Congratulations MAA, possibly the best, most complete and compelling analysis of the situation. I identify with you as I too have come the complete circle, from environmental activist to mainstream scepticist. At this point I reject anything that rejects the natural evolution of things in favour of something synthetic.
This is definitely one-stop shopping if you're in the market to dismantle this deeply entrenched global narrative - on which so many other scams rely.
Not that I'm surprised of course. But damn, you've packed a helluva punch here and I so appreciate it.
Brilliant to place the soldier/scout metaphors up front, softening the metal ground. Essential. Your personal stories of resistance and Michael's persistence, invaluable.
Wonderful, wonderful contribution to the book. May this spread far and wide. Repeating myself - just brilliant.
Thank you so much, Kathleen. I am pinning your comment because what you said about this being a one-stop shopping piece was my goal precisely. My hope is people can use this to understand the breadth and depth of the corruption, propaganda, and manipulations surrounding the climate narrative and that they can also share this with people who may be starting to question their implanted beliefs and are open to learning more.
Sending you my warmest love, my dear Apocaloptistic sister 🤗💓🌤
Totally agree with Kathleen. Margaret, this is just outstanding. Thank you for your efforts. You covered all the bases, so comprehensive. I didn't know hardly any of what you shared with us. Mostly, I operate on instinct or intuition, as in, "I smell a rat."
I especially resonated with your story of how you transitioned from being a lefty to where you are now, a "Truthy". You are truly amazing.
This is superb -- what a treasure-trove of resources, and all delivered in the thoughtful, measured, poetic prose style that characterizes your work. A pleasure to read; essential to read.
I will, of course, read it in its entirety. But I'm a slow and careful reader and for now I simply wish to say, that based on a quick scroll, I have no doubt this is indeed an epic takedown.
I always tell people (at least the one or two who feign interest in what I say), that CAGW is the foundational, always-running-in-the-background psy-op.
Once there were the Nazis. Then there were, and are, the Zio-Nazis. And now we have the Netzes, those hideously brain-washed, fanatical Net-zero-cult nutters.
Yup, a truly excellent piece! And doubtless timely, given the current Persian Gulf energy disruption.
THIS: “Climate hysteria is a coup de mâitre for the cruelites.”
Matt Gallagher: “So how do you convince a populace used to freedom that they need to accept temporary restrictions for the greater good?” — Carbon copy of the CovidCon … Free Hugs indeed! (courtesy BeVinodi Comics)
“What on Earth” is a one hour CBC radio program that, fittingly, runs on Sundays. Wikipedia describes it as a “radio program focusing on environmental issues”. But, as you might expect, it's actually focused on spreading the gospel of CAGW, aka "climate crisis/emergency". Unsurprisingly, it began airing in the Summer of Floyd (2020).
And speaking of Canuckistan, here's an interesting bit: Avi Lewis was elected today as the new leader of the NDP (Canada's “socialist”, perennial 3rd place national party). The reason I mention this, is that he is married to celebrated arch-propagandist/useful-idiot Naomi Klein. Incidentally, Avi directed “This Changes Everything”, a documentary based on Naomi's mega-selling book.
I skim read the above article, people’s brains have been reprogrammed by mind control and now believe absolute BS, it only takes about 20 years through the education system and the mainstream media and constant repetition of lies coupled with the hive mind, interesting times, I’m glad to be an old git the future isn’t looking good, transhumanist, totalitarian technocracy in my view! ☮️❤️🏴
I know you know I know this but it can’t hurt to say it again: you write so well. 🙏
As you say, it’s a case of understanding there’s a playbook and that we are manipulated through fear. But it seems to me there’s always a grain of truth or two within all the falsehoods. To confuse, to obfuscate, to allow the elites (or ourselves) to point to something real within the lies. And vice versa - a falsehood is integrated into something true so that it’s hard to tell truth from fiction. And in a binary world of 1’s and 0’s, of Team Red or Team Blue, a world that has forgotten nuance, people pick a side and swallow their chosen ideology wholesale, seemingly unaware of the contradictions and downright nonsense wrapped into the microwaveable, ready-to-eat belief system of choice.
For whatever reason, the manmade ’Climate Crisis’ was not a thing I ever bought into and I can’t say exactly why because all the propaganda reached us here in Africa. Perhaps too many other immediate problems to worry about. Perhaps an understanding that I could really do very little to stop the problem as it was laid out for me. I’m not sure.
I write this to say I didn’t have to break my mind and let go of my identify regarding ‘Climate’ in the same way I did with ‘Covid’. Once I understood the Covid playbook (and the bigger picture of deception, corruption, greed and manipulation), I then recognised the same pattern in the Climate one but I had never internalised that ideology in the same way I had ‘medical doctors are trying to help me’ etc…So while I do think we need not worry about being implicated in global boiling or global cooling or whatever it is today, the idea that damage is being done is correct. The need for our footprint to be lighter is true. But in the minds of many, the lies have now been woven into the truth and the real issue, blurred. It’s the sun that’s the problem, not geo-engineering! It’s carbon, not the tokenisation of carbon, that’s the problem!
I’m suddenly reminded of the 90’s track by Baz Luhrman ‘Everybody’s Free (To Wear Sunscreen)…IYKYK.
What am I trying to say here? I’m trying to say if we spend more time in the real world, paying attention, we’ll find a lot of the chaos and bad ideas are simply virtual, whether on our computer or as a download in our heads. The drumming up of collective fear via movies (a moment for Al Gore, the O.G. climate shyster), TedTalks, the theatre that is Greta Thunberg etc - it’s all part of the same ‘Be Afraid’ playbook/playbill that warps what we think is important because it contains some truth.
Because we’ve become so far removed from reality itself that we can no longer appreciate the messy perfection of nature. Which deserves our reverence because once considered, will leave you dumbstruck. Once we appreciate where we live, understand the odds of us being alive at this very moment, that the world is an abundant place and scarcity is part of the playbook, it might shift us to value the pear off the pear tree at the bottom of our garden more than our ability to ship an avocado half way around the world, because we can. We might choose to eat seasonally, locally, again. We may choose to stop consuming quick fashion, non-stick cookware, TikTok videos, a smart house downloading all your ‘data’ all the time. (You are not data). The list is endless. I’m not advocating for ‘Net Zero’ at all. Just awareness.
For the last three and a half years (since moving from Johannesburg to Cape Town) I walk in the forest every day and I have some understanding of the perfection of nature that we are part of. It grew slowly, over years, over seasons, over observing the different quality of light at different times of the day, of watching a wasp kill an enormous spider and drag it off, of seeing the pink spring blossoms become brown twigs and pink blossoms again. I didn’t ‘get it’ on the first beautiful walk. It’s taken years. Of all the rabbit holes I have been down since 2020, the most life-changing has been the one that was me.
This whole shebang, the world, the universe, the cosmos, is a moral place. What you choose to value matters. And it seems to be dependent on how you are disposed to see the world and yourself as part of it. And what you think you might be doing here in the first place. For me, I know it’s not to buy more insurance, it’s not to have a white-girl summer in Bali, it’s not looking like I’m a good and kind person to others while signing a contract with my corrupt government or global corporate, and it’s not to write angry social media posts while standing in a line to vote because this time it’ll work. It’s changing what I can change inside me. To rejoin this glorious world faithfully.
(Random sidebar: REM’s Man On The Moon has been recently, ‘randomly’ popping up for me. 🚀🌝)
That was so exquisitely beautiful and profound, dear Lisa—just like you 😻💓🤗
I especially appreciate your articulation of the grander playbook as it is that pattern I’m trying to help people recognize. The more people understand it, the fewer who will get fooled the next time … and the next time … and the next time.
The cruelites are very unimaginative and use the same tactics over and over again—because they work. But they’ll stop working if enough people see through the magic tricks.
Excellent summary! Thank you so much! I feel very privileged that I can call it a summary because I read since about ten years the science blog https://sciencefiles.org/ They have published in depth research articles on climate change (and later on CoVid) for 20 years. You can find them also on Telegram https://t.me/RealScienceFiles Only drawback: It's in German. However you can easily select the translation function. As a scientist myself (though in a very different field) I am glad that others like you take science as serious as I do.
I considered the whole CO2=climate change angle in the early 2000's during some record heat waves in the Southwest with 120 degree desert days. Seeing the damage firsthand from Hurricane Katrina in late 2005 changed my mind on that, even though this event was supposed to ironically cement belief in man made climate change.
In short this looked man made, but not in a whole of world way. It was in more of a targeted energetic weapons way. It had me pondering the emergency FEMA response or lack thereof from the cop who stopped us on that lonely Mississippi road, his Indiana State Trooper car donated from another place, who talked about his wife and sons being swept away on the gulf coast during the storm surge. Their bodies were never found.
"Never forget. I need you to tell them what happened here."
He was like a ghost of a man out there: wandering around, doing the motions he had done for probably decades, his family gone and no way to go on really. People don't realize that the "Storm surge" rarely even mentioned during Hurricane Katrina, looked like a nuclear weapon had been detonated on the Gulf Coast. It leveled everything. An entire riverboat casino rested on top of a decimated building hundreds of meters inland. Boats were still hanging out of trees even one or two miles away from the shore, along with cowhides and all types of strange things. On the Gulf road itself there were no traffic lights, no traffic signs, almost no landmarks and even the road could be hard to find. The entire area around Gulfport for example was levelled.
That's what began my deep dive into the evils of Malthusianism and how forces of good and evil shape that conversation behind the scenes. It's always about blaming the individual for the collective problems. But what if the problems are themselves just created by a very small number of individuals?
One wonders why the climate change idea is being promoted so strenuously. From my point of view it's because there really is a problem that humanity faces, and that is the oil, gas, and coal supply is finite. Of those, oil is the most important and also the most critical, because oil production is past its peak. Technological society can basically only run on fossil fuels, mainly oil. So there will be a serious problem concerning dwindling oil supplies from now on. It means resource wars, because no nation-state wants to lose access to oil, since if it does it will cease to be a technological society and probably collapse altogether.
Another complication is that TPTB, who act above the level of nation-state, want to retain the advantages of technological society, which means they want to make sure oil is available to themselves and enough of the main mass of the population such that the current ideal of progress is maintained. That means they have to devise ways of conserving oil. One way is to reduce the population. Another way is to limit energy use per capita. It looks like that is what they are trying to do.
And instead of being up front about what they are really doing they are promoting this fake climate change idea. It's probably because they have wargamed this through their think-tanks for decades and come to the conclusion they can more effectively coerce the population to do what they want by means of reference to climate change than they could by telling the truth about oil.
As it is they: the various govt's, media, official academia, are rather silent about the oil situation. They don't want anybody even thinking about it. And on the rare occasions when the issue comes up they trot out their usual rhetoric which includes denial that oil is a fossil fuel, or that it is finite in amount. It's all a lot of arm-waving.
Now we see what looks like a resource war in Iran. It might be real, and then again it might be entirely stage managed. It could be a forcible and controlled reduction of oil usage, leading to various desirable outcomes (from the point of view of tptb) such as travel restrictions and what have you -- more totalitarianism, anyway. Maybe they just want to collapse or at least severely weaken the US. The alternative would be an uncontrolled free for all competition for the remaining oil leading to potential chaos. Chaos is anathema to them, since above all they want always to control.
On what basis did you decide oil and gas are finite?
You surely know that they’re not “fossil”, the product of formerly living matter?
Instead, their most likely origin is from methane trapped in the planet at formation.
High temperatures and pressures convert monomeric methane through the alkanes to octane (much of gasoline).
There’s absolutely no evidence it’s running out. Just a lot of claims of that.
Consider the experimental thought that we’ve extracted less than 1% of it.
In the case of coal, it is unequivocally the case that in practise we could never use it all up. There’s so much of it. If U.K. ran mostly on coal for electricity generation and heating, there’s at least 300 years worth underground in U.K. alone.
Much of the heart of deserted Australia is rich in coal and other natural resources.
So I don’t buy the oil is running out idea. Also, the powerful couldn’t care less about the population.
We’ve been lied to even about “nuclear”, both nuclear fission weapons (which are a hoax: Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed using incendiaries, high explosives and laced with nitrogen mustard, to mimic the bone marrow destroying effects of non existent radiation) and nuclear electricity generation. These work, but not by atomic decay (see Dr Steven A Young, Galen Winsor & others).
About the only thing you can rely upon is that the official narrative is a lie.
Yes. Delingpole piling in here. If you’re going to assume the vocabulary of someone who is awake - TPTB - you need to be aware of the full picture rather than keep one foot in Normieworld. Oil, as Mike says, is NOT a fossil fuel. It is abiotic. The scarcity story is a narrative which has been introduced to the conversation by bad actors like the Rockefellers. As for Peak Oil theory - which you are effectively endorsing here - read my book Watermelons. Or, short version, be aware that the guy pushing Peak Oil theory was a notorious technocrat M King Hubbert with an agenda. He has been proven wrong on multiple occasions, not unlike Thomas Malthus.
Essentially what you are doing with posts like this, even if in good faith, is running cover for the Enemy.
If MKingHubbert was deploying a false scarcity strategy as guided by Thee Kinetic Despots then there has been no truth in geology. Or, such a control of oil formations has been implemented that the ME is pure theater.
If there are known but unrevealed oil deposits or if oil refreshes as fast as it can be usefully extracted l for IC then which sciences have not been infiltrated? Also, how is a completely enslaved populace, waiting patiently for rations, incapable of any disturbance, any benefit to elite rule? To watch as entertainment? For experimentation? How impenetrable must the tower be to secure a vantage over such populace? Would a micromanaging godforce efficiently serve a thrifty working class to sustainability? Are we to be monitored and mined for selection and elevation to a higher class? How many generations until the elite class mutates into elite subdivisions and foments their own revolution?
It could be, as you say, that the "normal" geological explanations for oil are false, just as the normal explanations for vaccines are false. One readily accepts that these days much of what passes for common knowledge is actually false, and even deliberately faked.
With regard to the Peak Oil hypothesis, it seems to have drifted into the metaphysical realm, since trustworthy data on the subject is scant or contradictory, especially over the last 10 years or so. But whether oil turns out to be biotic or abiotic doesn't matter much, what is important is whether it is finite in supply or not. Even metaphysically speaking it is probably finite, unless we want to allow a series of mini big-bangs (whether naturally occurring or divine) that constantly replenishes it. Meanwhile demand for it continues to grow, as more countries adopt Enlightenment Philosophy as their guiding light and attempt to become industrialized.
It's curious to some that if we look at world population estimates over the period 1800-2000 we see a tremendous increase. And if we want to believe statistics on world oil production over the same interval they compare pretty closely. Just for the sake of argument, suppose oil is finite, and production is currently declining. How long would it take for population to adjust (decline is perhaps the word I was searching for) to less energy being available (especially for growing, harvesting, and transporting food)? Perhaps that is too Malthusian a line of argument? Would there come a point where the economic system (including food production) simply collapses? That would result in chaos. I'm suspecting our TPTB friends abhor and disrelish the very idea of chaos, since they always and everywhere want control.
Watermelons: I've been tempted to read it, following upon exposure to your podcasts. I'm currently reading five books, so perhaps one more would be just as easy?
Given that their motto is Ordo ab Chao I’m not sure you are quite right about this. We’re talking about the same people who staged the First and Second World Wars as a Satanic cull cum business venture. Creating wars of that magnitude is not the behaviour of people who aren’t comfortable with chaos.
Are we veering toward the unusual situation of agreement with each other? At any rate I agree with the idea Ordo ab Chao being a modus operandi of the fabled tptb.
I'm wondering about degrees of chao. I suspect that at lower degrees the overall situation resembles the Hegelian problem-reaction-solution gambit. Tptb sit back and pull the strings. They create a certain amount of chaos, but at a level that they manage and control. They themselves aren't affected much; it's the main mass of the population (or whatever subset is being targeted) that experiences the disruption and then becomes susceptible to directives that tptb give them (such as wearing masks).
But what happens if the level of chaos is really high? An all-out nuclear war would do that. Same thing if the earth got hit by a sizable meteor. It is to be expected that tptb would not like it if they themselves were caught up in the chaos. I suspect that is the last thing they would want. They want to feel in control at all times. Real chaos that affects them would in addition threaten their very existence.
So, working on the assumption that the Peak Oil hypothesis is true, they, tptb, might very well consider themselves at risk. So they wouldn't sit back and twiddle their thumbs and lament their impending demise, they would do something about it, with all that money they have (they have nearly unlimited funds). They would want to conserve the oil. That means less energy use. Fewer people. Less energy use per capita (except for themselves). Much of what is happening in the wide world today is interpretible against this theoretical background. And hello, what's this? I've accidentally (or synchronistically) stumbled on someone who agrees with me: Vernon Coleman. Weird.
As to WWI and WWII, I find I can readily agree with your explanation, brief though it is. Banksters made them happen in order to enrich themselves and take greater control over foreground governments. Then they wanted to kill people too, since they are dominated by pride and the end point of pride development is the desire to annihilate the being of others. War is great for that. I might add another reason, since we're talking about WWI and WWII: that is they were fought in order to establish Israel in Palestine (banksters are Jewish, or at any rate Zionist).
These days there is a lot of confusion on many topics, even scientific ones that formerly were believed to have been settled and beyond question. For instance, there is suddenly doubt regarding whether the moon landings took place, controversy regarding where oil comes from and how it is formed, and even arguments about whether the earth is flat or spheroidal, among other things...atom bombs.
The atmosphere of psychological warfare has increased greatly over, say, the last 50 years, and now touches on various subjects that used to be considered peripheral to power politics: moon landings, oil, and shape of the earth, among a host of others. One advantage to all this doubt is that it breeds confusion among the main mass of the population, with the consequence that they become more easily manipulated by the propaganda. As a reaction some adopt the position the the gov’t/media nexus is lying, or even that they are always lying: paradoxically making it easy to pick and choose what to believe or not believe without thinking it through. At least that’s the way it looks to me.
It’s hard for me to grapple with some of these newfangled claims, like the moon landings were faked. I grew up adjacent to the unmanned space center, and quite a few people I went to school with were offspring of scientists and technicians who worked there. They used to give guest lectures on what they were working on (Mariner missions to Mars, for instance). My high school physics teacher was married to the person who originally determined the age of the earth “four point six times ten to the ninth” (years). They did it with lead isotope ratios. So it seems mighty implausible that the whole space program is faked. Then if some of it is real (like communication satellites — the ideal orbital positions were proposed by Arthur C. Clarke back in the forties, if I remember right), where does one draw the line between real and fake? Was project Mercury a fake? Project Gemini? Project Apollo? Project Mercury was very probably real, and if it was, then so were Gemini and Apollo. But if the claim is made that although Apollo was real but we (or anybody) didn’t actually land on the moon it looks peculiarly adhoc. Same thing regarding doubt over nuclear weapons. What, did the US (and Russia, UK, France) just build all those boomers more or less for the fun of it? Those things cost a fortune...did they build them just to load them up with pseudo-nuclear weapons? What about all the strategic arms limitations treaties and conferences that have taken place? Why waste so much time and political energy over a non-threat? EMP — discovered by the Soviets as a consequence of their nuclear testing in the fifties — was that fake? Moreover, the Deep State doesn’t like nuclear weapons (because they can’t instigate a large war between nation states that have them since that kind of war would result in mutual destruction). Of course now might be different, if they’ve changed their mind and want all-out destruction. That’s possible, too.
As to oil, I have a background in geology, and at one time I was fairly conversant with the standard explanation (one might call it the settled science, though I realize that’s a loaded term these days). So when a geophysicist claims, in 1956, that the US oil production would peak in 1970, and it happened (even if no one believed him when he made the prediction), I tend to lean toward the geologists and the geophysicists when they are talking about oil. In short, the standard explanation (among those who don’t work for oil companies) is that oil is organic in origin. It is finite. The total endowment is 2.1 trillion barrels. Half of that has been used. The remaining oil will be harder to find and more expensive to produce. We are in that period now, since we have past the peak.
A few more observations are in order. We live in a technological society. It rests on two pillars: 1) ideology (Enlightenment Philosophy), and 2) energy (oil). There is no substitute for oil. The other so-called alternatives aren’t energy dense enough. Moreover oil itself is not only limited in supply, but becomes less useful and energetic the further past the peak we go. It provides energy when produced, but it requires energy to produce it. That sets up a significant ratio, abbreviated EROEI (Energy Returned On Energy Invested). For oil it used to be 100:1. It’s much less now (data on this kind of thing has become hard to come by these days). At some point, even if there is oil in the ground, it can’t be used as an energy source because the EROEI will equal 1. When will that happen? I suspect the Deep State, via their think-tanks, know (but they are not talking). I wouldn’t be surprised if it were sometime middle/late this century. That means technological society has a built-in limit: it only lasts as long as its limiting resource exists (oil). That span looks to be about 150-200 years. And we are near the end.
It is to be presumed that the Deep State people want to retain their position: being in control, enjoying a lavish 20th century energy-rich lifestyle, and in addition, promote and develop the course of history to their liking — in accord with their ideology (myth of progress, science maximization, technology maximization). So that means they have a problem, since oil, usable, high EROEI oil, is running out — especially since demand is growing, as more countries become technologized/industrialized.
At the level of the nation state the leadership probably is aware of these problems also. Given sufficient withdrawal of energy from the economy, the economy will collapse. And since there is only so much remaining oil we should expect resource wars. Remember Dune? Frank Herbert used spice as an analogue for oil. He started writing the book in the late 1950s. His previous book was about WWIII and oil. What has been happening recently? War in Libya (oil), Iraq (oil), Venezuela (oil), Iran (oil). Of course there may be other considerations, such as the petrodollar issue, but what a coincidence we have all these wars involving oil.
Above the level of the nation-state there are quite a few things happening that are consistent with the idea the Deep State wants to conserve oil for their own purposes, and perhaps extend the lifespan of technological society. They want fewer people (thus lethal vaccines, abortion, euthanasia, various sterilization schemes). They want less energy use per capita (travel restrictions, 15 minute cities, carbon credits). Less productive economies? Could be. They might have a plan to manage and control the use of energy in the oil declining period. They want to control everything, so why wouldn’t they want to control that?
And then there’s one more thing. They are not talking about the issue. They trot out the global warming idea instead. Like I said before it probably means they have decided they can get more compliance from us waving the fear of the global warming rather than dealing with the truth of the energy (oil) situation. And what else? In addition to not discussing the real issue, they obfuscate, by floating ideas about oil not being finite, not being organic, and so on. ANd there are those who show up on the internet and promote these ideas. So I’m wondering, here we have a set of assertions that contradict what might be called a scientific consensus regarding oil — from 75 years ago, or thereabouts — right at the point when the energy situation has become an item of supreme political significance. Is it a coincidence? Is it better science? Maybe it is better science, but it’s likely it’s psychological science, and not geological science.
The key word is renewable. Another facet of energy production is farming. An old saying by miners is “if it can't be grown it must be mined.” Most of the energy lies stem from an unrecognized and unremembered fact. Cannabis hemp can produce virtually ALL of the products petroleum is currently used for, not to mention it is the strongest oldest fabric known to man, outproduces conifers for woody pulp production, and produces the best paper in history. The war on drugs has only one true purpose. That is to keep industrial hemp out of the competition. If hemp was used for all of its possible products farmers in America would again lead in the economic struggle between agriculture and industry, or basically, what I believe is still the continuing struggle between the north and the south. Oil businesses would easily loose half of their revenue.
If it became unequivocally clear to you that governments have lied to us about something substantial, like nuclear fission weapons, do you think that would prompt you to consider the possibility that their lying about addition, also substantial things?
If yes, please have a look at this book. It’s not large and reduced considerably if you’ve got a good basic grasp of nuclear basics.
Ps: I also have proved to my satisfaction that we’ve been lied to about viruses (there’s no evidence any of them exist: see Jamie Andrews writing here), contagion (all published papers fail to demonstrate it) and therefore “vaccines” are now and always have been unnecessary, ineffective and variably harmful (see the writings of legal scholar Katherine Watt: https://bailiwicknewsarchives.wordpress.com/ there isn’t any doubt about this. It’s not opinion. It’s all there in the stealthy process of deception, meaning that no product classed as a vaccine has ever been regulated in any way).
These two are enormous frauds. That they are both transnational also puts a bowling ball through our basic beliefs about a multipolar world, which I think is an illusion.
I think I see where you're coming from. It's an analogy. Would it be something like "Just as the governments and media have been lying about covid-19, and indeed about viruses in general, so too the deception is greater by far, in that they are also lying about nuclear weapons, moon landings, Peak Oil, climate change, and just about everything else, too."
I'm sympathetic to that standpoint, in a general sense, since I believe the root deception is the widespread adoption of Enlightenment Philosophy. I disbelieve Enlightenment Philosophy, chiefly because it denies God, and consequently I don't automatically believe in a whole host of assertions that most other people adopt as a matter of course (such as vaccinations protect one from disease). Then one immediately runs up against scale factors: how much is actually lies? I doubt, metaphysically speaking, that everything (all of science, for instance) is a lie. I suspect that TPTB are usually content to let ordinary science progress without tampering, as long as it doesn't impact politics, or the Party Line in some area of significance to them and their revolutionary propensities. So they have a tendency to let mathematics and astronomy, for instance, more or less alone. What about geology? It used to be that there was a certain consensus regarding oil and, whether it was right or wrong, it wasn't newsworthy, so to speak. That was in days gone by when the US, for instance, was exporting a lot of oil. Now it imports a lot. So now energy, particularly oil, is potentially significant to politics. And now, surprise, surprise, we all of a sudden have newfangled theories concerning oil, the general idea of which is that there is now and always will be plenty of it, so no need to worry. Don't think about it. It's suspicious. Maybe it's true: science marches on. And it could be that the "old" (75+ years ago and more) theories of oil were even at that time being deceptively promoted, just as these days various pharmaceuticals are deceptively promoted. But I'm wondering: the Germans invaded North Africa in WWII, and one of their objectives was to take control of the oil fields in the Middle-east. Same thing when they diverted one of their army groups to the south when they invaded the Soviet Union. They wanted the oil fields in Baku. In the early 20th century the British were all over the Middle-east: Churchill, Gertrude Bell, Lawrence of Arabia. Of course they were generally interested in imperialism, and there was no doubt intrigue concerning the establishment of Israel in Palestine, but they also wanted the oil. So I'm thinking, why all this massive interest in oilfields if oil is plentiful and there's no problem about it and don't worry? And now we see yet more war and intrigue swirling around oil: Iraq, Venezuela, Iran, to name of few.
I'm looking at the situation and it seems to me that quite a lot of what is happening in the realm of international power politics is explainable with reference to the Peak Oil hypothesis being true. Covid-19, for instance. They wanted lockdowns (less movement consequently less energy use). They wanted to kill people -- with the vx -- consequently less energy use. Now we have yet another war in the Middle-east, or what looks like a war, and oil is inevitably involved. There might be other considerations, but it's likely that governments are going to be responding by trying to limit or ration energy use, by edict. It already has happened in certain countries. Less energy use all over again. And they want 15 minute cities (TPTB does, anyway). That means less energy use per capita. It strikes me that none of this would be happening if oil were no big deal.
So is the Iran war real? It seems to be on the surface, but could it be another pageant, like Covid-19 was? The objective, in both instances, seems to be to contrive a situation where less energy is used by the main mass of the population. It could be that, despite the bombings and the casualties, the war is basically a psychological maneuver having something to do with not only control, but with leveraging energy use.
When you look at the world from the perspective of the cruelites, you realize the climate lie goes hand in hand with the energy scarcity lie, and both are being used to persuade 99% of the public to submit to one-world technotalitarianism because no one would willingly accept slavery without a virtuous call to sacrifice for the greater good. The cruelites get people to roll over without a fight while they achieve their goals of PROFIT, POWER, and DEMOCIDE and hoard the resources for themselves:
I'm glad to see you believe there are and were no viruses. That was my gut feeling, which I still maintain, from the beginning of this absurd episode in American/ world history. I also maintain that by habitually using vaccines to protect ourselves from viruses, we're not allowing our natural immune system to develop, resulting in more susceptibility to disease over the course of life, especially into old age. Natural support for our immune system with herbal supplements appears, logically, to be a preferred method to sustain health.
Suddenly doubt? It's been doubted since 1969! Space may be the final frontier bur it's made in a Hollywood basement” Red Hot Chili Peppers, 2000. Where have you been?
The finite resource being protected here is POWER (hierarchy).
The problem which needs solving is not ‘climate change’ or ‘peak oil’ but the rather unfortunate liberation and empowerment of the masses in the post industrial era thanks to all the new amazing technology. This has effectively levelled the playing field between the ‘elites’ and the ‘peasants’.
Thanks to modern technology we can all live like kings and queens (ie modern middle class lifestyles) and we can even bypass elite controlled media and outcompete them with our own media platforms, video editing software and social media.
Even poor kids living in the inner city get to own new trainers, a smartphone and a computer. Cheap air travel is a thing. The world is our oyster.
The environmental movement was invented in the 1960’s to put a DRAIN on modern living standards and to thwart any more progress and liberation.
The modern healthcare system was invented to BURDEN us with poisons (vaccines) which we must all carry for life, which also have the effect of DRAINING our health and prosperity and keeping us down.
All wars (including all ‘wars on X’) are primarily designed to beat the masses down economically, psychologically, spiritually and by killing off each generation’s healthy young men and traumatising the women.
The war on carbon is a taxation on your very existence. They ran out of other things to tax so now they are taxing the air that you breath out (and fart).
Coal, oil etc are being misrepresented as ‘finite’ and mines and oilfields are being shut down because they provide cheap, reliable energy to the masses and give them higher living standards and personally autonomy (cars, air travel etc).
Renewables are being brought in precisely because they DON’T provide energy and are vastly expensive and unreliable.
The service provided by renewables is not ‘energy’ or ‘green energy’…. but maintaining (and reasserting) the divide between the super rich and everyone else.
People struggling to pay the bills have no spare time or energy to socialise, research, learn about their situation or the world around them. They are exhausted and just want to crash out in front of the TV after a hard day’s work and consume junk media and junk food.
If we had remained on the post war trajectory (with no ‘green’ policies) the entire population would be middle class and have lots of time and resources to figure out the elites are pedo-parasites and they would start to distance themselves from ‘government’ and become increasingly self organising and self sufficient.
We would have a much more relaxed, high cultured and high trust society. This is the exact type of society that rejects (or simply outgrows) having a violent ruling class.
Electric cars, windmills, solar, net zero, carbon credits, green policies …. these things are not designed to be functional or sensible - they are designed to fail (for us) and keep us demoralised, impoverished and struggling to survive day-to-day.
This is how the ruling class MUST keep us if they are to maintain their own dominance in a post industrial/ post technological world.
The old paradigm of requiring a large, healthy, strong, motivated workforce (to build railways, ships, suspension bridges, canals etc) is over. The ruling class do not want us to be strong and motivated any more, they need us to be weak and demoralised (also they will soon have robots and AI to replace a huge part of the labour force).
Try seeing the world through this lens (through the eyes of the ‘elites’) and you’ll find every ‘crazy’ policy suddenly makes perfect sense and is not so ‘crazy’ after all!
People only think they are ‘crazy’ because they think the people setting policies are in the same boat as the rest of us. They are not. Their success and continued status as ‘elites’ is now 100% dependent on our failure to thrive and ‘self actualise’ ….. a general demoralisation and loss of living standards and energy impoverishment.
They can’t just cut the power off, so they have to invent a bunch of imaginary problems like ‘climate change’ and ‘peak oil’ so the masses accept being impoverished again - and even cheer for it believing they are ‘saving the planet’!
This post is massive and I think I came here via a restacked Mike Yeadon comment, perhaps half way through the comments, without seeing the original post. I'm trying to type whilst sitting on a hot terrace getting my first natural sun D3 in 6 months …chemtrails in Catatonia obscuring the sun these past few days of my holiday. It's too bright for my eyes to read but wanted to get back to you in case you thought no reply was because my authenticity was protecting you by going mute…
Haha… not at all. I'm going to listen to something here since I'm done with typo correction and squinting!
Hey MAA, Yes, sorry I did mean the comment from Corona Studies. Eek, sorry you thought it was for you...awkward 🙈 So now I'm feeling like reading your comment and saying something kind, too. Tbh I have only read one comment and probably got distracted soon after by my kids. Don't worry...I'm pretty authentic and won't simply say something kind to make you feel good. 😆 The comment will be genuine, from the heart, no matter what! Aussies have a reputation for being (sometimes brutally) honest.
There are probably no typos. 😉
But I'm wondering whether you got a notification saying I replied to you and maybe I messed up in replying??? So gonna check that, too. Big, warm hug 🤗 [also genuine even though I don't really know you :) The world just needs aass many hugs as possible right now]
"I am anti-authoritarian, anti-war, anti-corporation, countercultural, tolerant of diverse viewpoints, pro-truth, pro–freedom of speech, pro–freedom of choice, pro-justice, and pro-equality for all." I'm hold all of those values too. I'm also pro-life but accept that others can have different beliefs and act on them in ways that I would not.
I think we're both pro-vaccine safety. None have been proven safe to my satisfaction yet according to my research.
I'm pleased you've figured out the climate scam. It is anti-science and anti-human at its core. Climate has always changed and it always will. Sometimes gradually, often suddenly, from forces beyond our control. The are more immediate and important issues to worry about.
Human civilization is based on our use of fire and many of our most important discoveries rely on technical mastery of it. Even if we are changing our climate there is nothing we could do about it without returning to being hunters and gathers with the associated reduction in population and misery. Better to use our know how for adaptation and mitigation.
Ben Davidson explains the impact of the sun on the earth and his theory of the disaster cycle through his daily videos on solar weather at the YouTube site Suspicious Observers.
Thanks for being you. You are very wise and tenacious. I still feel for your loss of Michael. He'd be proud of your continued intellectual growth.
A huge part of “Trust the $cience™️” is the faith in (so-called) “vaccination”. The entirety of this inoculation / vaccination routine is a scam. An extremely deadly — in terms of excess mortality and growth of rates of cancer — scam.
To be an “antivaxxer” today is the same as being a “climate science denier” of yesteryear.
Excellent problem statement. Note that any solution which continues to be based on a non-voluntary social structure will eventually devolve into some variant of the same problem. https://michaelhaag.substack.com/p/durable-freedom
Yish! I never did fall for it. All it took was to look into deep history. Things were far far hotter 125 000 years ago. Hippos swam in the Thames. And the planet was fine. Things were hotter 8 000 years ago... turtles lived in lakes in northern Scandianvia. And the temp has overall be going down. Then I noted that the climate alarmists were always starting their graphs around 1850 as the world was warming from the Little Ice Age. And then I noticed that they hid "projected temps" in their graphs so nobody notices that even warm as it is now, it's less than in the past. Etc.
Science is dead. It will stay dead until we all figure out how to out and weed out the personality disordered scumbags who lie as a way of life.
MAA, it took me a few days to get to this and now almost a whole morning to read over brekkers (still have the last fifth to finish but have to prep now for a job this afternoon). But I wanted to say before I head out of the door: this piece of yours is so flippin’ excellent! Starting with the realization that — like so many of us, and about so many other scams — you were duped (follows my own journey to a tee, as you know). I am thinking of several diehard climate “carbon net zero” people I need to send this to. And I will share via my SS too later. “Chapeau!” as they say in Frogspeak. Thanks for this amazing work you did, tying it all together. So rational, so logical, and so human… just the way I like it. ☀️😍✨ PS that’s such a cute photo of you as a lil’ girl.
Congratulations MAA, possibly the best, most complete and compelling analysis of the situation. I identify with you as I too have come the complete circle, from environmental activist to mainstream scepticist. At this point I reject anything that rejects the natural evolution of things in favour of something synthetic.
Steve Friedman, West Kelowna, BC, Canada.
This is definitely one-stop shopping if you're in the market to dismantle this deeply entrenched global narrative - on which so many other scams rely.
Not that I'm surprised of course. But damn, you've packed a helluva punch here and I so appreciate it.
Brilliant to place the soldier/scout metaphors up front, softening the metal ground. Essential. Your personal stories of resistance and Michael's persistence, invaluable.
Wonderful, wonderful contribution to the book. May this spread far and wide. Repeating myself - just brilliant.
👏 💕 🌟
Thank you so much, Kathleen. I am pinning your comment because what you said about this being a one-stop shopping piece was my goal precisely. My hope is people can use this to understand the breadth and depth of the corruption, propaganda, and manipulations surrounding the climate narrative and that they can also share this with people who may be starting to question their implanted beliefs and are open to learning more.
Sending you my warmest love, my dear Apocaloptistic sister 🤗💓🌤
Love back to you, dear Margaret. 😘 And, I share your hope! 🙏
Totally agree with Kathleen. Margaret, this is just outstanding. Thank you for your efforts. You covered all the bases, so comprehensive. I didn't know hardly any of what you shared with us. Mostly, I operate on instinct or intuition, as in, "I smell a rat."
I especially resonated with your story of how you transitioned from being a lefty to where you are now, a "Truthy". You are truly amazing.
This is superb -- what a treasure-trove of resources, and all delivered in the thoughtful, measured, poetic prose style that characterizes your work. A pleasure to read; essential to read.
I will, of course, read it in its entirety. But I'm a slow and careful reader and for now I simply wish to say, that based on a quick scroll, I have no doubt this is indeed an epic takedown.
I always tell people (at least the one or two who feign interest in what I say), that CAGW is the foundational, always-running-in-the-background psy-op.
Once there were the Nazis. Then there were, and are, the Zio-Nazis. And now we have the Netzes, those hideously brain-washed, fanatical Net-zero-cult nutters.
Yup, a truly excellent piece! And doubtless timely, given the current Persian Gulf energy disruption.
THIS: “Climate hysteria is a coup de mâitre for the cruelites.”
Matt Gallagher: “So how do you convince a populace used to freedom that they need to accept temporary restrictions for the greater good?” — Carbon copy of the CovidCon … Free Hugs indeed! (courtesy BeVinodi Comics)
“What on Earth” is a one hour CBC radio program that, fittingly, runs on Sundays. Wikipedia describes it as a “radio program focusing on environmental issues”. But, as you might expect, it's actually focused on spreading the gospel of CAGW, aka "climate crisis/emergency". Unsurprisingly, it began airing in the Summer of Floyd (2020).
And speaking of Canuckistan, here's an interesting bit: Avi Lewis was elected today as the new leader of the NDP (Canada's “socialist”, perennial 3rd place national party). The reason I mention this, is that he is married to celebrated arch-propagandist/useful-idiot Naomi Klein. Incidentally, Avi directed “This Changes Everything”, a documentary based on Naomi's mega-selling book.
No comments???
I skim read the above article, people’s brains have been reprogrammed by mind control and now believe absolute BS, it only takes about 20 years through the education system and the mainstream media and constant repetition of lies coupled with the hive mind, interesting times, I’m glad to be an old git the future isn’t looking good, transhumanist, totalitarian technocracy in my view! ☮️❤️🏴
Thank you for reading and referring to my article about the geopolitics of climate change:
https://denisrancourt.substack.com/p/opinion-geopolitical-context-of-the
I know you know I know this but it can’t hurt to say it again: you write so well. 🙏
As you say, it’s a case of understanding there’s a playbook and that we are manipulated through fear. But it seems to me there’s always a grain of truth or two within all the falsehoods. To confuse, to obfuscate, to allow the elites (or ourselves) to point to something real within the lies. And vice versa - a falsehood is integrated into something true so that it’s hard to tell truth from fiction. And in a binary world of 1’s and 0’s, of Team Red or Team Blue, a world that has forgotten nuance, people pick a side and swallow their chosen ideology wholesale, seemingly unaware of the contradictions and downright nonsense wrapped into the microwaveable, ready-to-eat belief system of choice.
For whatever reason, the manmade ’Climate Crisis’ was not a thing I ever bought into and I can’t say exactly why because all the propaganda reached us here in Africa. Perhaps too many other immediate problems to worry about. Perhaps an understanding that I could really do very little to stop the problem as it was laid out for me. I’m not sure.
I write this to say I didn’t have to break my mind and let go of my identify regarding ‘Climate’ in the same way I did with ‘Covid’. Once I understood the Covid playbook (and the bigger picture of deception, corruption, greed and manipulation), I then recognised the same pattern in the Climate one but I had never internalised that ideology in the same way I had ‘medical doctors are trying to help me’ etc…So while I do think we need not worry about being implicated in global boiling or global cooling or whatever it is today, the idea that damage is being done is correct. The need for our footprint to be lighter is true. But in the minds of many, the lies have now been woven into the truth and the real issue, blurred. It’s the sun that’s the problem, not geo-engineering! It’s carbon, not the tokenisation of carbon, that’s the problem!
I’m suddenly reminded of the 90’s track by Baz Luhrman ‘Everybody’s Free (To Wear Sunscreen)…IYKYK.
What am I trying to say here? I’m trying to say if we spend more time in the real world, paying attention, we’ll find a lot of the chaos and bad ideas are simply virtual, whether on our computer or as a download in our heads. The drumming up of collective fear via movies (a moment for Al Gore, the O.G. climate shyster), TedTalks, the theatre that is Greta Thunberg etc - it’s all part of the same ‘Be Afraid’ playbook/playbill that warps what we think is important because it contains some truth.
Because we’ve become so far removed from reality itself that we can no longer appreciate the messy perfection of nature. Which deserves our reverence because once considered, will leave you dumbstruck. Once we appreciate where we live, understand the odds of us being alive at this very moment, that the world is an abundant place and scarcity is part of the playbook, it might shift us to value the pear off the pear tree at the bottom of our garden more than our ability to ship an avocado half way around the world, because we can. We might choose to eat seasonally, locally, again. We may choose to stop consuming quick fashion, non-stick cookware, TikTok videos, a smart house downloading all your ‘data’ all the time. (You are not data). The list is endless. I’m not advocating for ‘Net Zero’ at all. Just awareness.
For the last three and a half years (since moving from Johannesburg to Cape Town) I walk in the forest every day and I have some understanding of the perfection of nature that we are part of. It grew slowly, over years, over seasons, over observing the different quality of light at different times of the day, of watching a wasp kill an enormous spider and drag it off, of seeing the pink spring blossoms become brown twigs and pink blossoms again. I didn’t ‘get it’ on the first beautiful walk. It’s taken years. Of all the rabbit holes I have been down since 2020, the most life-changing has been the one that was me.
This whole shebang, the world, the universe, the cosmos, is a moral place. What you choose to value matters. And it seems to be dependent on how you are disposed to see the world and yourself as part of it. And what you think you might be doing here in the first place. For me, I know it’s not to buy more insurance, it’s not to have a white-girl summer in Bali, it’s not looking like I’m a good and kind person to others while signing a contract with my corrupt government or global corporate, and it’s not to write angry social media posts while standing in a line to vote because this time it’ll work. It’s changing what I can change inside me. To rejoin this glorious world faithfully.
(Random sidebar: REM’s Man On The Moon has been recently, ‘randomly’ popping up for me. 🚀🌝)
That was so exquisitely beautiful and profound, dear Lisa—just like you 😻💓🤗
I especially appreciate your articulation of the grander playbook as it is that pattern I’m trying to help people recognize. The more people understand it, the fewer who will get fooled the next time … and the next time … and the next time.
The cruelites are very unimaginative and use the same tactics over and over again—because they work. But they’ll stop working if enough people see through the magic tricks.
🙏 (I should have proofread and tidied it up but I’m even getting over that, quite unbelievably. 😄). Thanks for inspiring the thoughts. 🫶
by then it wont matter
Net Zero is the net they trap us in until the population is zero.
Except the people who will have control and complete wealth.
Excellent summary! Thank you so much! I feel very privileged that I can call it a summary because I read since about ten years the science blog https://sciencefiles.org/ They have published in depth research articles on climate change (and later on CoVid) for 20 years. You can find them also on Telegram https://t.me/RealScienceFiles Only drawback: It's in German. However you can easily select the translation function. As a scientist myself (though in a very different field) I am glad that others like you take science as serious as I do.
I considered the whole CO2=climate change angle in the early 2000's during some record heat waves in the Southwest with 120 degree desert days. Seeing the damage firsthand from Hurricane Katrina in late 2005 changed my mind on that, even though this event was supposed to ironically cement belief in man made climate change.
In short this looked man made, but not in a whole of world way. It was in more of a targeted energetic weapons way. It had me pondering the emergency FEMA response or lack thereof from the cop who stopped us on that lonely Mississippi road, his Indiana State Trooper car donated from another place, who talked about his wife and sons being swept away on the gulf coast during the storm surge. Their bodies were never found.
"Never forget. I need you to tell them what happened here."
He was like a ghost of a man out there: wandering around, doing the motions he had done for probably decades, his family gone and no way to go on really. People don't realize that the "Storm surge" rarely even mentioned during Hurricane Katrina, looked like a nuclear weapon had been detonated on the Gulf Coast. It leveled everything. An entire riverboat casino rested on top of a decimated building hundreds of meters inland. Boats were still hanging out of trees even one or two miles away from the shore, along with cowhides and all types of strange things. On the Gulf road itself there were no traffic lights, no traffic signs, almost no landmarks and even the road could be hard to find. The entire area around Gulfport for example was levelled.
That's what began my deep dive into the evils of Malthusianism and how forces of good and evil shape that conversation behind the scenes. It's always about blaming the individual for the collective problems. But what if the problems are themselves just created by a very small number of individuals?
One wonders why the climate change idea is being promoted so strenuously. From my point of view it's because there really is a problem that humanity faces, and that is the oil, gas, and coal supply is finite. Of those, oil is the most important and also the most critical, because oil production is past its peak. Technological society can basically only run on fossil fuels, mainly oil. So there will be a serious problem concerning dwindling oil supplies from now on. It means resource wars, because no nation-state wants to lose access to oil, since if it does it will cease to be a technological society and probably collapse altogether.
Another complication is that TPTB, who act above the level of nation-state, want to retain the advantages of technological society, which means they want to make sure oil is available to themselves and enough of the main mass of the population such that the current ideal of progress is maintained. That means they have to devise ways of conserving oil. One way is to reduce the population. Another way is to limit energy use per capita. It looks like that is what they are trying to do.
And instead of being up front about what they are really doing they are promoting this fake climate change idea. It's probably because they have wargamed this through their think-tanks for decades and come to the conclusion they can more effectively coerce the population to do what they want by means of reference to climate change than they could by telling the truth about oil.
As it is they: the various govt's, media, official academia, are rather silent about the oil situation. They don't want anybody even thinking about it. And on the rare occasions when the issue comes up they trot out their usual rhetoric which includes denial that oil is a fossil fuel, or that it is finite in amount. It's all a lot of arm-waving.
Now we see what looks like a resource war in Iran. It might be real, and then again it might be entirely stage managed. It could be a forcible and controlled reduction of oil usage, leading to various desirable outcomes (from the point of view of tptb) such as travel restrictions and what have you -- more totalitarianism, anyway. Maybe they just want to collapse or at least severely weaken the US. The alternative would be an uncontrolled free for all competition for the remaining oil leading to potential chaos. Chaos is anathema to them, since above all they want always to control.
On what basis did you decide oil and gas are finite?
You surely know that they’re not “fossil”, the product of formerly living matter?
Instead, their most likely origin is from methane trapped in the planet at formation.
High temperatures and pressures convert monomeric methane through the alkanes to octane (much of gasoline).
There’s absolutely no evidence it’s running out. Just a lot of claims of that.
Consider the experimental thought that we’ve extracted less than 1% of it.
In the case of coal, it is unequivocally the case that in practise we could never use it all up. There’s so much of it. If U.K. ran mostly on coal for electricity generation and heating, there’s at least 300 years worth underground in U.K. alone.
Much of the heart of deserted Australia is rich in coal and other natural resources.
So I don’t buy the oil is running out idea. Also, the powerful couldn’t care less about the population.
We’ve been lied to even about “nuclear”, both nuclear fission weapons (which are a hoax: Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed using incendiaries, high explosives and laced with nitrogen mustard, to mimic the bone marrow destroying effects of non existent radiation) and nuclear electricity generation. These work, but not by atomic decay (see Dr Steven A Young, Galen Winsor & others).
About the only thing you can rely upon is that the official narrative is a lie.
Yes. Delingpole piling in here. If you’re going to assume the vocabulary of someone who is awake - TPTB - you need to be aware of the full picture rather than keep one foot in Normieworld. Oil, as Mike says, is NOT a fossil fuel. It is abiotic. The scarcity story is a narrative which has been introduced to the conversation by bad actors like the Rockefellers. As for Peak Oil theory - which you are effectively endorsing here - read my book Watermelons. Or, short version, be aware that the guy pushing Peak Oil theory was a notorious technocrat M King Hubbert with an agenda. He has been proven wrong on multiple occasions, not unlike Thomas Malthus.
Essentially what you are doing with posts like this, even if in good faith, is running cover for the Enemy.
If MKingHubbert was deploying a false scarcity strategy as guided by Thee Kinetic Despots then there has been no truth in geology. Or, such a control of oil formations has been implemented that the ME is pure theater.
If there are known but unrevealed oil deposits or if oil refreshes as fast as it can be usefully extracted l for IC then which sciences have not been infiltrated? Also, how is a completely enslaved populace, waiting patiently for rations, incapable of any disturbance, any benefit to elite rule? To watch as entertainment? For experimentation? How impenetrable must the tower be to secure a vantage over such populace? Would a micromanaging godforce efficiently serve a thrifty working class to sustainability? Are we to be monitored and mined for selection and elevation to a higher class? How many generations until the elite class mutates into elite subdivisions and foments their own revolution?
It could be, as you say, that the "normal" geological explanations for oil are false, just as the normal explanations for vaccines are false. One readily accepts that these days much of what passes for common knowledge is actually false, and even deliberately faked.
With regard to the Peak Oil hypothesis, it seems to have drifted into the metaphysical realm, since trustworthy data on the subject is scant or contradictory, especially over the last 10 years or so. But whether oil turns out to be biotic or abiotic doesn't matter much, what is important is whether it is finite in supply or not. Even metaphysically speaking it is probably finite, unless we want to allow a series of mini big-bangs (whether naturally occurring or divine) that constantly replenishes it. Meanwhile demand for it continues to grow, as more countries adopt Enlightenment Philosophy as their guiding light and attempt to become industrialized.
It's curious to some that if we look at world population estimates over the period 1800-2000 we see a tremendous increase. And if we want to believe statistics on world oil production over the same interval they compare pretty closely. Just for the sake of argument, suppose oil is finite, and production is currently declining. How long would it take for population to adjust (decline is perhaps the word I was searching for) to less energy being available (especially for growing, harvesting, and transporting food)? Perhaps that is too Malthusian a line of argument? Would there come a point where the economic system (including food production) simply collapses? That would result in chaos. I'm suspecting our TPTB friends abhor and disrelish the very idea of chaos, since they always and everywhere want control.
Watermelons: I've been tempted to read it, following upon exposure to your podcasts. I'm currently reading five books, so perhaps one more would be just as easy?
Given that their motto is Ordo ab Chao I’m not sure you are quite right about this. We’re talking about the same people who staged the First and Second World Wars as a Satanic cull cum business venture. Creating wars of that magnitude is not the behaviour of people who aren’t comfortable with chaos.
Are we veering toward the unusual situation of agreement with each other? At any rate I agree with the idea Ordo ab Chao being a modus operandi of the fabled tptb.
I'm wondering about degrees of chao. I suspect that at lower degrees the overall situation resembles the Hegelian problem-reaction-solution gambit. Tptb sit back and pull the strings. They create a certain amount of chaos, but at a level that they manage and control. They themselves aren't affected much; it's the main mass of the population (or whatever subset is being targeted) that experiences the disruption and then becomes susceptible to directives that tptb give them (such as wearing masks).
But what happens if the level of chaos is really high? An all-out nuclear war would do that. Same thing if the earth got hit by a sizable meteor. It is to be expected that tptb would not like it if they themselves were caught up in the chaos. I suspect that is the last thing they would want. They want to feel in control at all times. Real chaos that affects them would in addition threaten their very existence.
So, working on the assumption that the Peak Oil hypothesis is true, they, tptb, might very well consider themselves at risk. So they wouldn't sit back and twiddle their thumbs and lament their impending demise, they would do something about it, with all that money they have (they have nearly unlimited funds). They would want to conserve the oil. That means less energy use. Fewer people. Less energy use per capita (except for themselves). Much of what is happening in the wide world today is interpretible against this theoretical background. And hello, what's this? I've accidentally (or synchronistically) stumbled on someone who agrees with me: Vernon Coleman. Weird.
As to WWI and WWII, I find I can readily agree with your explanation, brief though it is. Banksters made them happen in order to enrich themselves and take greater control over foreground governments. Then they wanted to kill people too, since they are dominated by pride and the end point of pride development is the desire to annihilate the being of others. War is great for that. I might add another reason, since we're talking about WWI and WWII: that is they were fought in order to establish Israel in Palestine (banksters are Jewish, or at any rate Zionist).
These days there is a lot of confusion on many topics, even scientific ones that formerly were believed to have been settled and beyond question. For instance, there is suddenly doubt regarding whether the moon landings took place, controversy regarding where oil comes from and how it is formed, and even arguments about whether the earth is flat or spheroidal, among other things...atom bombs.
The atmosphere of psychological warfare has increased greatly over, say, the last 50 years, and now touches on various subjects that used to be considered peripheral to power politics: moon landings, oil, and shape of the earth, among a host of others. One advantage to all this doubt is that it breeds confusion among the main mass of the population, with the consequence that they become more easily manipulated by the propaganda. As a reaction some adopt the position the the gov’t/media nexus is lying, or even that they are always lying: paradoxically making it easy to pick and choose what to believe or not believe without thinking it through. At least that’s the way it looks to me.
It’s hard for me to grapple with some of these newfangled claims, like the moon landings were faked. I grew up adjacent to the unmanned space center, and quite a few people I went to school with were offspring of scientists and technicians who worked there. They used to give guest lectures on what they were working on (Mariner missions to Mars, for instance). My high school physics teacher was married to the person who originally determined the age of the earth “four point six times ten to the ninth” (years). They did it with lead isotope ratios. So it seems mighty implausible that the whole space program is faked. Then if some of it is real (like communication satellites — the ideal orbital positions were proposed by Arthur C. Clarke back in the forties, if I remember right), where does one draw the line between real and fake? Was project Mercury a fake? Project Gemini? Project Apollo? Project Mercury was very probably real, and if it was, then so were Gemini and Apollo. But if the claim is made that although Apollo was real but we (or anybody) didn’t actually land on the moon it looks peculiarly adhoc. Same thing regarding doubt over nuclear weapons. What, did the US (and Russia, UK, France) just build all those boomers more or less for the fun of it? Those things cost a fortune...did they build them just to load them up with pseudo-nuclear weapons? What about all the strategic arms limitations treaties and conferences that have taken place? Why waste so much time and political energy over a non-threat? EMP — discovered by the Soviets as a consequence of their nuclear testing in the fifties — was that fake? Moreover, the Deep State doesn’t like nuclear weapons (because they can’t instigate a large war between nation states that have them since that kind of war would result in mutual destruction). Of course now might be different, if they’ve changed their mind and want all-out destruction. That’s possible, too.
As to oil, I have a background in geology, and at one time I was fairly conversant with the standard explanation (one might call it the settled science, though I realize that’s a loaded term these days). So when a geophysicist claims, in 1956, that the US oil production would peak in 1970, and it happened (even if no one believed him when he made the prediction), I tend to lean toward the geologists and the geophysicists when they are talking about oil. In short, the standard explanation (among those who don’t work for oil companies) is that oil is organic in origin. It is finite. The total endowment is 2.1 trillion barrels. Half of that has been used. The remaining oil will be harder to find and more expensive to produce. We are in that period now, since we have past the peak.
A few more observations are in order. We live in a technological society. It rests on two pillars: 1) ideology (Enlightenment Philosophy), and 2) energy (oil). There is no substitute for oil. The other so-called alternatives aren’t energy dense enough. Moreover oil itself is not only limited in supply, but becomes less useful and energetic the further past the peak we go. It provides energy when produced, but it requires energy to produce it. That sets up a significant ratio, abbreviated EROEI (Energy Returned On Energy Invested). For oil it used to be 100:1. It’s much less now (data on this kind of thing has become hard to come by these days). At some point, even if there is oil in the ground, it can’t be used as an energy source because the EROEI will equal 1. When will that happen? I suspect the Deep State, via their think-tanks, know (but they are not talking). I wouldn’t be surprised if it were sometime middle/late this century. That means technological society has a built-in limit: it only lasts as long as its limiting resource exists (oil). That span looks to be about 150-200 years. And we are near the end.
It is to be presumed that the Deep State people want to retain their position: being in control, enjoying a lavish 20th century energy-rich lifestyle, and in addition, promote and develop the course of history to their liking — in accord with their ideology (myth of progress, science maximization, technology maximization). So that means they have a problem, since oil, usable, high EROEI oil, is running out — especially since demand is growing, as more countries become technologized/industrialized.
At the level of the nation state the leadership probably is aware of these problems also. Given sufficient withdrawal of energy from the economy, the economy will collapse. And since there is only so much remaining oil we should expect resource wars. Remember Dune? Frank Herbert used spice as an analogue for oil. He started writing the book in the late 1950s. His previous book was about WWIII and oil. What has been happening recently? War in Libya (oil), Iraq (oil), Venezuela (oil), Iran (oil). Of course there may be other considerations, such as the petrodollar issue, but what a coincidence we have all these wars involving oil.
Above the level of the nation-state there are quite a few things happening that are consistent with the idea the Deep State wants to conserve oil for their own purposes, and perhaps extend the lifespan of technological society. They want fewer people (thus lethal vaccines, abortion, euthanasia, various sterilization schemes). They want less energy use per capita (travel restrictions, 15 minute cities, carbon credits). Less productive economies? Could be. They might have a plan to manage and control the use of energy in the oil declining period. They want to control everything, so why wouldn’t they want to control that?
And then there’s one more thing. They are not talking about the issue. They trot out the global warming idea instead. Like I said before it probably means they have decided they can get more compliance from us waving the fear of the global warming rather than dealing with the truth of the energy (oil) situation. And what else? In addition to not discussing the real issue, they obfuscate, by floating ideas about oil not being finite, not being organic, and so on. ANd there are those who show up on the internet and promote these ideas. So I’m wondering, here we have a set of assertions that contradict what might be called a scientific consensus regarding oil — from 75 years ago, or thereabouts — right at the point when the energy situation has become an item of supreme political significance. Is it a coincidence? Is it better science? Maybe it is better science, but it’s likely it’s psychological science, and not geological science.
The key word is renewable. Another facet of energy production is farming. An old saying by miners is “if it can't be grown it must be mined.” Most of the energy lies stem from an unrecognized and unremembered fact. Cannabis hemp can produce virtually ALL of the products petroleum is currently used for, not to mention it is the strongest oldest fabric known to man, outproduces conifers for woody pulp production, and produces the best paper in history. The war on drugs has only one true purpose. That is to keep industrial hemp out of the competition. If hemp was used for all of its possible products farmers in America would again lead in the economic struggle between agriculture and industry, or basically, what I believe is still the continuing struggle between the north and the south. Oil businesses would easily loose half of their revenue.
John,
If it became unequivocally clear to you that governments have lied to us about something substantial, like nuclear fission weapons, do you think that would prompt you to consider the possibility that their lying about addition, also substantial things?
If yes, please have a look at this book. It’s not large and reduced considerably if you’ve got a good basic grasp of nuclear basics.
Best wishes
Mike
https://archive.org/details/Hiroshima_revisited/
Ps: I also have proved to my satisfaction that we’ve been lied to about viruses (there’s no evidence any of them exist: see Jamie Andrews writing here), contagion (all published papers fail to demonstrate it) and therefore “vaccines” are now and always have been unnecessary, ineffective and variably harmful (see the writings of legal scholar Katherine Watt: https://bailiwicknewsarchives.wordpress.com/ there isn’t any doubt about this. It’s not opinion. It’s all there in the stealthy process of deception, meaning that no product classed as a vaccine has ever been regulated in any way).
These two are enormous frauds. That they are both transnational also puts a bowling ball through our basic beliefs about a multipolar world, which I think is an illusion.
I think I see where you're coming from. It's an analogy. Would it be something like "Just as the governments and media have been lying about covid-19, and indeed about viruses in general, so too the deception is greater by far, in that they are also lying about nuclear weapons, moon landings, Peak Oil, climate change, and just about everything else, too."
I'm sympathetic to that standpoint, in a general sense, since I believe the root deception is the widespread adoption of Enlightenment Philosophy. I disbelieve Enlightenment Philosophy, chiefly because it denies God, and consequently I don't automatically believe in a whole host of assertions that most other people adopt as a matter of course (such as vaccinations protect one from disease). Then one immediately runs up against scale factors: how much is actually lies? I doubt, metaphysically speaking, that everything (all of science, for instance) is a lie. I suspect that TPTB are usually content to let ordinary science progress without tampering, as long as it doesn't impact politics, or the Party Line in some area of significance to them and their revolutionary propensities. So they have a tendency to let mathematics and astronomy, for instance, more or less alone. What about geology? It used to be that there was a certain consensus regarding oil and, whether it was right or wrong, it wasn't newsworthy, so to speak. That was in days gone by when the US, for instance, was exporting a lot of oil. Now it imports a lot. So now energy, particularly oil, is potentially significant to politics. And now, surprise, surprise, we all of a sudden have newfangled theories concerning oil, the general idea of which is that there is now and always will be plenty of it, so no need to worry. Don't think about it. It's suspicious. Maybe it's true: science marches on. And it could be that the "old" (75+ years ago and more) theories of oil were even at that time being deceptively promoted, just as these days various pharmaceuticals are deceptively promoted. But I'm wondering: the Germans invaded North Africa in WWII, and one of their objectives was to take control of the oil fields in the Middle-east. Same thing when they diverted one of their army groups to the south when they invaded the Soviet Union. They wanted the oil fields in Baku. In the early 20th century the British were all over the Middle-east: Churchill, Gertrude Bell, Lawrence of Arabia. Of course they were generally interested in imperialism, and there was no doubt intrigue concerning the establishment of Israel in Palestine, but they also wanted the oil. So I'm thinking, why all this massive interest in oilfields if oil is plentiful and there's no problem about it and don't worry? And now we see yet more war and intrigue swirling around oil: Iraq, Venezuela, Iran, to name of few.
I'm looking at the situation and it seems to me that quite a lot of what is happening in the realm of international power politics is explainable with reference to the Peak Oil hypothesis being true. Covid-19, for instance. They wanted lockdowns (less movement consequently less energy use). They wanted to kill people -- with the vx -- consequently less energy use. Now we have yet another war in the Middle-east, or what looks like a war, and oil is inevitably involved. There might be other considerations, but it's likely that governments are going to be responding by trying to limit or ration energy use, by edict. It already has happened in certain countries. Less energy use all over again. And they want 15 minute cities (TPTB does, anyway). That means less energy use per capita. It strikes me that none of this would be happening if oil were no big deal.
So is the Iran war real? It seems to be on the surface, but could it be another pageant, like Covid-19 was? The objective, in both instances, seems to be to contrive a situation where less energy is used by the main mass of the population. It could be that, despite the bombings and the casualties, the war is basically a psychological maneuver having something to do with not only control, but with leveraging energy use.
When you look at the world from the perspective of the cruelites, you realize the climate lie goes hand in hand with the energy scarcity lie, and both are being used to persuade 99% of the public to submit to one-world technotalitarianism because no one would willingly accept slavery without a virtuous call to sacrifice for the greater good. The cruelites get people to roll over without a fight while they achieve their goals of PROFIT, POWER, and DEMOCIDE and hoard the resources for themselves:
• “A Mostly Peaceful Depopulation”: https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/a-mostly-peaceful-depopulation
“Anatomy of a Philanthropath” series:
• https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/anatomy-of-a-philanthropath-dreams
• https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/anatomy-of-a-philanthropath-dreams-947
• https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/anatomy-of-a-philanthropath-dreams-3fd
Dr Yeadon,
I'm glad to see you believe there are and were no viruses. That was my gut feeling, which I still maintain, from the beginning of this absurd episode in American/ world history. I also maintain that by habitually using vaccines to protect ourselves from viruses, we're not allowing our natural immune system to develop, resulting in more susceptibility to disease over the course of life, especially into old age. Natural support for our immune system with herbal supplements appears, logically, to be a preferred method to sustain health.
Suddenly doubt? It's been doubted since 1969! Space may be the final frontier bur it's made in a Hollywood basement” Red Hot Chili Peppers, 2000. Where have you been?
The finite resource being protected here is POWER (hierarchy).
The problem which needs solving is not ‘climate change’ or ‘peak oil’ but the rather unfortunate liberation and empowerment of the masses in the post industrial era thanks to all the new amazing technology. This has effectively levelled the playing field between the ‘elites’ and the ‘peasants’.
Thanks to modern technology we can all live like kings and queens (ie modern middle class lifestyles) and we can even bypass elite controlled media and outcompete them with our own media platforms, video editing software and social media.
Even poor kids living in the inner city get to own new trainers, a smartphone and a computer. Cheap air travel is a thing. The world is our oyster.
The environmental movement was invented in the 1960’s to put a DRAIN on modern living standards and to thwart any more progress and liberation.
The modern healthcare system was invented to BURDEN us with poisons (vaccines) which we must all carry for life, which also have the effect of DRAINING our health and prosperity and keeping us down.
All wars (including all ‘wars on X’) are primarily designed to beat the masses down economically, psychologically, spiritually and by killing off each generation’s healthy young men and traumatising the women.
The war on carbon is a taxation on your very existence. They ran out of other things to tax so now they are taxing the air that you breath out (and fart).
Coal, oil etc are being misrepresented as ‘finite’ and mines and oilfields are being shut down because they provide cheap, reliable energy to the masses and give them higher living standards and personally autonomy (cars, air travel etc).
Renewables are being brought in precisely because they DON’T provide energy and are vastly expensive and unreliable.
The service provided by renewables is not ‘energy’ or ‘green energy’…. but maintaining (and reasserting) the divide between the super rich and everyone else.
People struggling to pay the bills have no spare time or energy to socialise, research, learn about their situation or the world around them. They are exhausted and just want to crash out in front of the TV after a hard day’s work and consume junk media and junk food.
If we had remained on the post war trajectory (with no ‘green’ policies) the entire population would be middle class and have lots of time and resources to figure out the elites are pedo-parasites and they would start to distance themselves from ‘government’ and become increasingly self organising and self sufficient.
We would have a much more relaxed, high cultured and high trust society. This is the exact type of society that rejects (or simply outgrows) having a violent ruling class.
Electric cars, windmills, solar, net zero, carbon credits, green policies …. these things are not designed to be functional or sensible - they are designed to fail (for us) and keep us demoralised, impoverished and struggling to survive day-to-day.
This is how the ruling class MUST keep us if they are to maintain their own dominance in a post industrial/ post technological world.
The old paradigm of requiring a large, healthy, strong, motivated workforce (to build railways, ships, suspension bridges, canals etc) is over. The ruling class do not want us to be strong and motivated any more, they need us to be weak and demoralised (also they will soon have robots and AI to replace a huge part of the labour force).
Try seeing the world through this lens (through the eyes of the ‘elites’) and you’ll find every ‘crazy’ policy suddenly makes perfect sense and is not so ‘crazy’ after all!
People only think they are ‘crazy’ because they think the people setting policies are in the same boat as the rest of us. They are not. Their success and continued status as ‘elites’ is now 100% dependent on our failure to thrive and ‘self actualise’ ….. a general demoralisation and loss of living standards and energy impoverishment.
They can’t just cut the power off, so they have to invent a bunch of imaginary problems like ‘climate change’ and ‘peak oil’ so the masses accept being impoverished again - and even cheer for it believing they are ‘saving the planet’!
(edited for typos and clarity)
Post this on your page..it's brilliant and needs to be read widely and restacked +++++ !
I found a few typos but it's bang on otherwise ❤️
Thank you so much, Shanti, and please let me know where the typos are so I can fix them!
P.S. Oh wait, did you meant the comment by Corona Studies above? Good idea to restack.
This post is massive and I think I came here via a restacked Mike Yeadon comment, perhaps half way through the comments, without seeing the original post. I'm trying to type whilst sitting on a hot terrace getting my first natural sun D3 in 6 months …chemtrails in Catatonia obscuring the sun these past few days of my holiday. It's too bright for my eyes to read but wanted to get back to you in case you thought no reply was because my authenticity was protecting you by going mute…
Haha… not at all. I'm going to listen to something here since I'm done with typo correction and squinting!
Hey MAA, Yes, sorry I did mean the comment from Corona Studies. Eek, sorry you thought it was for you...awkward 🙈 So now I'm feeling like reading your comment and saying something kind, too. Tbh I have only read one comment and probably got distracted soon after by my kids. Don't worry...I'm pretty authentic and won't simply say something kind to make you feel good. 😆 The comment will be genuine, from the heart, no matter what! Aussies have a reputation for being (sometimes brutally) honest.
There are probably no typos. 😉
But I'm wondering whether you got a notification saying I replied to you and maybe I messed up in replying??? So gonna check that, too. Big, warm hug 🤗 [also genuine even though I don't really know you :) The world just needs aass many hugs as possible right now]
There is an abundance of oil.
There is an abundance of coal.
There is an abundance of gas.
There is an abundance of food.
There is an abundance of water.
. . .
You’re ‘opinions’ are founded on unsound narrative and ultimately manipulative propaganda.
Base assumption wrong, the whole Argument falters.
I used to flow back oil and gas wells and the data I collected was used to calculate the royalties, or taxes, the company had to pay.
There are hundreds of single wells already drilled in northern Canada that could individually supply all of North America for a year.
"I am anti-authoritarian, anti-war, anti-corporation, countercultural, tolerant of diverse viewpoints, pro-truth, pro–freedom of speech, pro–freedom of choice, pro-justice, and pro-equality for all." I'm hold all of those values too. I'm also pro-life but accept that others can have different beliefs and act on them in ways that I would not.
I think we're both pro-vaccine safety. None have been proven safe to my satisfaction yet according to my research.
I'm pleased you've figured out the climate scam. It is anti-science and anti-human at its core. Climate has always changed and it always will. Sometimes gradually, often suddenly, from forces beyond our control. The are more immediate and important issues to worry about.
Human civilization is based on our use of fire and many of our most important discoveries rely on technical mastery of it. Even if we are changing our climate there is nothing we could do about it without returning to being hunters and gathers with the associated reduction in population and misery. Better to use our know how for adaptation and mitigation.
Ben Davidson explains the impact of the sun on the earth and his theory of the disaster cycle through his daily videos on solar weather at the YouTube site Suspicious Observers.
Thanks for being you. You are very wise and tenacious. I still feel for your loss of Michael. He'd be proud of your continued intellectual growth.
A huge part of “Trust the $cience™️” is the faith in (so-called) “vaccination”. The entirety of this inoculation / vaccination routine is a scam. An extremely deadly — in terms of excess mortality and growth of rates of cancer — scam.
To be an “antivaxxer” today is the same as being a “climate science denier” of yesteryear.
Visit geoengineering.org. Dane has led this battle for 20+ years. He broadcasts every week.
Excellent problem statement. Note that any solution which continues to be based on a non-voluntary social structure will eventually devolve into some variant of the same problem. https://michaelhaag.substack.com/p/durable-freedom
Yish! I never did fall for it. All it took was to look into deep history. Things were far far hotter 125 000 years ago. Hippos swam in the Thames. And the planet was fine. Things were hotter 8 000 years ago... turtles lived in lakes in northern Scandianvia. And the temp has overall be going down. Then I noted that the climate alarmists were always starting their graphs around 1850 as the world was warming from the Little Ice Age. And then I noticed that they hid "projected temps" in their graphs so nobody notices that even warm as it is now, it's less than in the past. Etc.
Science is dead. It will stay dead until we all figure out how to out and weed out the personality disordered scumbags who lie as a way of life.
Oregon, in the Pacific Northwest, used to have mammoths and tropical plants. The planet changes over time, in cycles.
MAA, it took me a few days to get to this and now almost a whole morning to read over brekkers (still have the last fifth to finish but have to prep now for a job this afternoon). But I wanted to say before I head out of the door: this piece of yours is so flippin’ excellent! Starting with the realization that — like so many of us, and about so many other scams — you were duped (follows my own journey to a tee, as you know). I am thinking of several diehard climate “carbon net zero” people I need to send this to. And I will share via my SS too later. “Chapeau!” as they say in Frogspeak. Thanks for this amazing work you did, tying it all together. So rational, so logical, and so human… just the way I like it. ☀️😍✨ PS that’s such a cute photo of you as a lil’ girl.