By Howard Dewhirst October 24, 2022
A LARGE number of businesses, including factories, pubs, shops, farms and fishing, might not survive the winter. This is primarily due not to the war in Ukraine or to Covid, but to the Great Reset that the World Economic Forum (WEF), the UN and their Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have been working towards since the 1970s. At that time climate ‘science’ was warning of a new Ice Age and acid rain. When these did not materialise, they were replaced in the early 1980s by the new ‘science’ of Global Warming and 40 more years of failed predictions.
It seems that human CO2 emissions are to blame, despite the fact that CO2 emissions were too small to cause a period of warming that ended in 1943, and too large to explain periods of low to no warming from 1943-1978 and post 1998. Despite this absence of correlation, the UN/IPCC still insist that what is now called Climate Change is driven solely by human emissions of CO2.
Human activity does cause problems for the environment in the form of multiple pollutants, but the essential plant food CO2 is not one of them. Why do so many scientists claim that it is?
It all began with an idea that appeared admirable – the redistribution of resources and wealth between the developed West and poor undeveloped countries such as China and India. This search for what is called social justice became formalised in the doctrine of the Great Reset, which began life in a book published in 1972 by the Club of Rome, a global think tank. Titled The Limits to Growth, it is a Malthusian interpretation of humanity’s impact on the Earth summarised as too many people and too few resources.
These ideas were re-imagined in an interview in 1990 given by Maurice Strong, a founding member of the IPCC and the WEF, in which he postulated that:
· In order to save the planet, the group asks: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialised civilisations collapse?
· Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?
· This group of world leaders (then) form a secret society to bring about an economic collapse.
This idea was taken up in the Club of Rome’s 1991 book, The First Global Revolution, which said: ‘The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy . . . we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill.’
The IPCC issue massive compilations of the latest climate scientific ‘consensus’ every few years, but only the ‘Summary for Policy Makers’ is read by most, and it focuses on the message, not the facts. The 1995 IPCC Main Report said:
· None of the studies . . . has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed [climate] changes to the specific cause of increases in greenhouse gases.
This was replaced in the Summary by:
· There is evidence of an emerging pattern of climate response to forcing by greenhouse gases and sulfate aerosols . . . These results point toward a human influence on global climate.
This change was then approved by the ‘consensus’; why?
One answer is buried in the unelected UN’s Agendas 21 and 30 which posit the way forward to the brave new world where you will ‘own nothing and be happy’, apparently; sustainable development is clearly something to strive for but at what cost? The planned economic collapse is now upon us – the West that is – and is moving towards completion, mission accomplished. But in execution this ambition has become stridently despotic. There has been no discussion of the IPCC conjecture that human CO2 emissions cause warming, just blind acceptance of what is falsely claimed to be a consensus.
The majority of those who accept the conjecture believe it is true, because data that does not support it has been shut down by multiple agencies such as Google and Facebook, where algorithms push different opinions out of sight. Scientific journals, universities and scientific institutions have been corralled into rejecting any paper that does not support this blind consensus, not based on facts, but on the suspect papers ‘not meeting editorial standards.’
That there has never been an experiment which proves global warming is caused by human CO2 emissions, and that for more than 50 years, every one of the predicted climate ‘tipping points’ has failed to happen, are quietly ignored for the sake of the consensus. What drives the consensus is the determination of the WEF, IPCC and the UN to drive home the Great Reset, come what may. In the words of Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, the goal is ‘to intentionally transform the (existing global) economic development model . . . in other words not to save the world from ecological calamity, but to replace capitalism with something based on sustainable development driven by de-carbonisation of industry and agriculture.’
What this means was explained by the Democratic Governor of Washington State, Dixy Lee Ray: ‘The future is to be World Government with central planning by the United Nations. Fear of environmental crises – whether real or not – is expected to lead to compliance.’
Confirmation of the UN’s determination to control the debate can be deduced from the recent declaration that they ‘own the science and the world should know’ and that they have joined with Google to ensure that searchers find only UN results.
This is the thinking behind what the WEF call the Great Reset, which will use climate change to undermine the capitalist economy and then nationalise everything, so people will indeed ‘own nothing and be happy’ and, as in Russia after the revolution and in China today, the state is all.
Re-published by permission. This was first published on TCW, The Conservative Woman, in the UK.