What the climate emergency narrative tells us about the death cult's psychology.
Ancient Yi Wasteland,
© Luye Zhang
Ancient Yi Wasteland.
The imminent destruction of the Earth's climate at human hands has been a constant theme throughout my life. The exact form of it has evolved somewhat over time. When I was a kid in the 80s it was the disappearing ozone layer. In the 90s it was global warming. In the naughts it morphed into climate change. Most recently the branding got racheted up to the more emphatic Climate Emergency.

It doesn't matter that none of the dire predictions of the past have manifested. Back around the turn of the millenium Al Gore rode a crane up the side of the infamous and long-discredited hockeystick graph, and confidently proclaimed that snow would soon be a thing of the past. Meanwhile, here in 2022, the Greenland ice sheet just added more mass in one day that at any other summer day in recorded history. That's just one example; there are others, more meaningful, such as the continuous failure of climate models to match actual global temperature changes, with the models consistently predicting far higher temperatures than have actually been experienced; the infamous emails between climatologists, arguing about how best to 'hide the decline' in global temperatures; the numerous instances of data having been manipulated to try and turn flat temperatures into slight increases, to smooth out previous warm or cool eras in order to emphasize recent supposed trends; and so on.

The failures of the models don't matter. Just as with the COVID mask formation, 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. All the failed predictions are forgotten just as soon as they look at the latest blood-red weather map, in which temperatures that a mere decade past would have been depicted with happy smiling cartoon suns are painted in the colour scheme of a murder scene.

I'm not going to ajudicate whether anthropogenic global warming driven by carbon dioxide emissions has any basis in fact. It doesn't, 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. I'm also not going to speculate on why so many people keep falling for it - it's for the same reason, ultimately, that they fell for the coronavirus psyop, the same reason they put pronouns in their email signatures, the same reason they loudly agree that white supremacist patriarchy is the real power structure in society, and the same reason they think the Rangz of Powah is a masterpiece of mythopoetic cinematography. Weak humans have low pain tolerance, and when you're a loyal citizen of the Empire of Lies the Truth Hurts like carbolic acid applied directly to the nerve endings.

What I'm interested in here is, why global warming, precisely? Why is the parasite class so obsessed with pushing this specific narrative?

The bluepill answer is that it's a real threat, and our leadership class are trying to save civilization from itself. Like I said, I'm gonna pass by that without comment.

The more cynical, and more correct, answer is that the narrative is exceedingly useful to their project of establishing a global technocratic governance system. Because the Climate Emergency is a global emergency, forestalling it demands global coordination. Further, the Climate Emergency is that best of emergencies, the permanent emergency - therefore it requires permanent global coordination. The deadly threat of runaway temperature rises, leading to droughts, famines, extreme weather, melting ice caps, coastal cities being flooded ... that threat will never go away so long as humanity is an industrial civilization. Preventing it demands constant vigilance. We will never be able to stop monitoring carbon emissions, because the moment we let our guard down, carbon levels will start rising again and the doomsday clock will move closer to hot high noon. To avoid destroying the planet, humanity must submit to a centralized control architecture that will ration out permission to travel, to eat, to heat, and to procreate according to algorithms designed so as to minimize, and ideally eliminate, our carbon footprints.

Even that answer, however, only provides a partial explanation for why the parasite class has settled upon global warming via carbon emissions, specifically, as supposed to some other hypothetical global crisis.

Think about it: the exact nature of the climatological threat is really quite arbitrary. They could have settled on global cooling, instead, with the deadly threat of a new Ice Age providing the invisible enemy with which to frighten humanity into surrendering our freedom. In the 1970s they were already running with that narrative; it wasn't until the 80s that the switch happened. Global cooling has a lot to recommend it, too. We know that we're in an interglacial, and moreover we know that we're near the end of the current interglacial - historically they last about 10,000 years, after which the icecaps race forward to swallow the land masses for the next hundred thousand. With only a small amount of imagination, a human role in this could be elaborated. For instance, air pollution increasing the albedo of the planet, and reflecting too much sunlight back into space, could be posited as a contributing factor - right there is your excuse to limit jet travel and restrict industry. The parasite class would have every excuse to claim that human activity could tip the global climate into a premature ice age, and from there to insist that the planet's resources must be marshalled to avoid this fate, and to warm the Earth instead. The catastrophic impact of global cooling is also easily demonstrated: historically, cooler temperatures lead to reduced crop yields, therefore famine, therefore plague, therefore war. The northern latitudes being trapped under miles of ice would remove much of productive global industry. Dropping sea levels (which were indeed hundreds of feet lower during the ice age) would leave our coastal cities high and dry, with severe impacts on global trade given that the ports would be rendered useless.

I think the answer to the question, why global warming instead of cooling, is precisely that global cooling is actually a threat to human flourishing.

Just as cool periods have always coincided with diebacks due to famine, plague, and war, so warm periods have always been accompanied by a flowering of human society. The High Middle Ages occurred during the Medieval Warm Period; the Roman Empire blossomed during the Roman Warm Period. Even our recent industrial flourishing in the latter half of the 20th century was accompanied by a warm spell following the end of the Little Ice Age. Taking the longer view, while a megalithic Ice Age civilization looks increasingly plausible, there's no evidence that they reached anything like the heights of technical sophistication enjoyed in the modern era: the long interglacial has been accompanied by a steady growth in human population and human prosperity.

The warm light of the Sun is life.

The chill embrace of the ice is death.

By convincing the human species that a warmer world represent an existential threat, they've convinced us to view life itself as a danger. We must fear the day and embrace the night; we must prevent, at all costs, the coming of summer, that winter may claim the world.

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 ... or placing giant sunshades in orbit, to eclipse our star and trap Earth within a permanent umbra.

Their obsession with global warming is a window into their psychology. The parasite class are a cult of death.

As the saying goes, you are the carbon they want to reduce.

Carbon is one of the essential elements of life, and they have declared war upon it, which is to say a war on life. In the name of that war on carbon, they demand that you do not reproduce, that you do not grow strong on a diet of meat, that you freeze in the dark. Consider the solutions they offer to the great threat of global warming: to cover the land with mirrors, reflecting the light of the Sun back into the sky; erecting great windmills that slaughter the beasts of the air by the thousands; manufacturing lithium batteries, requiring vast neurotoxic leeching pools that kill birds at a touch. Consider that the one technology that could provide sufficient energy to power our civilization, with no emissions - nuclear power, possibly the greatest triumph of scientific thought and technical mastery - is ruled strictly out of bounds 1.

Recently, the war on lifestuff has expanded - they've added a proton to the rogue's gallery of the periodic table, and announced that nitrogen is now to be considered a deadly pollutant. Nitrogen is primarily produced by agriculture; therefore, the agricultural sector must be decimated. This, in the context of growing global food shortages. As a result, the economy of Sri Lanka has collapsed; as a result, the Netherlands, one of the world's breadbaskets, is enveloped in farmer protests that have continued for months, now. The case of the Netherlands is instructive, for the farmers' spokesmen have repeatedly described their willingness to reduce nitrogen emissions, to find innovative solutions that can enable their high agricultural productivity to continue while dramatically reducing pollutants. This is no empty promise on their part: Dutch farmers have a long and distinguished record of innovation (this being why their small country is an agricultural powerhouse), and they have already developed a long list of practical proposals. 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.

Canada's WEF Occupation Government has recently announced a similar intention to render Canada's enormously productive prairies agriculturally barren, with nitrogen as the excuse.

They could not be more clear. They want us to freeze in the dark, and starve to death while doing it.

Here's a prediction: at some point, oxygen will be declared a dangerous pollutant. It's the next logical step.

Everything they do is calibrated to kill us.

They tell us this all the time. They are Malthusians - there are too many people, they say, the Earth has grown crowded and the ecosystems groan to the point of buckling under our weight, so humanity's numbers must be reduced to a more manageable level ... a few hundred million, perhaps ... though they avoid specifying, in public, on what is to become of the other several billion of us.

The signs of the death cult are everywhere, plain as day.

Abortion is a sacrament to them; while they cannot answer the simple question, 'what is a woman', they know that an essential step in a woman's coming of age, the defining event that marks her passing from girl to woman, is murdering the life in her womb.

Those children that are born, are encouraged to vivisect their genitalia, turning them into inside-out or outside-in parodies of their natural complements, thereby sterilizing themselves forever ... or if not, to indulge in sterile mockeries of sex, to spill their seed in mixtures of shit and blood ... or failing that, to alter their hormonal profiles such that conception is impossible, to deliver up their most fertile years to economic servitude in corporate bureaucracies as they dull themselves with the spiritual death of hedonism.

Then there are the rumours of the rituals practiced in the high and secret places, of drugs harvested from the glands of tortured and terrified children whose flesh is consumed as a delicacy following sacrificial sex magick rites ... rumours, yes, but then what of Epstein? What of his island, and the temple built upon it? What of the client list, still unreleased? What of all that weird shirt uncovered by the anons who dove into Pizzagate? What of the Belgian Dutreaux Affair? What of the Finders, the Franklin Coverup, and the connection of those events to Col. Michael Aquino, self-deified founder of the Temple of Set?

Perhaps such speculations are a mere fever dream.

Perhaps it is simply the collective imagination, projecting an elaborate metaphor that expresses the spiritual essence of the parasite class, but with no connection to empirical reality.

Perhaps.

Or perhaps, the Death Cult exists at a more concrete level than mere metaphor, and its adepts have fashioned rituals appropriate to their demonology. Perhaps the Epstein scandal was merely one of the instances of the hideous underbelly of the cosmic horror that has seized control of the minds occupying our highest levels of institutional power peaking out into view. Perhaps, for those with eyes to see, the signs of this darkness are hidden everywhere in plain sight.

Perhaps C.S. Lewis's macrobes are real. Mark Bisone, who's been one of the top commenters on this blog for a while now, recently opened his own Substack with a banger of an essay looking at exactly this possibility - what if spiritual evil is real, as in genuinely physically real, and if so, what would it look like? How would it operate?

Or perhaps the macrobes aren't real, and it's all in the heads of the parasite class, a societal egregore expressing a great cosmic No to life, to existence, to everything, an annihilating black hole of nullity that the death cult worships, which has reality only through their own psychic sickness. A god of nothing born in the warp storm. Perhaps the lords of sickness ruling our world are simply the Sierpinski gasket of evil, a strange attractor emerging from the simple behavioural rules followed by psychopaths.

Either way, how much easier is it to offer a hecatomb to your gods of darkness, if you can pour spiritual scopalamine into the souls of your victims, and have them actively choose death?

What better way to worship the Great No, than to train its victims to live in terror of the warm summer radiance of the Sun and demand the embrace of the winter's dead hand?

Note:
1 - One bluepill friend, who of course believes in the Climate Emergency but is technically adept enough to agree that nuclear power is the best solution to the supposed problem, suggested to me that this is not pursued because there is too much opposition. To which I replied simply, those who oppose it, are precisely those who joyfully received the mRNA inoculation; should the parasite class wish it, all they would have to do is conduct a media campaign in which a relentless message of 'safe and effective' was pounded into the soft heads of the NPCs, and the opposition to nuclear power would evaporate like morning dew.