Climate Change - The Fraud

Anthropogenic climate change - scientific fraud

None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. They feed them on falsehoods till wrong looks like right in their eyes.

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

No amount of evidence will ever persuade an idiot

Mark Twain

The alleged climate change crisis being of man’s own making is presented only as a one-sided argument. The public debate is heavily censored by the mainstream media (MSM). If it were to be properly debated with real science and genuine scientists then the fraud would very quickly unravel. What is a normal temperature? Dramatic figures like CO₂ levels increasing by 47% (280ppm → 412ppm) in the last 260yrs are egregiously misleading. The parts per million (ppm) is very conveniently ignored. Subjectively, 280ppm → 412ppm = 132ppm (47% increase). Objectively, 280ppm = 0.0280% and 412ppm = 0.0412% atmospheric CO₂ content, so 99.972% of the atmosphere content is initially not CO₂ and after 260yrs becomes 99.9588% not CO₂. The increase is an additional 132ppm = 0.0132% over a 260 year period.

Subjectively = 47% and objectively = 0.0132%

Both terms are mathematically correct but there is a difference >3500 in the level of CO₂ depending on how figures are presented. To be persuaded that 412ppm (0.0412%) carbon dioxide (CO₂) could be responsible for a global ‘meltdown’ is to believe the logic of the environmental idiot. Higher CO₂ results in a greener planet and better crops (photosynthesis). Vegetable growers routinely increase the CO₂ content in a greenhouse environment to generate the glucose within the vegetable (O₂ is a bi-product) to provide nutrition and improve the quality and yield of their products. Any reduction in the volume of CO₂ in the atmosphere would cause a consequential reduction in the yield/quality of crops. Any claims that biofuels are a benefit is a lie as crops grown for human use would be diverted to make the biofuel and cause starvation. A genocidal plan.

A cooler medium will have a higher concentration of a dissolved gas than a warmer one. Warming sea water releases dissolved carbon dioxide (submarine volcanos generate tremendous heat and copious volumes of CO₂ and this underwater source of CO₂ and heat is ignored). The climate change fraud claims that a greater concentration of CO₂ results in warming seas and is left unchallenged. As the medium warms, this gas is released, not dissolved so that the atmospheric concentration will naturally increase.

That carbon dioxide causes global warming and warming seas is the fraud

Any small increase in atmospheric CO₂ is a consequence of warming

and is not the cause of global warming

The issue is not that there is no change in climate but that the alleged warming is caused by the use of oil-based fuels. The false reasoning is that increased atmospheric CO₂ results in global warming and comes about directly from burning oil-based fuels. Oil and gas are not fossil fuels. They are formed from non-living (inorganic) matter by an abiogenic process that requires intense pressure and temperature as was postulated at Earth’s formation. Not rotting trees/vegetation. The abiogenic theory also proposes that new oil is continually formed. Both oil and gas are found far deeper than any possible organic source. That humans are responsible for their own demise is predicted on deliberately misrepresented (absolutely wrong) theory. Lies.

When ice melts, there is no measurable volume change. The density of ice is less than water (it floats) as it contains trapped air. About 10% of the ice is above water. When the ice melts, this air is released and the reduction in volume accounts for that extra volume due to the trapped air. The amount of water contained in an iceberg as solid ice is exactly the same as is released as liquid water. The promoted illusion is that the disappearance of an iceberg results in an increase in the water volume.

This is demonstrated to be false by filling a glass that contains a cube of ice with water to the brim. When the ice (that rises and is seen partially above the surface) melts there is no overflow of water. The volume remains the same. Dramatically rising sea levels caused by melting icebergs is pure scaremongering and fraudulent science.

The atmosphere gases trapped in ice:

Gas Volume ppm

Nitrogen 78% 780,000

Oxygen 21% 210,000

Argon 0.95580% 9,558

Carbon dioxide 0.04120% 412

Neon 0.00180% 18

Helium 0.00050% 5

Methane 0.00018% 1.8

Krypton 0.00011% 1.1

The release of the heat (the exothermic latent heat of melting) into the atmosphere could (theoretically) introduce instability and potentially result in weather disturbances as the transfer of heat causes winds to be created. However, such release is very slow and any weather change would be minimal. Originally (primordial era), there was no atmosphere and consequently nothing to press down upon the seas. The level of the sea would have been much higher than it is today. The atmosphere matured over 100s millions of years into its present-day composition and has an estimated weight of 5.15 x 10¹⁸kg (5.15 quadrillion tonnes). This enormous weight presses down on the water surface forcing water underground to form subterranean lakes. The depression of sea level provides an explanation as to why chalk cliffs rise so high above the present-day sea surface. Chalk originates from the shells and skeletons of primitive water-borne creatures.

Water vapour also entered the atmosphere to form clouds (the visible evidence of water) and these clouds as water in its condensed liquid form are blown by the wind and subsequently precipitate their load as rain/hail/snow somewhere else. Relentlessly, the cooling towers of power stations are shown with the obviously fraudulent intention that the nebulous visible clouds are carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is a colourless (invisible) trace gas. The reality is that condensing water vapour forms clouds from steam. A very large amount of water collects beneath the tower. The water cycle neither creates nor destroys water but simply redistributes it around the World. Humidity, moisture, and condensation demonstrate the presence of water and water vapour is a powerful greenhouse gas. Consider: why it is extremely hot in the daytime and so cold at night in the Sahara and Gobi deserts?

There is no moisture in the local atmosphere

The very long-term Milankovitch cycles (10s of thousands of years) describe the ever-changing Earth motion/position as the planet orbits the Sun but do not account for the alleged (claimed but unverified) rapid escalation in global temperatures. How are these alleged escalating temperatures measured? The positioning of instruments to monitor the temperature at a specific location is critical. Is the monitor placed at ground level in an ever-expanding concrete jungle (city location)? The more concrete, the greater the heat capture. Or at an airport that has high volumes of hot aeroplane exhaust gases in the surrounding local atmosphere? An instrument placed at an elevated level above the sea/open country (weather balloon) to monitor the upper atmosphere will collect very different data.

Groundwater extracted for irrigation and other human activities has displaced 2.15 trillion tons (2,150 gigatons) water between 1993 - 2010 and has had a significant impact on Earth’s tilt (obliquity). Only a very small shift (to <23.5°) in the obliquity would be enough to result in more land directly facing the Sun and for the quantity of solar radiation captured to increase. The upward movement of radiated heat would then warm the lower atmosphere. Canada and North America, North Africa, Europe, Russia, China, and India form the most significant land masses in the northern hemisphere with South Africa, Australia, and South America in the southern hemisphere. Highly speculative statements about the imminent tipping point that would result in the collapse of Earth ocean systems is scaremongering.

The ‘agreed’ genocidal policy (a protocol) of nett zero is a lethal plan (a deliberate action) based on a lie. That any further increase in the CO₂ concentration in the atmosphere will lead to a climate crisis is an absurd notion. Without carbon dioxide, all life on Earth would cease.

Living entities (trees/plants) are the lungs of the Earth and convert atmospheric CO₂ into new O₂ in equal amounts: one for one (photosynthesis). The World’s largest rainforest is in Brazil (mostly in the southern hemisphere). Burning biomass (the toxic greenhouse gas methane) releases energy in the form of heat. To claim that it is a sustainable process is exceptionally cynical. A tree being so destroyed takes a short very while but to be substantially regrown will take a considerable number of years.

The manifestation of wildfires is reported by MSM (mainstream media) in such a way as to convey the illusory conclusion that they are caused by global warming. That is blatantly untrue. Most fires are caused by human activity either deliberately (arson) or accidentally (carelessness). A fire once started can be sustained by its environment (marshland/wetland/peat-rich soil = methane). The 1925-1926 wildfire season caused terrible destruction but almost 100 years later, MSM attempts to promote the case for a climate crisis. Bill Gates is one of the wealthiest individuals on Earth (money talks) and pontificates (the self-appointed climate change guru who has no expertise - a college dropout) about how to avoid a climate disaster. What is not mentioned is that Gates is the biggest private owner of farmland in the United States. Gates advocates laboratory grown meat and could interfere with the global production of livestock by buying up even more and more farmland to prevent anyone from raising cattle. And in doing so, in the false race to nett zero, will force people to survive by consuming the fake laboratory manufactured (synthetic) meat that he will supply and control. The scope for genetic adulteration of the meat is unlimited. One man feeding the World and saving humanity. The Messiah complex. And making £billions/£trillions in the process.

The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it - H.L. Mencken

Electricity has become an absolute dependency - rechargeable devices and electric vehicles (EVs). The natural resource that contains the lithium, nickel, and cobalt to produce EV rechargeable batteries is already relatively scarce (2024) compared to confirmed crude oil reserves. The abiogenic theory defines a continually forming resource. Ultimately, oil will become cheaper and the scarce metals (lithium, nickel, and cobalt) will attract premium prices. It’s very basic economics.

The length of time that EVs could exist for is extremely limited. Just a few years at most and that should be blindingly obvious. Enormous amounts (a claimed 200 tonnes) of mined ore are needed to process enough lithium, nickel, and cobalt to manufacture just a single average-sized 500kg car battery. The use of oil-based fuels would be necessary to facilitate the extraction/isolation processes. Crude oil has myriad other uses and the petrol collected from the volatile distillates of the refining process is a waste product. A 10 gallon (imperial) car fuel (petrol) tank would weigh-in at about 50kg (1/10^th the weight of the average-car EV battery). The huge EV battery weight defines the need for a large vehicle to structurally house such a monstrosity. Around half-a-tonne dead weight is necessary to provide the energy simply to make an EV function. A heavy vehicle has a high inertia and considerable energy is necessary each time it is moved from standstill and the subsequent acceleration to operating speed. The frictional wear on tyres will be massive and they will need to be replaced more often than for the much lighter petrol/diesel-fuelled equivalent. Micro-particles of synthetic rubber (an oil-derived product) in the atmosphere will create severe pollution issues as will the brake pads that will wear out much more quickly and create even more atmospheric pollution during the EV’s serviceable life. Brake-pad technology is a complex science and for a pad to remain efficient for a heavier vehicle imposes significant challenges.

What would happen in the event of a power outage? How can an EV be energised? Solar and wind power alone could never supply the necessary energy (dull and windless days in Winter). And there has not been any new-build nuclear power stations. The use of a wind turbine may produce so-called green energy (no CO₂) but the manufacture of the steel to build it does. This applies also to EVs. The major supplier of wind turbines is China and the Chinese intend to continue building coal-fired power stations. The reason should be glaringly obvious. Wind turbines and EVs may be regarded as environmentally friendly by not producing CO₂ but the manufacture of both produces an enormous yield of CO₂. A gas that is claimed to be deadly. Heat pumps extract warm air from an outdoor atmosphere and transfer it indoors though this requires electricity to function. Heat is not actually generated. Just extracted and transferred. On very cold days conventional oil-based fuels would be necessary. And no doubt some authority would declare when it’s cold enough and give permission to use conventional energy sources. Or so one might expect.

Venus is a very, very hot planet but scaremongering persists by (MSM) claiming that Earth is in imminent danger of becoming another Venus. This planet in 40 million km closer to the Sun than Earth and has an atmosphere of 95% (950,000ppm) CO₂. The concentration of CO₂ in the Venusian atmosphere is 95/0.0412 = 2300 times that of Earth. The natural difference in temperature between Earth and Venus is enormous (464°C - 15°C = 449°C) and is far in excess of the temperature to melt lead (327.5°C). Sources other than atmospheric carbon dioxide for alleged ‘global warming’ (on Earth) must be sought elsewhere. Carbon dioxide is not the cause of alleged terrestrial global warming. Earth’s Moon and the continuous movement of the global seas (tidal motion) offers the source of endless free energy. The only reason to shun the whole concept is the lack of opportunity to make a very, very substantial financial return (£trillions). That hydrogen would make a good candidate is only because it is assumed to be present everywhere in the Universe. How this source would be ‘mined’ or the gas liquefied and stored is never discussed but simply referred to as Green Hydrogen as though that makes it superior to ordinary hydrogen. It is currently produced using oil-based fuels (liquefaction of a gas into its liquid form). If generated electrolytically from water, electricity is an essential requirement. The gargantuan dangers involved with such a liquefied fuel are never mentioned. What might be the outcome in the event of a single vehicle crash/fire? Or of a tanker delivering liquid hydrogen. And sitting above a tank of liquefied hydrogen in a car would be particularly unnerving. Only if the challenges of hydrogen gas liquefaction (hydrogen boils at -253°C at atmospheric pressure), storage, and convincing users of the safety of using hydrogen as a fuel were to be overcome, could there potentially be any achievable financial return. Nevertheless, the consumption of hydrogen in a fuel cell will consume O₂ and convert it into water (H₂O).

The world-wide production of new water from hydrogen-cell fuelled vehicles will increase global warming. The very thing that the hydrogen fuel cell is claimed to reduce by not producing any CO₂.The narrative would have it that carbon dioxide is a toxic gas but fails to point out that it is the very gas that will generate new O₂ (photosynthesis). Deforestation is a genocidal (long-term) plan. Less trees means that less CO₂ will be removed from the atmosphere and less O₂ will be created to sustain an ever-growing population. The CO₂ removed by trees from the atmosphere to produce O₂ and glucose is the same amount of CO₂ that will be formed when it is consumed. Similarly, the water (H₂O) used is simply regenerated. There is no nett change in the volume of CO₂ or H₂O but hydrogen fuelled vehicles produce new water and consume oxygen. Direct competition will occur between the hydrogen-fuelled vehicle and all life for the available oxygen. One advantage that is claimed by the use of hydrogen as a fuel is its potential for sustainability but unless the copious amounts of water can be completely recycled (its actual destruction) to regenerate both new hydrogen and oxygen (creation), the introduction of the hydrogen-fuelled vehicle must be regarded a genocidal plan.

Photosynthesis: 6CO₂ + 6H₂O → 6O₂ + C₆H₁₂O₆ (glucose)

Glucose combustion: C₆H₁₂O₆ + 6O₂ → 6CO₂ + 6H₂O

Hydrogen cell: 2H₂ + O₂ → 2H₂O (new water)

Sustainability: 2H₂O → 2H₂ + O₂

There is a gulf between real (good) science and the environmentalist (bad science) agenda^,. And it takes only a rudimentary general scientific knowledge (laced with a very small amount of commonsensical clear thinking) to trip up the very poor arguments at the first hurdle. When people are afraid, poor decisions are made and the promoted narrative is accepted without question. Because of FEAR.

Consider a World where oil-based fuels were not used. Transporting anything around the planet would not be realistic. A family-size car fuel tank will hold around 10 gallons (imperial) and there are about 1.5 billion vehicles around the World. Theoretically, the maximum volume of fuel could be 15 billion gallons at any one time. Thousands of merchant ships (58,228) were operating Worldwide in 2022. A container/cargo ship can hold anything between 2.5 and 4.5 million (average = 3.5 million) gallons of fuel oil depending on its size and use. Just one average-sized ship would equate to around 350,000 cars. It would need only around 4,300 such container/cargo ships to be operational at any one time to carry as much fuel as all the vehicles on Earth. There are 5,574 container ships of various sizes and over 50,000 other types of vessel that use the heavier fuel oil that is far more polluting than the more refined and volatile petrol/diesel. Around 80% of goods are transported by ship.

Merchant shipping (58,228):

Ro-Ro/General cargo: 17,784 Bulk cargo carriers: 12,941

Chemical Tankers: 6,122 Crude-oil tankers: 8,258

Container ships: 5,574 Passenger ships: 5,369

Liquid Natural Gas tankers: 2,180

Electrically powered aircraft, road, and rail transport would make up the other 20%. The weight of an aircraft battery (even if technically achievable) would be enormous. A car battery weighs ~500kg (25 - 30% curb weight). The high operating temperature of a liquid hydrogen-fuelled jet engine (1500°C) would mean extremely hot exhaust gases (CO₂ and H₂O) and will theoretically produce more nitrogen oxides than the use of kerosene (aircraft oil-based fuel). Not less as is claimed. The production of any nitrogen-oxide molecule must be through a heat-based interaction with the atmosphere that contains both nitrogen and oxygen (78% nitrogen and 21% by volume). Apart from a new engine design to burn hydrogen as a fuel, aircraft airframe design would by necessity have to be modified to carry a larger volume of fuel as liquid hydrogen compared to the much more dense kerosene. Although hydrogen has around x4 the energy output for a comparative volume of kerosene, around 2000 times the volume of liquid hydrogen would be necessary for a similar operation specification. The entire global fleet of aircraft would need to be changed to comply with the climate change fraud and the cost would be astronomical (£trillions).

The elephant in the room, however, is the production of the electricity to recharge the batteries. It is an argument that becomes totally absurd. How the electricity would be generated is never discussed. It could only be provided in the necessary enormous quantities by using oil-based fuels. The entire fraud is completely lacking any logic and is moronic thinking. Cars and other forms of transport will all become obsolete as the resources required to enable it quickly run out. It’s all part of the plan to render all transport obsolete and imprison the entire global population. The 15-minute city concept. The fraud is fraught with deceit and lies and is an existential threat to all life on Earth. In the attempt to introduce any kind of measure/new technology to fix a climate system that is not damaged and a planet that doesn’t need saving, the environment and the climate will be destabilised and severely and detrimentally harmed. Using technology (the hydrogen fuel cell) to remove life-sustaining O₂ that adds water to the atmosphere and promotes atmospheric warming.

What is the alleged irreversible damage? That question has never even been asked and is unanswerable. The immediate response to any crazy idea that will cause depopulation (eugenics = murder) must always be an emphatic NO and to not comply.

United Kingdom (August 2024)