Good Hearts, Fooled Minds: 4 Fallacies of the (Hijacked) Environmental Movement

 

Good-Hearts-Fooled-Minds-Top-4-Fallacies-of-the-Hijacked-Environmental-Movement-460

By Makia Freeman

Contributing Writer for Wake Up World

The hijacked environmental movement is a symptom of the current general, collective state of humanity: good hearted but ignorant. Many people in the environmental movement are in it for the right reasons: they see the ongoing poisoning and destruction of the planet, led by corporations, and are determined to defend and speak out for the Earth. Yet, in spite of their good intentions, they have unwittingly allowed themselves to be channeled in a direction that is not really going to help the Earth, unintentionally supporting the very forces that are responsible for the pillaging of it.

By continuing to push notions that carbon dioxide is a poison, that global warming exists and all of mankind is responsible for it, that we need a worldwide carbon tax and that we require Agenda 21-style global governance, these people are unknowingly promoting the New World Order program – and unwittingly placing elite controllers in power who don’t care about the environment and view it merely as a resource to be exploited. It has even gotten to the point where those opposing popular beliefs about climate change (another Rothschild-Rockefeller creation) are being treated like criminal extremists – there have even been calls in the US for Obama to prosecute them!

Welcome to Planet Earth. If your opinion diverges too much from the mainstream, you could get locked up for thinking “wrongly”.

With the current focus being on the outcomes of the recent 2015 UN Summit, the hackneyed buzzword of sustainability is being thrown around like there’s no tomorrow. In this context, it’s worth revisiting how the environmental movement came to be so hijacked and co-opted.

Basis for the Hijack: Conspiracy Reports from The Iron Mountain and The Club of Rome

The basis for the hijacked environment movement lies within formerly secret military reports, and one of the elite Round Table groups that run the world: the Club of Rome. I wonder if those who believe in AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) or Manmade Global Warming have any idea that the elite came up with the idea of using mankind itself as the global threat against which we are all supposed to gather behind a One World Government? The 1966 Report from the Iron Mountain was commissioned by John F. Kennedy and considered by Lyndon B. Johnson as too dangerous to reveal to the public at the time when it was completed. This excerpt from it discusses how a global government could be imposed without war, and suggests the threat could instead be environmental pollution:

The possibility of war provides the sense of external necessity without which no government can long remain in power… An effective political substitute for war would require “alternate enemies,” some of which might seem equally farfetched in the context of the current war system. It may be, for instance, that gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal apparent threat to the survival of the species. Poisoning of the air, and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this respect; it constitutes a threat that can be dealt with only through social organization and political power. But from present indications it will be a generation to a generation and a half before environmental pollution, however severe, will be sufficiently menacing, on a global scale, to offer a possible basis… [however] the rate of pollution could be increased selectively for this purpose”.

The Club of Rome is one of 6 groups that are close to the center of the Rhodesian Round Table (ultimately funded by Rothschild) which also includes The Bilderberg Group, the CFR, the RIIA, the United Nations and The Trilateral Commission. The Club of Rome’s 1991 document entitled The First Global Revolution? contains this passage:

“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together … all these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”

Are You Being ‘Green Washed’?

The current environmental movement we see today was hijacked a long time ago. Let’s take a look at the top 4 fallacies the NWO conspirators have managed to get ‘greenies’ to believe.

The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #1: Carbon Dioxide is a Poison

Carbon-Dioxide-is-a-Poison-330x220

Let’s start with the basics: carbon dioxide (CO2) is a nutrient, not a poison. We breathe out carbon dioxide every breath, but we also take some of it in on the inbreath. According to the IPCC (Interplanetary Panel on Climate Change), we are therefore poisoning ourselves every breath! Think about it – if CO2 were really a poison, why does it help plants grow so much? Why is it a key part of the fundamental equation of biology: sugar + oxygen = carbon dioxide + water + heat? How is it that those in the environmental movement are ignorant of basic biology?

As the website PlantsNeedCO2.org states, the more CO2 around, the better plants grow:

“In Idso and Idso’s (1994) analysis of soil nutrient limitations, the percentage growth enhancement due to a 300-ppm rise in the air’s CO2 content actually did exhibit a slight (but statistically non-significant) decline, dropping from 51% to 45% when nutrients went from non-growth-limiting to limiting in a group of 70 experiments. But when the atmospheric CO2 enrichment was 600 ppm, this slight negative trend reversed itself, going from a CO2-induced growth stimulation of 43% when nutrients were present in abundance to a 52% enhancement when their supply was sub-optimal. And for a 1200-ppm increase in atmospheric CO2, the percentage growth enhancement jumped from 60% when the soil nutrient supply was adequate to 207% when it was less-than-adequate.”

It’s a simple equation: the more CO2 you have, the more the plants like it, and the faster they will grow.

The demonization of carbon dioxide is not about helping the environment. The NWO idea has always been to attach the worsening condition of the environment to an individual’s energy usage – and even his or her breathing – so as to introduce a carbon tax. The Government literally wants to tax you for breathing – for merely being alive.

The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #2: The Manmade Global Warming Hoax

AGW or man-made global warming has been exposed as a giant scam. It still remains an open question whether the world is actually warming or cooling, given all the fakery and fudging of data, such as ClimateGate, where hackers found that scientists at the UK’s East Anglia University had deliberately distorted the figures. (See the work of Ian Plimer, Christopher Monckton and others in exposing this.) That is why the term global warming got changed to climate change – this way, no matter what happens with the weather, the IPCC can say the climate is changing. But climate change is a slick truism – you can’t argue against it. Of course the climate is changing. When has it not changed?

The great documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle years ago exposed the lies behind the very political climate change agenda. More than 1,000 dissenting scientists from around the globe have challenged the man-made global warming claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), undermined its claims of scientific consensus, and shredded its credibility in the process. Furthermore, changes in climate (whether human behavior is causing them or not) are not necessarily bad; in some cases studies have suggested recent changes in climatic conditions are responsible for re-greening parts of the world and changing lives for the better. (see Geospatial Sciences Center of Excellence, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD 57007-3510)

The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #3: The Carbon Tax and Global Governance as Eco-Solutions

Carbon-Tax-460

As pointed out above, all this focus on carbon is for one reason: taxation. The whole scheme to get people and corporations fixated on their carbon footprint – rather than how much actual benefit or harm they are doing the environment – is to pave the way for more taxation and centralization of power. To have a worldwide carbon tax, of course, you need a One World Government to enforce and collect it. The UN, ICLEI and its other subdivisions are constantly talking about global governance for this very reason.

In this context, “global governance” means centralizing vast amounts of power into a body destined to become the World Government, under the pretext of fighting man-made global warming or climate change. It also means extending the reach of the United Nations so that local bodies such as local councils and municipalities that belong to ICLEI, (the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, created in 1990 as a non-governmental spin-off of the United Nations) can implement its global directives and make it look ‘grassroots’, or like it was locally decided.

For further information on this topic, check out George Hunt’s work in exposing how Evelyn Rothschild and David Rockefeller were cooking up the cap-and-trade scheme in the 1980s. Hunt was present at some of the meetings where the carbon tax was first being discussed.

The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #4: Overpopulation

Mahatma Gandhi once said: “Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s need, but not every man’s greed.” There is no doubt that rising populations can put a strain on resources, yet where is the proof that the Earth cannot support 7 billion people? Or 9 billion people? Is it really population that is the problem here, or is it rather self-centered greed and destructive environmental practices and technologies?

We can accept the world’s rising population not as a threat or a reason to justify killing (which goes by the euphemism of depopulation) but rather as a challenge. It can propel us into living more from the heart, to having more compassion for those less well off than us, to doing a better job of sharing, of distributing resources equitably. It can stimulate us into better modes of efficiency. Could the rising population help a critical mass of people awake to the truth of free energy, and the fact that free energy or over unity devices already exist which provide practically unlimited energy for free or very cheaply?

It has been known in many countries for a long time that as you increase education, you decrease population, naturally. There is no need for stealth sterilization programs, introducing contraceptives through vaccines or other depopulation murder programs. When people gain a higher education, they organically choose to have less kids. If the conspirators really cared about the planet’s population, why not use their money to help everyone access better education? The answer is, of course, that they don’t.

overpopulation-460

Underpinning the propaganda of overpopulation is eugenics. It’s the idea that some humans are superior to others, and that some humans don’t deserve to be here. This is really the philosophical and spiritual basis of the hijacking. As they have confessed, the conspirators in their delusions view the rest of the population as a virus that must be rid from the planet. Yet, the real virus is the fear mindset that runs the show in the brains of the elite controllers.

“In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.” ~ Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

The Real Problem Isn’t Climate Change or Carbon

The real problem with the environment isn’t climate change or carbon, it’s that we as a collective species are trashing and degrading it. We spill oil in our oceans and rivers. We kill off species faster than we can even classify them. We make substances that don’t biodegrade and end up in giant landfills. We cut down forests without taking enough care to replace them. We use an economic system which incentivizes planned obsolescence and economically encourages us to throw things away rather than repair them. We let maniacal men rule out-of-control Governments that spray toxic weather-altering chemicals like barium, aluminum and strontium chemtrails all over the world – and get away with it.

What does any of this have to do with climate change or carbon? These 2 terms are a huge distraction and a deliberate way to trick people who genuinely care for the environment.

Solution: Get Informed Before You Demonstrate

Do you deeply care for the environment? Great! Then do your research first before joining any protests. Oppose fracking, GMOs, toxic energy systems, geoengineering, and corporate welfare to military companies (the Pentagon is the biggest polluter on planet).

Last year, in September 2014, around 400,000 people turned up in New York for the People’s Climate March – but what is the point of this activism if it gets diverted?

As journalist Naomi Klein wrote in an article for The Nation:

Some of the most powerful and wealthiest environmental organizations have… led the climate movement down various dead ends: carbon trading, carbon offsets, natural gas as a “bridge fuel” — what these policies all held in common is that they created the illusion of progress while allowing the fossil fuel companies to keep mining, drilling and fracking with abandon. We always knew that the groups pushing hardest for these false solutions took donations from, and formed corporate partnerships with, the big emitters. But this was explained away as an attempt at constructive engagement — using the power of the market to fix market failures. Now it turns out that some green groups are literally part owners of the industry causing the crisis they are purportedly trying to solve.

When it comes to our environment, as David Icke says, we need streetwise spirituality. We need to have our hearts in the right places, but also put our thinking caps on, otherwise we will easily by led astray by tricksters. Only once the leaders of the environmental movement have their hearts and brains in alignment can we effect real change on the ecosystems of Planet Earth.

Environmental-Movement-460

Sources:

Previous articles by Makia Freeman:

About the author:

Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the global conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance. An avid promoter of freedom, truth and health, his mission is to expose the truth, raise awareness about the conspiracy to enslave mankind and to help create a critical mass of people to stand up against it – and thus restore peace and freedom to the world.

Want to keep informed with news and analysis on the New World Order, Natural Health, Sovereignty and more? Visit Freedom-Articles.ToolsForFreedom.com for more, follow Tools For Freedom on Facebook or sign up for ‘The Freedom Articles’ blog updates.

Read featured article here

TLB recommends you visit  Wake Up World for more great/pertinent articles.

2 Comments on Good Hearts, Fooled Minds: 4 Fallacies of the (Hijacked) Environmental Movement

  1. John, Why are you commenting on an article from Nov 15, 2015? Much about the subject has changed, both in science and opinion, since that time. Please try and stay current when commenting… or are you operating from a parallel matrix?

  2. This article is the pinnacle of ignorance. Your points are invalid and childish and you refuse to show the opposite side of the argument. Your statements are moronic and your sources are barely used. If they were used your arguments may have made more sense. You promote the idea that everyone who is a part of the movement is a part of something they don’t understand when in reality they are fighting for something they believe in. Another fallacy in your own article is the idea that carbon dioxide is completely harmless. With your incredulous sense of knowledge and your limitless biological understanding tell me, why would we breathe out carbon dioxide if it were beneficial to our health. Now I’m not saying you have no idea what you’re talking about, quite the opposite actually. But if you’re going to make an article that promotes false ideology and uses only sources that support your side of the controversy then perhaps you shouldn’t be writing at all.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*