbol of submission.” As noted in her slide show, “The strongest argument for mask wearing is it sounds good. The strongest argument against mask wearing is it doesn’t work at all.”
Alongside that quote is a photo of a man’s face covered in dust particles after sawing sheetrock wearing a Class II medical earloop facemask, with the caption, “Each particle of sheetrock dust is 10 microns. Coronavirus is 0.125 microns. Any questions?”
The coronavirus is nearly 100 times smaller than sheetrock dust. In other words, surgical masks cannot and do not block the coronavirus (or any other virus for that matter). Surgical mask boxes are even printed with the warning that the mask “will not provide any protection against COVID-19 or other viruses,” and “does not reduce the risk of contracting any disease or infection.”
Ditto for medical N95 respirator masks, as they only block particles larger than 0.3 microns. N95 masks are used in hospital settings to protect against tuberculosis, as the TB virus is 3 microns. You must, however, wear the correct size, it must be properly fitted to your face, and you must follow certain procedures when putting it on and removing it to prevent cross contamination.
OSHA respirators, used by construction workers and other industries, also screen down to 0.3 microns, but they are equipped with a one-way valve. So, it only screens the air coming in, not the air going out. So, you’re in no way protecting others when wearing such a mask.
The Quality of Data Is What Matters
Merritt also discusses a publication in PNAS, “Identifying Airborne Transmission as the Dominant Route for the Spread of COVID-19,”3 in which the authors purport to support mask wearing by looking at New York City as a model. According to Merritt, she has serious concerns about this study, as it doesn’t control for the No. 1 factor that reduces infectivity, namely humidity.
The higher the humidity, the lower the infectivity rate. The paper also has “all these bizarre references,” Merritt says, “that have absolutely nothing to do with the precursors of anything you would look at to do this kind of research.”
What’s more, at least one of the authors listed, Yuan Wang, has no medical background whatsoever. He’s in the division of planetary and geological sciences at Cal Tech.
The graph showing that infectivity in New York City was reduced when mask wearing was mandated also matches the natural downslope seen in Sweden (which had no lockdown or mask mandate) as the infection ran its course. In no way does it prove that mask wearing actually prevents infection. “This is a very sophisticated made-up fraud, I think,” Merritt says.
She also reviews other publications in the medical literature showing masks do not protect against viral infections — including a May 2020 review by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention itself, which I wrote about in “WHO Admits: No Direct Evidence Masks Prevent Viral Infection.” In that review, the CDC concluded that masks did not protect against influenza in non-health care settings.
Mask Mandates for Peons and the Social Distancing Lie
The suspicion that masks are little more than suppression muzzles also gains strength by the fact that lawmakers are exempting themselves and certain categories of workers from their mask mandates.
Two examples given in Merritt’s lecture is the D.C. mask mandate, which exempts lawmakers and government employees. In Wisconsin, the Governor has exempted all politicians from the mask order. If masks truly worked, wouldn’t these workers be prime candidates for wearing masks everywhere to prevent them from getting ill and dying?
The third lie Merritt reviews is the 6-foot social distancing rule. Thirty-four minutes into the lecture, you’ll find a fascinating video from a study published March 26, 2020, in JAMA Insights, demonstrating the particle emissions occurring when sneezing. In this study, they showed emissions can reach 23 to 27 feet (7 to 8 meters) — a far cry from the 6-foot distance we’re told will keep everyone safe.
The Biggest Lie: Lysosomotropic Agents Don’t Work
Lie No. 4, which Merritt believes is the biggest one of all, is that lysosomotropic agents (drugs that acidify the lysosome) such as chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine don’t work. Fauci has repeatedly stated that these drugs either don’t work, that there’s insufficient evidence, or that the evidence is only anecdotal.
Yet the National Institutes of Health itself published research6 in 2005 showing chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread, actually having both prophylactic and therapeutic benefits. As the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is a part of the NIH, since 1984, Fauci should be well aware of these findings.
That study delivered “overwhelming proof that chloroquine inhibited influenza A,” Merritt says. Now, if an inexpensive generic drug can prevent influenza infection, then what would we need seasonal influenza vaccines for?
So, not only might we have an inexpensive remedy that can fight the flu, it might be useful against many other diseases as well. In short, were these drugs to be recognized for their antiviral benefits, they could disrupt the drug industry to a significant degree. Is that why they’re suppressed and vilified?
Follow the Money
Merritt also reviews Dr. Vladimir Zelenko’s clinical experience with hydroxychloroquine, which you can read more about in “How a False Hydroxychloroquine Narrative Was Created.” Of course, the media vilified Zelenko rather than applauding his remarkable successes against COVID-19.
Even more egregiously, Merritt notes, was the fact that a Baltimore federal prosecutor actually started an investigation into Zelenko based on his statement that hydroxychloroquine is FDA approved. “It is FDA approved,” Merritt says. “You don’t go back once things are FDA approved to get reapproval for a new indication.”
Doctors have always had the ability to prescribe drugs off-label for other conditions once they’ve been approved by the FDA, which is precisely what doctors have been doing with hydroxychloroquine. But now all of a sudden, that common (and perfectly legal) practice is portrayed as controversial, unethical and/or illegal.
There’s also the clinical experience of French microbiologist and infectious disease expert Didier Raoult, founder and director of the research hospital Institut Hospitalo-Universitaire Méditerranée Infection, who reported that a combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin — administered immediately upon diagnosis — led to recovery and “virological cure” in 91.7% of patients.
Yet these fraudulent papers were published in The Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicine, two of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world. It’s worth asking how that could happen. As noted by Merritt, what we’re told and what’s borne out by facts simply don’t add up:
Yet Fauci is pushing the use of remdesivir, an intravenous drug for late-stage severe COVID-19 infection that costs $3,600, has been shown to cause severe side effects in 60% of patients, and doesn’t reduce the death rate. It merely reduces the recovery rate by an average of 31%, or four days.
Merritt believes the reason we’re not embracing hydroxychloroquine is because it could demolish the $69 billion vaccine industry. That alone is enough of a motive to warrant a cover-up, she notes. The drug could also eliminate one of the most powerful leverages for geopolitical power that the technocrats have, namely biological terrorism. If we know how to treat and protect ourselves against designer viruses, their ability to keep us in line by keeping us in fear vanishes.
Lies by Omission and Ultimate Motives
Last but not least, Merritt reviews lies of omission — facts that would have saved lives had they been promoted. This includes data showing that higher vitamin D levels reduce both the severity of COVID-19 infection and the mortality. So, who benefits from the suppression of data and information that can save lives and the promotion of medical lies?
According to two investigators, John Moynahan and Larry Doyle, Bill Gates negotiated a $100 billion contact tracing contract with Democratic Congressman Bobby L. Rush — who also introduced HR 6666, the COVID-19 TRACE Act — six months before the COVID-19 pandemic broke out, during an August 2019 meeting in Rwanda, East Africa.
The U.S. government has also purchased 100 million doses of a COVID-19 vaccine still under development by Pfizer and BioNTech. As noted by Merritt, we keep seeing how drug companies fund working groups on diseases, and then when the disease breaks out, those same drug companies make billions in profit.
But aside from profit, Merritt is convinced there’s another reason behind the illogical pandemic responses we’re seeing. She points out how in a few short months, we’ve been dramatically shifted from a state of freedom to a state of totalitarianism. And the way that was done was through the technocratic mechanisms of social engineering, which of course involves psychological manipulation.
Psychological Manipulation Tools
Merritt reviews psychiatry professor Albert Biderman’s work on psychological manipulation and his “chart of coercion,” all of which can be clearly related to the COVID-19 response:
Isolation techniques — Quarantines, social distancing, isolation from loved ones and solitary confinement
Monopolization of perception — Monopolizing the 24/7 news cycle, censoring dissenting views and creating barren environments by closing bars, gyms and restaurants
Degradation techniques — Berating, shaming people (or even physically attacking) those who refuse to wear masks or social distance, or generally choose freedom over fear
Induced debility — Being forced to stay at home and not be able to exercise or socialize
Threats — Threatening with the removal of your children, prolonged quarantine, closing of your business, fines for noncompliance with mask and social distancing rules, forced vaccination and so on
Demonstrating omnipotence/omniscience — Shutting down the whole world, claiming scientific and medical authority
Enforcing trivial demands — Examples include family members being forced to stand 6 feet apart at the bank even though they arrived together in the same car, having to wear a mask when you walk into a restaurant, even though you can remove it as soon as you sit down, or having to wear a mask when walking alone on the beach
Occasional indulgence — Reopening some stores and restaurants but only at a certain capacity, for example. Part of the coercion plan is that indulgences are always taken away again, though, and they’re already saying we may have to shut down the world again this fall
Merritt packs a lot of information into her hour-long presentation, so I hope you take the time to view it. Aside from what I’ve already summarized above, she also reviews:
The influence of the World Health Organization and its largest funder, Bill Gates, and his many connections to the drug and vaccine industries, digital economy and digital tracking technologies
The curious similarities between the Gates-funded Event 201 and current world events
June 3, 2020
(updated June 12, 2020)
Published by LeeF
An influential study which found anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine raised the risk of cardiac issues has been retracted by its three authors.
The study, published on May 22 in the UK’s prestegious Lancet medical journal, relied on bogus data from a company called Surgisphere, which would not transfer the full dataset for an independent review, and “can no longer vouch for the veracity of the primary data sources.”
While the company that produced the original data, Surgisphere Corp., had signaled that it would cooperate with an independent review, it ultimately reneged and said doing so would violate confidentiality agreements, wrote the study authors. “As such, our reviewers were not able to conduct an independent and private peer review,” the authors said. –Bloomberg
Notably, the World Health Organization halted trials of the drug, only to reverse course after the Lancet issued a major disclaimer regarding the study.
“As you know, last week the Executive Group of the Solidarity Trial decided to implement a temporary pause of the hydroxychloroquine arm of the trial, because of concerns raised about the safety of the drug”-@DrTedros#COVID19
a major study on the drug, Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), has been retracted by the Lancet, a mere 13 days after it was published. That might be a world record.
The study, using a gigantic data set of 96,000 patients in 671 hospitals, concluded the drug was useless for treating COVID-19 patients, and posed health dangers.
The study (briefly) had the effect of convincing medical professionals, governments, media, and the public that HCQ was a total failure. A COVID drug would have to come from somewhere else.
Only one problem:
The authors of the study and the Lancet reviewers now confess the data can’t be found. The strong suggestion is, the data never existed.
The relentless and brilliant journalist, Celia Farber, covers the whole sordid story at uncoverdc.com. She points out that “Remdesivir, [the toxic COVID drug] ‘touted’ by Anthony Fauci…costs $1,000 per pill, whereas HCQ’s generic price is $0.64.” That’s called a clue.
And, of course, the plan is to keep the whole COVID farce going long enough to make the Bill Gates vaccine the primary instrument of treatment, through “prevention.”
The next part of this article was prompted by a story a friend told me: a graduate student, when informed about the Lancet retraction, blew up and said, “Don’t you care about SCIENCE?” Scratching an inch below the surface of his non-sequitur outburst, his meaning was clear—he hates Trump, Trump said he was taking HCQ, so HCQ must be terrible, so the discredited Lancet study must actually be accurate. And that’s science. Isn’t this charming? And how many thousands of dollars did this student’s education cost?
So let’s focus on one sector of the massive population of loons who are dutifully wearing masks and trudging down life’s path hypnotized by the COVID myth:
Several years ago, I posted a staggering statistic from the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI): “More than 25 percent of college students have been diagnosed or treated by a professional for a mental health condition within the past year.”
June 1, 2020
(updated November 6, 2020)
Published by LeeF
Dr. Tom Cowan
(Oct 15, 2020) This week, my colleague and friend Sally Fallon Morell brought to my attention an amazing article put out by the CDC. The link to the article is here, and it was published in June 2020. The purpose of the article was for a group of about 20 virologists to describe the state of the science of the isolation, purification and biological characteristics of the new SARS-CoV-2 virus, and to share this information with other scientists for their own research. A thorough and careful reading of this important paper reveals some shocking findings.
First, in the section titled “Whole Genome Sequencing,” we find that rather than having isolated the virus and sequencing the genome from end to end, that the CDC “designed 37 pairs of nested PCRs spanning the genome on the basis of the coronavirus reference sequence (GenBank accession no. NC045512).”
To me, this computer-generation step constitutes scientific fraud. Here is an equivalency: A group of researchers claim to have found a unicorn because they found a piece of a hoof, a hair from a tail, and a snippet of a horn. They then add that information into a computer and program it to re-create the unicorn, and they then claim this computer re-creation is the real unicorn. Of course, they had never actually seen a unicorn so could not possibly have examined its genetic makeup to compare their samples with the actual unicorn’s hair, hooves and horn.
The researchers claim they decided which is the real genome of SARS-CoV-2 by “consensus,” sort of like a vote. Again, different computer programs will come up with different versions of the imaginary “unicorn,” so they come together as a group and decide which is the real imaginary unicorn.
The real blockbuster finding in this study comes later, a finding so shocking that I had to read it many times before I could believe what I was reading. Let me quote the passage intact:
“Therefore, we examined the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect and replicate in several common primate and human cell lines, including human adenocarcinoma cells (A549), human liver cells (HUH 7.0), and human embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293T). In addition to Vero E6 and Vero CCL81 cells. … Each cell line was inoculated at high multiplicity of infection and examined 24h post-infection. No CPE was observed in any of the cell lines except in Vero cells, which grew to greater than 10 to the 7th power at 24 h post-infection. In contrast, HUH 7.0 and 293T showed only modest viral replication, and A549 cells were incompatible with SARS CoV-2 infection.”
What does this language actually mean, and why is it the most shocking statement of all from the virology community? When virologists attempt to prove infection, they have three possible “hosts” or models on which they can test. The first is humans. Exposure to humans is generally not done for ethical reasons and has never been done with SARS-CoV-2 or any coronavirus. The second possible host is animals. Forgetting for a moment that they never actually use purified virus when exposing animals, they do use solutions that they claim contain the virus. Exposure to animals has been done once with SARS-CoV-2, in an experiment that used mice. The researchers found that none of the wild (normal) mice got sick. In a group of genetically modified mice, a statistically insignificant number lost some fur. They experienced nothing like the illness called Covid 19.
The third method virologists use to prove infection and pathogenicity — the method they most rely on — is inoculation of solutions they say contain the virus onto a variety of tissue cultures. As I have pointed out many times, such inoculation has never been shown to kill (lyse) the tissue, unless the tissue is first starved and poisoned.
The shocking thing about the above quote is that using their own methods, the virologists found that solutions containing SARS-CoV-2 — even in high amounts — were NOT, I repeat NOT, infective to any of the three human tissue cultures they tested. In plain English, this means they proved, on their terms, that this “new coronavirus” is not infectious to human beings. It is ONLY infective to monkey kidney cells, and only then when you add two potent drugs (gentamicin and amphotericin), known to be toxic to kidneys, to the mix.
My friends, read this again and again. These virologists, published by the CDC, performed a clear proof, on their terms, showing that the SARS-CoV- 2 virus is harmless to human beings. That is the only possible conclusion, but, unfortunately, this result is not even mentioned in their conclusion. They simply say they can provide virus stocks cultured only on monkey Vero cells, thanks for coming.
If people really understood how this “science” was done, I would hope they would storm the gates and demand honesty, transparency and truth.
November 6, 2019
(updated May 30, 2020)
Published by LeeF
Rush Limbaugh explained: “NBC News … described a ‘study’ produced by an ‘international consortium of more than 11,000 scientists’.”
He cited NBC, CNN, Guardian, Al-Jazeera headlines and more.
But, he said, “There was no study, there was just a press release. And it wasn’t 11,000 scientists, it was 11,000 random people who put their names on a web page. This was a total managed lie. There was no study. There were no scientists.”
He explained, “People went on a Web page and asked others reading it to put their signature on it. That was then presented as a scientific paper. It’s kind of like these two skeletons that put together Center for Science in the Public Interest that banned coconut oil, MSG. They weren’t scientists. They were just a couple people that didn’t want you to eat what you wanted so they created an icon, got a fax machine, got the media going. It was all made-up stuff.”
“The climate crisis has arrived and is accelerating faster than most scientists expected … It is more severe than anticipated, threatening natural ecosystems and the fate of humanity … Especially worrisome are potential irreversible climate tipping points and nature’s reinforcing feedbacks … that could lead to a catastrophic ‘hothouse Earth,’ well beyond the control of humans.”
Their result could be “large areas of Earth uninhabitable.”
One key to solving the problem, they said, is “reducing inequality.”
“The world’s news media reported breathlessly that 11,000 scientists had issued a report contending that the Earth faces a ‘climate emergency.’ NBC News, to cite just one example, described a ‘study’ produced by an ‘international consortium of more than 11,000 scientists.'”
For the last five years, we’ve been warning that scientists are using the climate change hoax to pursue a planetary depopulation agenda that aims to eliminate billions of humans from planet Earth.
The assertion has been predictably mocked by the CIA-run fake news media as a “conspiracy theory,” even as those same media outlets fabricate their own baseless conspiracies about Russia, Trump and the 2016 election.
Today, the media is once again eating crow as a new science paper, reportedly signed by 11,000 scientists, demands the world’s governments take action to eliminate billions of humans from our planet. (“Democide” is the term describing mass genocide carried out by governments, by the way. In the last century or so, governments of the world have already mass murdered 262 million people. Apparently, that’s not nearly enough, according to genocidal climate scientists.)
Authored by William J. Ripple, Christopher Wolf and other colleagues, the paper declares that “planet Earth is facing a climate emergency” which must be addressed by making sure human populations to plummet.
Humans are bad, the paper argues, because they eat meat and engage in transportation. Seriously. This is part of their argument.
As one of the vocal skeptics of the climate change agenda, I have recorded a lecture series, now published at OblivionAgenda.com, which explains exactly why globalists are using the climate change hoax to decimate humanity and “cleanse” the planet from all humans. Now we finally have a clear, unequivocal admission from the scientific community that mass genocide against human beings is, indeed, their final solution.
ALL THE SCIENCE IS FAKED, AND EVEN THE CHARTS ARE FAKED (BUT JOURNALISTS DON’T UNDERSTAND THEM ANYWAY)
The science paper published in BioScience is, of course, entirely based on wildly false quack science conclusions such as claiming, “greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are still rapidly rising, with increasingly damaging effects on the Earth’s climate.” In truth, carbon dioxide is actually re-greening the Earth, even according to a NASA paper based on comprehensive satellite imagery. Rising CO2 levels, in other words, are healing planet Earth, not damaging it.
Yet somehow, the simple chemistry of carbon dioxide and photosynthesis now escapes 11,000 scientists who have declared that CO2 — the single most important nutrient for plant life on our planet — is somehow a pollutant or poison.
The paper also rolls out a series of incomprehensible graphs, each of which is carefully selected to narrow the lines and dots to a specific time window that exaggerates observed reality and tries to convince people to be very afraid of lines and dots:
And yet, the paper readily admits all the charts are completely bogus, consisting of pure scientific fraud. For example, one explanation below the charts says, “Forest gain is not involved in the calculation of tree cover loss.”
Huh? Tree cover loss calculations don’t consider trees growing back?
What that sort of logic, you could make any scenario look catastrophic. And that’s exactly what these researchers did.
THE PROBLEM IS TOO MANY HUMANS (AND LIVESTOCK), CLAIM RESEARCHERS
The root of all these scary graphs, warn the quack scientists, stems from, “sustained increases in both human and ruminant livestock populations.” They go on to explain that people are eating too much meat, taking too many airplane flights (Al Gore, anyone?) and releasing too much CO2 per person. But remember, since CO2 is actually a nutrient that re-greens the planet and boosts food crop production, these scientists are arguing that sustainable food production is bad for the planet.
By the way, nobody has a larger CO2 footprint than the jet-setting globalists and demented Hollywood celebrities like Leonardo DiCaprio, who demands everyone else lower their CO2 consumption while he flies a private jet everywhere.
In pointing out what they see as GOOD things for planet Earth, the scientists cite the success of “decreases in global fertility rates,” which is of course the entire agenda behind vaccines, transgenderism, 5G EMF exposure and pesticide contamination of the food supply. It’s all about causing spontaneous abortions and infertility as a means to eliminate humans from planet Earth. (Yes, the globalists truly hate any human who is living, and they are trying their best to carry out mass death and genocide.)
The paper goes on to claim that ocean sea levels are “trending upward” but fails to point out that the increases are so tiny, there isn’t a single city that has been inundated under 20 meters of ocean as has been repeatedly (and absurdly) predicted by climate lunatics like Al Gore. Despite all the failed warnings that a “tipping point” would be reached many years ago, these scientists now argue about “irreversible climate tipping points” that will spell disaster, causing a “catastrophic ‘hothouse Earth’ beyond the control of humans.”
But wait, aren’t these authors claiming it’s humans who controlled the entire climate to ruin it in the first place? Somehow, humans are said to be in control of the climate, yet the climate is out of control of humans. This self-contradictory junk science smacks of the very kind of irrational lunacy we repeatedly hear from climate change alarmists, none of whom can honestly be called “scientists” in the first place, since they have abandoned the very process of scientific thinking.
THEIR SOLUTION? COLLAPSE ALL PLANT LIFE ON PLANET EARTH BY ELIMINATING CO2 FROM THE ATMOSPHERE
The solution to all these “climate emergency” fears centers around annihilating life as we know it on the planet. It’s all based on demonizing — and the eliminating — CO2 from the atmosphere, which would collapse food crop production and plant life across the entire planet (including rainforests).
The paper quite literally demands the removal of the CO2 nutrient from the air — “carbon extraction from the source and capture from the air” — as a way to starve plants to death and collapse the global food supply, killing off humans. This process of altering the atmosphere to prepare a planet for occupation by a completely different species is, of course, called terraforming. And that’s exactly what’s being done to Earth.
It makes you wonder how crops are going to grow at all, and since these 11,000 scientists also demand an end to livestock, claiming “reducing the global consumption of animal products” is absolutely necessary to save the planet, they never answer the question of how will all their genetically modified soybeans grow at all when CO2 is removed from the atmosphere, since soybeans require photosynthesis.
If anything, this science paper reads like a suicide wish list for the complete extermination of humankind… all run by mad scientists who seem to despise the very idea of humans surviving on this planet much longer.
THE CLIMATE CHANGE FINAL SOLUTION? KILL BILLIONS OF PEOPLE: GEO-GENOCIDE
As we’ve known all along, this entire climate change hoax has always been about justifying depopulation schemes that are nothing short of genocide.
And while the Holocaust of World War II killed a reported six million people, today’s mad climate scientists say they want to eliminate six BILLION people (or more), making the geo-genocide literally one thousand times larger than the Holocaust.
Notably, just as the Holocaust participants threw Jews into concentration camps and starved them to death, today’s proposed eco/geo-genocide would collapse the global food supply and lead to mass starvation, famine, pestilence and basically every nightmare occurrence mentioned in the Book of Revelation.
“The world population must be stabilized — and, ideally, gradually reduced,” claim the 11,000 scientists. Then they talk about ways to “strengthen human rights while lowering fertility rates,” obviously with mandatory (gunpoint) vaccines, a deliberately contaminated food supply, the ongoing exposure to hormone-disrupting food supply chemicals and the mass cancer wave caused by 5G exposure that increases free radicals in the bloodstream, leading to mass death via inflammation that causes heart attacks, cancer and neurological malfunctions.
This mass genocide of human beings will, claim the scientists, “honor the diversity of humans” … “within a framework that ensures social integrity.” Whatever that means. It’s all just doublespeak for an authoritarian, Orwellian society where no one is allowed to question the climate lunacy without being censored, de-platformed, fired from your job and blackballed from science altogether.
To these lunatic scientists, “diversity” means that people of all color will be bulldozed into mass graves in the name of saving the planet. Genetically engineered, weaponized viral strains will be released to murder people of every nationality, too, in the name of “tolerance.” Mass starvation will not discriminate, since the collapse of global food crops will impact every human being. This is how “diversity” is achieved by the very same lunatic scientists who are now poised to turn the entire planet into a deadly gas chamber. But instead of gassing everyone with Zyklon B — the Holocaust gas created by Big Pharma scientists, by the way — they will deplete the atmosphere of the entire planet, starving plants for food and leading to the deliberate collapse of human civilization.
If you thought the Nazis were mass murderers, just wait until you see what Bill Gates and Harvard scientists have in mind.
Indeed, they have found a way to eliminate six billion people from planet Earth: It’s called geo-genocide, and it means billions of humans starving, suffering and dying so that a small number of delusional nut jobs who falsely claim to be “scientists” can inherit the (dead) planet.
Or at least that’s what they think they’re doing. In reality, they are inadvertently working under non-human influence to annihilate the planet, exterminate humankind and prepare Earth for a post-human future. I cover this in an extensive video lecture series at OblivionAgenda.com. (More videos are coming, the lecture series is not complete yet.)
HERE’S HOW THIS WILL ALL BE ACHIEVED: ABORTIONS, FORCED VACCINATIONS, DENIAL OF HEALTH CARE SERVICES, FORCED EUTHANASIA, MASS POISONINGS AND MASS EXECUTIONS OF “CLIMATE DENIERS”
You might be wondering, then, how exactly the tyrannical governments of the world are planning on achieving the extermination of six billion people.
First, there’s the planned collapse of the global food supply caused by the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. But that’s going to take decades to achieve. In the short term, they have far more vicious, violent plans to carry out. Those include:
Ramping up abortion propaganda and legalizing the murder of children that have already been born, up to any age. (Infanticide)
Mandatory (gunpoint) vaccinations for everyone, using vaccines that are intentionally laced with infertility chemicals to help collapse the population.
– Cellular DNA damage
– Lowered sperm count / infertility
– Neuropsychiatric effects (driving people insane)
– Apoptosis / cell death
– Calcium overload at the cellular level
– Endocrime system disruption
– Oxidative stress and free radical damage to all cells
Learn about “voltage-gated ion channels” in the paper linked above to understand why 5G and Wi-Fi exposure causes calcium overload of the body’s cells.
In essence, you are going to be targeted for termination via multiple vectors of toxicity, infertility, neurological damage, etc., and it will all be delivered via food, medications and EMF exposure.
As all of this is happening, the globalists will be blocking the sun and shutting down photosynthesis planet-wide through chemtrails / geoengineering which also, by the way, will sharply reduce the energy production capacity of solar panels across the globe. (So much for the “green energy” myth.)
In all, it’s a geo-genocide plan to kill human civilization and “reboot” the entire planet without humans surviving at all.
By the way, all these very same scientists proposing this geo-genocide are utterly ignorant of the existence of geoengineering schemes, 5G health risks, the spiking of vaccines with infertility chemicals, the deliberate mass poisoning of the food supply with pesticides and heavy metals, the ongoing development of engineered bioweapon viral strains, the censorship of natural cures that promote longevity, the chemtrailing of food crops and more. Many of today’s scientists are, laughably, the most un-informed people on the planet when it comes to real events that are threatening human civilization.
Imagine their shock when they find themselves being terminated by the same mass death they are demanding being unleashed upon the world. No one is safe — not even the scientists themselves — when fake climate science is allowed to dictate global government policy.