MONOLOGUE WRITTEN BY CLYDE LEWIS
Just in case anyone blinked – it was Earth Day last Thursday. I realized this when a radio station that for some reason was pumping through my radio the dulcet tones of Greta Thunberg telling everyone that she feels leaders are not doing enough to combat COVID-19. I was thinking why anyone cares about what she says about how our leaders are dealing with COVID-19. Then, I realized that this snarky comment was included in her Earth Day message that she gave last Thursday.
Needless to say, that what I was listening to was a summation of the biggest stories of the week. I also noticed that PBS was also pushing a documentary featuring Thunberg and her message about zero carbon.
Greta Thunberg continues to say that only a drastic push toward Net Zero carbon emissions can save the world. But, as Thunberg readily admits, the politics to achieve this do not exist.
However, you would not know this because it appears that as the mainstream media is now in the process of abandoning its COVID-19 fear mongering and bringing back its Greenhouse gas fear mongering and it looks like the more than a decade’s long greenwashing of the people is working.
Even though scientists pushing Global Warming stated that we all should have been dead by now.
It was reported over the weekend that according to an NBC poll people’s minds are changing about anthropogenic global warming –and according to the poll the change has the majority in agreement.
According to the poll – the majority of Americans are no longer divided politically on Climate Change.
Now, I want to share with you the NBC story dated April 25th, 2021:
Headline: GLOBAL WARMING PERCEPTIONS BY STATE: MOST AMERICANS ACCEPT HUMAN FAULT
These numbers show the next big front in the climate change fight.
Now, here is part of the news report:
“It’s been more than 50 years since the words “Earth Day” entered the country’s environmental lexicon, and polling data show there is an increasing understanding that humans do, in fact, play a large role in earth’s changing environment.
Nonetheless, sharp political divides and challenges to action still remain. Survey data from the Yale Program on Climate Communication tells a story of change and differences among states.
In 2014, the program looked at a series of questions around climate change including whether people believed “global warming is mostly caused by human activities.”
Only about 48 percent of Americans believe that statement to be true. And at the state level, the idea got 50 percent or more support in only 18 states.
Why does the opinion at the state level matter? Because state sends two senators to Washington and, in 2014, those numbers showed how hard it might be to get legislation through Congress.
New data from last fall, however, shows how much has changed since then.
Asked the same question in 2020, a majority of Americans, 57 percent, said they believed that “human activities” were mostly responsible for “global warming.” That’s a 9-point shift.
And, perhaps even more remarkable, a majority of people agreed with that statement in 46 states. The only places that were under 50 percent — Kentucky, North Dakota, West Virginia and Wyoming — are states with deep ties to energy extraction.
It’s impossible to know for certain what drove that change, but the extreme weather events of the last few years, from hurricanes and floods to deep droughts and wildfires, might have played a role. Whatever drove the shift, however, those numbers suggest it should be easier for Congress to take action on climate change. Getting people to see the world differently is not easy.
Now, I would like to share with you a report from NBC that is dated December 30th, 2018.
Headline: POLLING: CONSENSUS EMERGES IN CLIMATE CHANGE DEBATE
If you expect those changing views to lead to action in Washington, however, think again.
Here now is part of the news report:
“The climate change debate has been a part of politics in Washington for decades now, but polling from 2018 shows that there may be a consensus emerging from the American public. A range of surveys show more people believe it is happening and more people believe humans are responsible.
If you expect those changing views to lead to action in Washington, however, think again. In the places where it counts, where laws and regulations are made, the feelings concerning what should be done about climate change are much more divided.
On the most basic level, there is big agreement that climate change is a real thing and is happening before our eyes, according to a massive survey from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication and the George Mason Center for Climate Change Communication.
That data showed 70 percent of Americans believe “global warming is happening” and 57 percent believe “global warming is being caused mostly by human activities.” In a nation as divided as the United States is right now, those are remarkable numbers.
The American Communities Project went further and analyzed those data through its set of 15 different community types and found similar numbers. Large majorities in all types believe climate change is real and majorities in most communities believing humans are mostly causing the changes.
The latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll provides more evidence of a climate change majority.”
Comparing both articles – it seems that two years ago NBC was playing the same tune and twisting the same numbers.
They would have you believe that during the Trump administration more people believed in man made climate change and the President wouldn’t listen.
Now, with a pro Green Deal leader in the White House it was time to dig up some poll on earth day in order to justify President Biden’s move to cut our country’s greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030.
According to the press release from the White House:
President Biden is holding to challenge the world on increased ambition in combating Climate Change – is part of the President’s focus on building back better in a way that will create millions of good-paying, union jobs, ensure economic competitiveness, advance environmental justice, and improve the health and security of communities across America.
On Day One, President Biden fulfilled his promise to rejoin the Paris Agreement and set a course for the United States to tackle the climate crisis at home and abroad, reaching net zero emissions economy-wide by no later than 2050. As part of re-entering the Paris Agreement, he also launched a whole-of-government process, organized through his National Climate Task Force, to establish this new 2030 emissions target – known as the “nationally determined contribution” or “NDC,” a formal submission to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Today’s announcement is the product of this government-wide assessment of how to make the most of the opportunity combating climate change presents.
Well, now we know there is a light at the end of the tunnel with regard to herd immunity with COVID-19 and it appears we have more science to contend with – the science will now focus its attention on Global warning again and if you are paying attention – there are nuances being reported that literally claim tat COVID-19 was beneficial in cutting greenhouse gasses that contribute to Global Warming.
COVID-19 has been killing us according to the CDC and the media experts – but now we are learning that COVID-19 has saved us – in a sick and twisted indication that culling the planet with a disease was a benefit to these sick climate cultists.
The narrative of the “deadly viral pandemic” is slowly losing momentum. Whether this is through the public having “post viral fatigue” or a deliberate shift in media talking points is unclear. But there’s certainly less energy in the story than at this time last year.
That said, it is also perfectly clear that governments around the world are in no mood to give up their newly acquired “emergency powers”, and that alleged “anti-covid measures” are not going away anytime soon.
Especially lockdowns, which are being freshly marketed as “good for the planet”.
The narrative that locking down the public was “helping the Earth heal” actually dates back to last March, when it was reported all across the world news that only a few weeks of lockdown had cleared up the water in Venetian canals so much there were dolphins swimming through the city.
This story later proved to be completely untrue, but that didn’t stop dozens of outlets from picking up the story and running with it.
At various times in the intervening year, Covid has been sold by the World Economic forum as a having an environmental silver-lining. Including potentially “saving the planet”.
Back in March, there was a curious article that was published in the UK that stated that a Global lockdown every two years would help the world meet it’s goal of eliminating carbon emissions.
Published in Nature Climate Change, the report found that carbon emissions fell by about 2.6 billion metric tons in 2020, or roughly a 7% drop from the previous year, a historic decrease.
However, researchers said further drops in carbon output—1 billion to 2 billion metric tons per year—are needed for global emissions to meet the safe worldwide temperature range defined by the Paris Agreement to dodge the effects of climate change.
That’s roughly the equivalent of a coronavirus-pandemic-scale lockdown once every two years, researchers said.
Now we can guess what is in store for the future — mandated lockdowns in order to combat Climate change — the folks at Davos said it was a silver lining to their plans of Carbon reduction and now since people blindly follow the science — it should be cinch to roll out another reason to lockdown the population in two years.
Conspiracy theorists have often stated that these lockdowns are to prepare us for a future event –anything from nuclear fall out to alien invasion – now we have an inkling of a more prosaic reason for doing so.
Think about what is being said here:
“Global lockdown every two years needed to meet Paris CO2 goals – study”
That this is all about marketing and opinion control is only not science.
At around the same time, there was another article, warning that emissions will increase to “pre-pandemic levels” once lockdowns are ended. Another saying lockdown has taught us to “love nature”. And another claiming the UK’s “star count” had increased thanks to lockdown.
All this kicked into another gear on Earth Day, the theme of which is Restore Our Earth–which by the way is a registered trademark that I am sure is going to be marketed to the climate sheep.
The whole plot is to encourage us to “celebrate how much the planet has healed during lockdown.“
If you have an apple TV subscription you may have heard of a documentary that was released called “The Year Earth Changed” chronicling the ways nature has rebounded during lockdown, and how much the “Earth has healed”.
To quote one review :
…lockdown offers scientists a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to observe the extent of human impact on animal behavior, by simply taking us out of the picture.
We can use what we learn to re-evaluate and modify our habits, they argue, instead of mindlessly returning to how things once were in a pre-pandemic world.
It says, before concluding:
It offers an affirmative slant – less ‘we are the virus’; more, the suffering of these last 12 or so months hasn’t been all in vain – as well as a way out of the environmental disaster that we’re unquestionably still facing.
The documentary shares with us that humans are the virus — that with us hiding in our homes — the earth went through a healing process — leading the observer to believe that perhaps we are a cancer on this planet.
An article in Forbes urges people to “embrace the lessons of the pandemic”:
“The planet has had a giant pause during the pandemic and had a chance to repair and reclaim itself. The planet is not the problem, we are, so how do we now continue some of the good efforts that we adopted under sudden social distancing and the threat of Covid-19?”
A press release from the Washington State Department of Health says “tele working could save the world”.
In it, we read:
“By skipping the commute to work, we reduce our carbon footprint. It’s pretty simple: Fewer commutes equals less greenhouse gas emissions. Global Workforce Analytics estimates that if everyone who works in an office would work from home just half of the week, this would reduce the emissions by 54 million tons each year.”
It goes on to say that Telecommuting is part of a climate change solution because using electronics to telecommute saves 9 to 15 billion kilowatt-hours of energy each year. Remote work would reduce the amount of oil we use by 640 million barrels and cut emissions by 54 million tons of greenhouse gas.
For anyone “out and about” during the early days of the pandemic, it was easy to see how the stay-at-home orders were impacting the environment. Office buildings were dark. There were very few cars on the road. The air seemed cleaner. What if we each continued those efforts, even in a very small way. What would the impact on our world be?”
It goes on and on and on.
Essentially, “lockdowns” – which, we remind you, are not shown to have any impact on the transmission of the “virus” – are now being rebranded, not just as “good for public health”, but also good for the planet.
Now we can see what the true purpose of lockdowns were for. They were put into place to heal the planet.
Now keep in mind what has been on the agenda even before COVID-19 and how it will apply to our so-called healing process.
We know that world leaders have talked about imposing a cashless society, decreased air travel, encouraging population control, mass surveillance, decreased meat production – these ideas were couched in fighting the pandemic – It did not quite catch on, but now times have changed – and the so-called healing agenda will find ways to push these agendas.
After all, what is the much talked about “Green New Deal”, if not a prototype of the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset plan?
The “Great Reset” and the “New Normal” are policy goals that pre-date COVID and are far more important than any of the tools used to pursue them. The “pandemic” apparently is nothing but a means to an end. They might discard or sideline the narrative of the virus, they might switch story-lines for a few months, or stop using certain phrases altogether for a while. But that doesn’t mean their greater agenda has changed at all.
They have shown us their hand. They have told us – upfront and out loud – what they want to achieve.