by Paul A. Philips, Activist Post:
We are forever getting told of a forthcoming major climate change crisis. How we are destroying our planet by unwittingly contributing to potential catastrophic famines, flooding and heatwaves… through our negligence to climate change.
Many have challenged this climate change crisis claim: It has been said that the human-led climate change crisis is a monumental lie. A deceptive Deep State tool. A PSYOP used to control the sleeping masses to get their compliance as they blindly walk into an engineered dystopia under the guise of saving the world.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
In reflection of this, here are 17 truth-seeking questions to challenge the climate change crisis claim and its related implications that something desperately needs to be done to prevent the so-called predicted catastrophic events.
Q1. If climate change is for real, then how is it that related disaster scenario predictions never came true?
Here are some of those predictions.
*Starting with so-called climate change expert James Hansen. He said in 1988 the West Side Highway, parallel to New York’s Hudson River, would be immersed in water in about 20-odd years. You can see from Google images that this is still dry.
*The Independent newspaper (anything but independent!) made the failed prediction in 2000 that snow would be no longer.
*Another mainstream newspaper with its fanfare and fearmongering claimed in 2004 European cities would be disappearing as they would be submerged under rising sea levels by 2020.
Another so-called climate change guru Al Gore in 2006 in his documentary film An Inconvenient Truth claimed that:
*In ten years (2016 – post-documentary film 2006) there will be no Kilimanjaro snow. Yes, it’s still there.
*Gore went on to say, come summer 2013, the North Pole may be ice-free.
*Through melting ice, sea levels could rise by 20 feet…
*A NASA scientist in 2008 predicted that Earth will be devoid of any ice.
*Then there’s this tweet from Greta Thunberg which she later removed:
Climate Change Crisis – Alarmist Reports
Q2. Given that there have been quite a number of alarmist reports, stories over the years scaring us into believing that climate change is the culprit, but later these stories were proven to be untrue, as with the above false predictions, is this another case of using fake climate change as a World Economic Forum control tool for imposing dystopic change?
Here are a few examples of those untrue alarmist report stories.
*A report from the BBC told us that fast melting Antarctic ice was causing a dramatic reduction in ocean current speeds which “could have a disastrous effect on the climate.” What they didn’t tell you in this hidden agenda net-zero endorsing fairy tale scare-story was that NASA research had found the opposite of the claim. That the Antarctic ice was in actual fact in balance and not melting.
*There was a story going around in the mainstream media that polar bears were under the threat of extinction due to climate change. However, zoologist Susan Crockford did a demolition on this fake story telling us with her research that polar bears are in fact thriving.
*Then there was the misleading Netflix film with David Attenborough’s bogus claim that there were falling walruses due to lack of ice and climate change…
*As with untrue stories there have been numerous gross exaggerations regarding climate change to the point of fantasy. This is done in a desperate attempt to persuade us that the claims are for real. Take for instance an IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report telling us that “Global Temperatures Are Highest for 125,000 Years.”
This has no settled science, but since when has that ever bothered those receiving plentiful funding to go along with the narrative?
Q3. Following on, isn’t real science showing there is no climate change crisis or emergency getting ignored, censored or even demonized because it goes against globalist billionaire’s political agendas for world Orwellian takeover?
Q4. Doesn’t the undemocratic acceptance of 15-minute, ludicrous net-zero carbon, “smart” cities… and its implications simply mean that you’d be agreeing with your own imprisonment?
