It's the massive amount of media attention however which triggered me.
I can't help but think we are lied to again. Climate change is a hoax. It's not true. There is no correlation between the "human" excrement named CO2 and global warming. None. Although there is between all kinds of human excrement and "the environment"; the world we live in. This part I do not doubt: we are polluting our single stellar vessel but that's not discussed anywhere in mainstream. More on that later.
"Global Warming" however or "Climate Change"? No. It's not man-made.
School protests
Ever since the first week of this year Belgium sees pupil protests every Thursday. They rose and continue to rise up against "the government's and politician's inaction to react against the threat of climate change". They revolt because "they are afraid". These exact words triggered me. I heard them before. The last time was with "terrorism" back in 2001.
Through secondary school pupils (17-ish years of age) we hear that we should worry. We really, really need to be. No time left. Urgent action required. We even know how urgent in years! There's 12 left to do something; anything. A figure now often repeated by mainstream and their populace adepts. Not 13, not 11, nor even 10-and-a-half years; the answer is "12".
Speaking of urgency huh?
Spokesgirls of the Belgian students are Anuna De Wever and Kyra Gantois. They were shot to fame from the get go. Not a week passes without Anuna appearing in talkshows. She does well too. As if she had media-training. They took their cue only in December of last year. In their own words: "they took the actions of their Swedish peer Greta Thunberg as an example". Let us entirely forget she resembles Pippi Långstrump; a TV series first aired in 1969 about... a Swedish girl who "often makes fun of unreasonable adults, especially if they are pompous and condescending."
Back to Belgium. Anuna and Kyra managed to get thousands of secondary school students to skip classes on Thursday with only a few weeks of organization. Belgian national media witnessed this preparation as was evident in a report which was aired Sunday, February 27 2019. This makes me wonder: which channel sends in a TV crew before something becomes news?
Astounding Networks
Using kids as proponent of social change is nothing new as I addressed in the opening paragraphs of this article.
Nobody should ask questions though. We should not try to grasp how the 16-year old Greta was allowed to address the UN Climate Change COP24 Conference out of the blue. Nor should we wonder why she is allowed access to UN Secretary General António Guterres. Nor how she - as a relative nobody - was invited for coffee by French President Emmanuel Macron. Compare that to the observation that no delegation of the French popular uprising "Yellow Vests" gets this luxury.
Obviously, 16 year old girls also are frequent speakers at the yearly World Economic Forum in Davos which allows them coverage on the biggest of news channels. An opportunity which also brought her in contact with Bono, Al Gore, Christine Lagarde and... the Pope. Wow - not too shabby for a 16-year old...
When I (re-)posted about this weird observation on Facebook a friend of mine answered there had been precedents of nobodies speaking to the UN. She was absolutely right. We have had Margaretha Guidone from the village of "Kapellen" (Antwerp, Belgium) speech to the UN Climate Conference in 2006. Naturally - we all know her, don't we? Google brings up no less than 1.520 results when fed the Flemish lady's name. Quite in the same ballpark as the 4.000.000+ results when using "Greta Thunberg" as keywords, isn't it?
Lastly, is it really a coincidence that the European Commission launched an initiative in December 2017 using the exact same phrase our young climate protesters are using now? "Youth for Climate" was first mentioned in this press release.
Unfortunately, that massive difference in results does not diminish my gut feeling we are witnessing a coordinated campaign. Quite the contrary.
But to what end?
Climate Change is Big Business
Forbes published an article only December 12, 2018 titled: "With $32 Trillion In Assets, Investors Demand Immediate Action On Climate Change". The group of 415 investors need to have their or someone's mouth where the money is. They - as if big business suddenly became environmentaly cautious- "reiterated their support of the ongoing Paris Agreement taking place during COP24 in Katowice, Poland". As previously mentioned COP24 is the platform where Greta was invited to speak.
The World Bank pledged "to invest $200bn to combat climate change" as well while the European Investment Bank will commit at least 25% of their investment to "climate change mitigation and adaptation". These latter words are surprisingly in-line with how The Atlantic's "interactive" widget addresses the potential reactions to combat climate change in their article sponsored by Morgan Stanley.
As I mentioned at the start of this opinion piece: when I see such coordinated big business campaigns rehearsed all throughout mainstream media I increasingly ask myself questions.
Although all of the above made me ask more by the day, they did not make me a climate skeptic yet.
What did?
The Great Global Warming Swindle
Forbes published an article back on February 13, 2013 titled "Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis". Another one on the same site on May 31, 2012 named: "Sorry Global Warming Alarmists, The Earth Is Cooling". These must have been published before investors saw the great financial opportunity. Even before that on March 8, 2007 Channel 4 aired a documentary named "The Great Global Warming Swindle"which "argues against the virtually unchallenged consensus that global warming is man-made."
If you have not seen that documentary yet I urge you to do so before it gets pulled. The global elite does not want to share too much information which contradicts the narrative. The fight against fake news is nothing more than an urge to fight the dissenting voice as I argued before. As is visible from the intro on the YouTube page linked above [and repeated here in case it gets pulled] the contributors to the program were professionals. Martin Durkin knits testimonials of the following experts throughout the strong narrative in this show:
- Professor Tim Ball - Dept. of Climatology - University of Winnepeg, Canada
- Professor Nir Shaviv - Institute of Physics - University of Jerusalem, Israel
- Professor Ian Clark - Dept. of Earth Sciences - University of Ottawa, Canada
- Dr. Piers Corbyn, Solar Physicist, Climate Forecaster, Weather Action, UK
- Professor John Christy - Dept. of Atmospheric Science - University of Alabama, Huntsville - Lead Author, IPCC (NASA Medal - Exceptional Scientific Achievement)
- Professor Philip Stott - Dept of Biogeography - University of London, UK
- Al Gore - Former Presidental Candidate
- Margaret Thatcher - Global-Warming Promoter
- Professor Paul Reiter - IPCC & Pasteur Institute, Paris, France
- Professor Richard Lindzen - IPCC & M.I.T.
- Patrick Moore - Co-Founder - Greenpeace
- Dr. Roy Spencer - Weather Satellite Team Leader - NASA
- Professor Patrick Michaels - Department of Environmental Sciences - University of Virginia, US
- Nigel Calder - Former Editor - New Scientist
- James Shikwati - Economist & Author
- Lord Lawson of Blaby - Secretary of Energy - UK Parliament Investigator, UK
- Professor Syun-Ichi Akasofu - Director, International Arctic Research Centre
- Professor Fredrick Singer - Former Director, US National Weather Service
- Professor Carl Wunsch - Dept. of Oceanography - M.I.T., Harvard, University College, London, University of Cambridge, UK
- Professor Eigil Friis-Christensen - Director, Danish National Space Centre
- Dr. Roy Spencer - NASA Weather Satellite Team Leader
- Paul Driessen - Author: Green Power, Black Death
Doing so mainstream media keeps eerily quiet about a significant number of scientists who do doubt the results. According to the site linked right before: 31.487 Americans including 9.029 PhDs. They do not mention the signatories of the "Manhattan Declaration" either. Channel 4's documentary explains the incongruence well.
Why?
From the above one could deduct that something stinks. To what end though? The answer is as straightforward as can be. All this is devised to make sure capital gravitates even more to where it finds its natural home; that is with capitalists. This, again, will be detrimental to the people who are sold a lie. It will certainly not help developing nations either who are asked to invest in clean energy while we burn fossils. The masses will put up with increased taxes on everything identified as pollution.
Expect airplane tickets to get more expensive; extremely good (but expensive) insulation to become mandatory; fuel prices to be jacked upwards; car rides to be billed by the mile; meat to be raised in price. Maybe we'll even see taxes on Google queries and Facebook usage? Our digital habits "leave a strong CO2 print" after all. It's another scheme to move money out from the masses' pockets and onto the accounts of these entities having the biggest "carbon footprint" of us all. Anyhow, I might not need to rehearse what has been eloquently explained already.
And we'll all agree.
Some of The Real Dangers
Now before I leave you to #makeupyourownmind about all this and as a disclaimer of sorts. Refer to what I wrote right at the beginning. I am convinced our modern human society has a detrimental influence on our environment but not so much on climate.
I'd want Greta, Anuna, Kyra and the school protesters to address the dangers of 5G wireless technology for example as the technology is lauded by most press as the next big thing.
They could address the worrisome decline in insects over the last decades. 40 percent of insect species are according to National Geographic.
They might do well addressing the beehive colony collapse disorder happening from the US to Asia.
But they do not and I can't blame them.
They're kids after all.
And they blame adults for acting like kids.
Much like Pippi Långstrump indeed.
That's what Hitler did.