Climate Change alarmists are clinically depressed?

Just so you know, I inserted the banner words “We Are Morons”in to the demonstration and group photo of an Extinction Rebellion ‘rally.’ It was also the working title for this piece, which I forgot to change before publishing. The Extinction Rebellion group is so pessimistic that the word “rally” seems inappropriate. “Funeral” or cavalcade of mourners would be a better description.

They are wrong. We are not headed for a sixth great extinction, at least one within our control. The planet routinely undergoes collisions with foreign bodies, and that has led to great tragedies. I think that is hidden somewhere in our collective psyches, and that might be the reason that Immanuel Velikovsky was so vilified. Routine human disasters as he described are forbidden knowledge. Mike Baillee in his book New Light on the Black Death*** calculated that we endure a major catastrophe involving an asteroid every 300 years or so. That’s a huge problem, one we ought to be studying. That could lead to extinction of species and … even climate change.

Other than that, we’re OK. Of course we have problems that need to be addressed, such as industrial pollution, deforestation, corrupt science, medicine and politics. These are large problems, and at this time it seems that forces of evil so dominate our lives that it is hopeless. But that kind of thinking is self-defeating, leading us to depression and inaction. We cannot afford to be depressed or lazy!

I’ve sent away for a book by Michael Shellenberger called Apocalypse Never, as I very much enjoyed his exchange with Jordan Peterson. It is almost two hours long (interspersed with annoying ads that can attack at any moment, making passive listening while doing other things nearly impossible). But I did make my way through it, quick to cover the ads with my hand and ditch them at five seconds. One important point (among many) that I took away is the Climate Alarmists and Apocalyptics like Greta Thunberg and those who make up Extinction Rebellion appear to be suffering from clinical depression. What else can they do when they see no future, no reason to be optimistic about our lives and our planet? Thunberg in particular appears to have suffered a psychotic break, as she is so agitated, anguished and angry. It’s all treatable, but first she has to stop being constantly afraid.

I’ve spent a lot of time accumulating facts and data and graphs on major Climate Alarmism issues, like sea level rise, tornadoes and hurricanes, forest fires, and general temperatures. We are not threatened by Climate Change. That’s what the data says.

But Climate Change is a propaganda campaign having nothing to do with data or science, so facts and evidence do not matter. Climate Change is based on a highly gullible and uneducated public influenced by a corrupt monolithic news media, corrupt and bought scientists, and (it goes without saying) corrupt politicians. In such an environment, facts don’t matter, never see light of day.

A woman who came to look at the plants and birds and animals on our property seemed depressed, mentioning Climate Change as real and menacing. What a way to live! I answered her with optimism and easy dismissal of her worries. She responded that Siberia is going to hell. Right now.

No, Siberia isn’t going to hell, but it is so far away, and she’ll never go there so that she’ll never realize how very wrong she is. It is the same with matters like the Amazon Rain Forest, the Great barrier Reef, Arctic, South Pole, and Greenland ice melt – we are not experiencing unmanageable problems, but rather, mere climate variability, and in the Amazon, subsistence farming. Without that variability, Alarmists would have nothing to be alarmed about.

I think Alarmists choose those locations due to their inaccessibility. We can all stick our heads out our car windows and see that nothing is changing in any meaningful way, that things are pretty much as they always have been, from a data standpoint just very slight warming going on (Colorado 1918-2018 .47 degree Fahrenheit per decade, hardly a problem). That warming, beneficial, has been going on since the bottom of the Little Ice Age, around 1680. (I just went looking to make sure my LIA date was correct about that, and realized that there are not many trustworthy sources out there, least of all Wikipedia, and that Climate Alarmist frauds are busy altering the past to conform with the propaganda. We must be careful with our data. It is under attack.)

In propaganda campaigns (Covid is a just a propaganda campaign), facts do not matter. Karl Rove (allegedly) had the following exchange with Ron Suskind:

[Rove] said that guys like me [Suskind] were “in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. “That’s not the way the world really works anymore …”

I wonder if the world has ever worked that way.

I just got done reading (and skimming, as it is very hard to absorb) a paper on “climate sensitivity”, defined as “by convention, the eventual total increase in global mean temperature associated with a doubling of CO2. I’ll jump ahead, for purposes of this post, to the final paragraph:

“This remote possibility [of dangerous anthropogenic global warming] is far from “settled science,” and the thought that multi-trillion dollar policies would be implemented to putatively prevent this, seems far from rational. This is especially so when one considers that for about 95 percent of the time since complex life systems appeared (about 600 million years ago), levels of CO2 were much higher than they are anticipated to become (as much as 10-20 times today’s levels) without evidence of a relationship to global mean temperature..”

Climate sensitivity is the essential element in the theory that we are threatened by increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. If it is in the region of .75 to 1.50, we have no problem. Anything in excess of 1.50 might be problematic, but we are not experiencing anything like that. After all, even during ice ages, CO2 atmospheric levels were higher than now. Much higher. Also understand that the effect of CO2 decreases exponentially with increased levels, so that an increase from 200-400 ppm and 400-800ppm would be about the same, and minimal.

So what are we to do in the face of such a monstrous propaganda campaign? Imagine being a school child now and thinking that the future is so bleak. Students are not taught anything real about climate other than to be worried, if not despondent. That is child abuse, in my view, robbing them of enthusiasm and optimism, telling them they have no future. (“How DARE you!”) All we can do is maintain steady optimism, and speak up. Do not try to argue facts with Alarmists. Merely inform them that their worries are baseless, their data missing, and fears unfounded. Do so stridently, if we must. Do not waste facts and evidence on them.

___________________________________________________________________________

***This is a passage from Baillee’s book that grabbed me and sticks with me. Collisions and near-misses with asteroids pollute our atmosphere to such a degree that we have large die offs of fish, animals, and humans. He thought we had such a collision and that it was the cause of the Black Death in 1348.  He shows conclusively that it was not traveling packs of rats. I leave it to the reader to evaluate, but these words are what caught my eye:

Take this example from the ice-core records. If you access the particulate record from the American GISP2 ice core, you find that they give both the numbers of particles in the ice and the size of the particles through time. They provide this information running back to the seventh century. If you look at this 1300-year record you discover that the section of ice with the most particles and the largest particles is 1920-2. This spike is so huge in comparison with anything else in the record that it stands out like a sore thumb. There is a lesser but still outstanding spike in 1916. What on earth was the “event” that causes 1920-2 anomaly? One could possibly understand something in the middle of World War I putting dust into Greenland, but it’s hard to think of a “once in 1300 years” happening around 1920. Thus, as recently as the 1920s, when the world was well-connected, we have a complete enigma involving anomalous amounts of course dust – someone might like to solve this little enigma! Examples like this one (and there are many, many others relating to past happenings) suggests the past is really a bit of a mystery.” (Page 116)

The reason I find that passage so important is that the time period (1916-1922) coincides with another mass die off not well understood, though certainly not caused by a “virus.” That die off was called the Spanish Flu.

49 thoughts on “Climate Change alarmists are clinically depressed?

  1. That’s a very interesting quote from Mike Baillee. Thanks for posting it here. If you insert Baillee’s particulates (as evidenced by the ice core samples) into the picture, then you have the recipe for severe lung disease, no “pathogens” needed. You might add to that the testimony of Eleanor McBean (on this page is an excerpt from her book “Vaccination Condemned”, https://educate-yourself.org/cn/flu1918andnow07feb04.shtml). The lung disease coupled with the intense vaccination efforts would amount to a powerful assault on human life.

    On this page, https://vaccineimpact.com/2018/did-military-experimental-vaccine-in-1918-kill-50-100-million-people-blamed-as-spanish-flu/, in the summary at the top, Kevin Barry tries to implicate bacterial pneumonia as the Spanish flu culprit, which is as much nonsense as the viral narrative he tries to supplant. Notice though, in support of McBean’s claims, how vaccination is central to the plot of Spanish flu (as seen in the Fort Riley story) from the very beginning….Historic concentration of particulates of unknown origin, leading to pulmonary disease, aided and abetted by a massive vaccination campaign.

    Like

  2. I wonder if the world has ever worked that way.

    Ditto.

    Some years ago I read ‘The Crowd’ by Gustave le Bon. A few passages resonated with me, and caused me to reconsider my beliefs at the time regarding the regular people, and how much of their reality was based on what we might term ‘objective facts’.

    I had spent my life up until that point generally believing, apparently without question, that we (humans) all more or less think the same way: even if we have differing opinions, this is based on different exposure to facts and evidence and so forth. I now see that this is simply not the case.

    Here’s a GLB quote which is among my favourite quotes of all times:

    “A crowd scarcely distinguishes between the subjective and the objective. It accepts as real the images evoked in its mind, though they most often have only a very distant relation with observed fact.”

    With the ubiquity of monoliths and the social media hive-mind, we are all in a crowd now. Those of us who prefer to base our opinions on facts and evidence are among a tiny, tiny minority, and will appear crazy to the majority if we ever utter our honest thoughts and opinions, or dare to ask the obvious questions of the herd or their authorities.

    If you’d like to see some more brilliant Gustave quotes, complete with links to source material, check out this page: https://www.johnlebon.com/start/resources/great-quotes/gustave-le-bon/

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Great source! I wish I had time to read everything that comes around. Bernays in his book Propaganda references “Trotter and le Bon.” I’ll bring that quote around later today for those unfamiliar … I briefly examined the work of each man, and they were both students of crowds and crowd behavior. Bernays merely took it a step forward, saying that if we understood crowd behavior, can we not manipulate crowds without their knowing it? You bet you can.

      Like

  3. “The planet routinely undergoes collisions with foreign bodies, and that has led to great tragedies.”

    I’m curious if you have any evidence to support these assertions? Setting aside for the moment the idea that Earth is a planet (“wandering star”), what evidence is there that it “routinely undergoes collisions with foreign bodies”? Or that it has “led to great tragedies”?

    We aren’t still entertaining the dino-myth, are we? Oh dear…

    Like

    1. There is all of the impact craters on the moon … do you imagine asteroids are selective, hitting only the moon but not the earth? There is the 1908 Tunguska event that leveled over 800 square miles of forest, leaving no crater. Shortly before the Black Death (1348 forward) the planet was struck by Comet Negra, which coincided with droughts, floods, earthquakes, “thunder underground,” “sheets of fire,” millions of dead fish washing ashore, a “column of fire,” and, just coincidentally, we are told, a “virus” causing people to die in the millions. If you buy that as coincidence, I have a bridge to sell you.

      Velikovsky, of course, wrote about comets impacting the planet giving rise to biblical tales in Exodus, and later again during the Roman Empire the Antonine Justinian Plague.

      If you’re a flat earther, you must now go your merry way. We do not discuss that matter at this site, but plenty of other sites are available to you.

      Like

  4. Hi Mark, I read somewhere that there is no tree in Siberia older than some 250 years. Probably because something big happened back then and destroyed everything. Such big catastrophes scary people big time and make them willing to accept big changes in their lifestyle. That’s when NWO’s come into place. That was the time when the French Revolution happened and introduced the national state with borders and armies and conscription. If people weren’t scary enough it would never happen. At the time also the USA was created. 250 years is not much. I know houses here which are older than that. TPTB, which I call “The Vatican” now, build up the USA to have a new external center of power, along with Rom and City (of London). This is called The Three Roms, which Wikipedia wrongly explains as Rom,Moscow and Istanbul. All power comes from Vatican, believe it or not. That’s why everybody with “power” has to visit the Pope, who is the spokesman of the Vatican. Biden has now to report to the Pope, which may be the beginning of the end of Corona. We will see.

    As for Bulgaria (John Le Bon), did you know, there is a pyramid there older and bigger than the Egyptian pyramids in Giza. Just google “pyramid bulgaria”.

    Like

    1. Hi Barb, thanks for chiming in. I always enjoy your comments. Quite a bit of Velikovsky’s work centered around the idea that something so horrible had happened that we blocked it from our conscious existence. One guy observed that it would be like sitting in the front row of a crowded movie theatre, and then watch as everyone in every other row perished. That’s why I think Velikovsky was destroyed as he was, for broaching the limits, discussing forbidden knowledge.

      You have been optimistic about the end of the Covid regime for some time now. I wish I could share that optimism. I was listening to a Scottish comedian, Daniel Sloss, yesterday, and he noted that performing for Americans was very different than, say, Canada or Great Britain, in that Americans will laugh if they think something is funny, where other places there is awareness of the group, and people only laugh as a collective. This came as a surprise to me, as I don’t think much of Americans, and certainly don’t imagine them, generally, to think independently. But we do have bastions of resistance to Covid, South Dakota, Idaho, Texas, Florida, recently Montana and other states where life goes on normally, generally places where governance is more conservative, aka Republican in outer appearance. On the other hand, places like California are more like East Germany, your familiar background, collective nightmares where people have submitted completely to fascist rule. One guy I like, Dr.Tim O’Shea (The Doctor Within) lives in San Francisco, and there is still a statewide mass mask mandate. He says he goes freely without a mask everywhere, and no one looks at him. That was my experience here, people blindly following ritual, afraid to be different. I think they don’t look at me without my mask due to inner shame.

      Anyway, I do not see it ending soon in those places that are governed by “liberals” and “progressives,” aka fascists. Where I live, in the foothills above Denver, it is maybe 50-50 masked and unmasked, those wearing them having been broken down, suffering a psychotic break, as I see it. As Ellul reminded us, people broken down by agitation propaganda never recover. The brain damage is permanent. The whole of California is a wasteland now.

      Like

    2. Thanks, Barbara 124 (7). Biden will get his marching orders at the Vatican. https://www.state.gov/secretary-blinkens-travel-to-vatican-city-rome-and-glasgow

      Blinken is there to take notes because Biden’s short-term memory is shot. City of London (the Crown), the Vatican/Pope, and Washington, DC. are running this shit-show. I couldn’t agree more. Nations? What nations? The only bigger lie is the one told nightly on the MSM about “threats to OUR democracy.” Such a joke.

      Like

      1. Steve, the nations were given to us from the same people that are taking them away now. There is this heartland theory. Before Vatican entered the stage the World was concentrated in the center of Europe in the area from France to deep into Russia and the people were called Asen (western part), Wannen (eastern part) and Tartars (the Russian part. And they spoke a common language called theodisch (www.theodisch.blogspot.com) which actually (phonetically spoken with Saxon accent) means deutsch (German). One could say, the world was Saxony. In Finish (the language not the end 🙂 ) German still means Saksan. They forgot to change that when they faked the history the last time. There weren’t any states back then and not even kingdoms. All this are inventions of the Vatican, which (the term) by the way comes from the Theodisch language and means “Vatti kann” (father can do everything). The Pope is called Papa, which means father.

        Like

        1. Barb, I doubt the etymology you’re proposing here.

          I used to think that vaticanus has to do with Latin vates (soothsayer), and still do so. “Vati kann”, in my opinion, is a strikingly naive so-called popular etymology (Volksetymologie). Please reconsider, as this clearly is the wrong track.

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ager_Vaticanus

          Germany, Germania / Saxony, Saksa / Allemagne / Tyskland, cf. tedesco in Italian, Deutschland, cf. Dutch in English. The world was never Saxony, but Saxon/Platt was the lingua franca for trade in the Baltic area. The North Germanic languages (Danish, Swedish, Icelandish) are languages of their own, albeit from the same family.

          Theodisc, cf. tedesco in Italian, meant common folks, common people, not nobility or anything, and indeed deutsch in German and Dutch in English are derived from theodisc.

          Also, Russia is a civilizational latecomer in Europe, which is a fact Anatoly Fomenko strives to wipe out with his work.

          Then, there is this Tartaria theory (really Flat Earth History, in my opinion) that there once was an eminent Tartarian civilization who built most of the architectural monuments we see today, before being buried by mud floods. It’s a lot of nonsense, really.

          Like

    3. “All power comes from Vatican, believe it or not.”

      Can you post a link or bibliographical reference that persuaded you this is really so?

      Like

  5. Re “facts and evidence do not matter”

    True, one will probably not change many minds with other laypeople by presenting facts or logical critique of official dogma. Certainly I won’t, since I haven’t deeply studied all the arguments and evidence myself. (And to the extent I have in the past, I’m not immersed in it daily, so the particulars slip away from me after a few months.)

    So what you are really debating is an epistemology of knowledge, or the reasonableness of great faith in official science. Any layperson will most likely acknowledge that the dogma could be wrong – even the experts graciously concede that their models lack absolute perfection – but, in their epistemology, or model of reality, it is most reasonable, they say, to lean on the consensus of scientists. These experts have deeply studied the problem, only a few oil-funded rogues or whackos disagree, and so on.

    How could they all be corrupted? That’s impossible! To get to that many independent-minded, brilliant scientists. And what nefarious cabal would do such a thing? And manage to pull it off? And on and on. I’m just scratching the surface of the objections one runs into in conversations of this sort.

    There are answers, of course, but they aren’t soundbites, and they involve opening one’s mind to sustained inquiry about sociology of science, mass society, propaganda, social engineering, etc.

    So yes, even if one personally mastered all the evidence, could source everything from official or impeccable sources, and answer all of the “science,” one would not change any minds because any layperson knows that while they may lack a response, their model weights a consensus of scientists more heavily than any evidence or logic on immediate display before them.

    As an aside, I find it interesting that I know “conservatives” who dismiss the official science of global warming out of hand – who consider it obviously fraudulent, a scam, etc. – but in respect to Covid, think there must be some basic there there, even if it’s over-hyped.

    Like

    1. Great comment, Tim. The long, officially-established “truth” and “reality” is the water most swim in, but never perceive.
      Sadly, as you aptly note, there is no “soundbite” answer, though memes may be a way to get folks thinking differently in today’s instant-reward society. But fear of loss, in all its manifestations, prevents most from even trying to look outside the fishbowl.

      Like

    2. I agree, TimR, great comment.

      As to how they can all be corrupted, they are not by any means. As with Covid, there is an enforcement mechanism in place, and immediate sanctions and punishment await any who speak out. So the only voices we hear are of the corrupted ones.

      This is why Heartland Institute, a great organization, consists of so many retired people, like Richard Linzden, who are beyond the reach of censors.

      Like

    3. TimR, I ran into this just this past weekend with a true-believer relative. “So you think ALL the scientists are corrupted?”

      What I wish I’d have said–not that it would have mattered–is that I don’t think (and don’t think anybody really thinks) ALL the scientists are studying Covid. It’s a relatively small group of them who are studying it, and they are doing so on the payroll of people with an agenda. That’s as sound-bite-y a response as I can come up with, and it seems to me that, if you think of it that way, it’s not hard to believe that the small group of scientists “studying” Covid could be corrupted. But A) people don’t want to think about it and B) experience tells me that if they did, they’d just come up with some new way to convince themselves that they’re right.

      Like

    4. The other day i was thinking to present POM readers with the following question:

      “Why are you all so absolutely convinced that coronavirus is a hoax?”

      Well here seems a good time to ask that question.

      Apply what you are saying about others to ourselves and what will we discover? we will discover that our belief that corona is a hoax is also not based on real or imagined or tampered with data; our belief is fixed by our feelings in the same way that others are fixed in their belief by feelings: it would probably be quite difficult to convince the true unbelievers that corona is a real thing. Granted, a few of us are still flexible enough to change the moment the situation and data change but i suspect most of the true unbelievers are just as rigid as the believers in their own special way.

      Like

      1. Godfly, yes, I think about that a lot, actually. Even thought about it as I was writing the comment above yours. Belief is addictive, no matter what the belief is.

        I’ve never trusted authority figures of any type or of any political party, which makes me predisposed to see things the way I do, just as people who have always trusted authority figures of some stripe or another are predisposed the way they are.

        The idea that a few pharmaceutical companies are dispensing salvation for all of humanity–that our species has made it this far and survived all kinds of disease and disaster, but it now must place total responsibility for its survival on known criminals with long histories of showing utter contempt for human life–is so pathetic and absurd to me that I can’t imagine taking any “facts” or “data” seriously that might be used to support it. As C.J. Hopkins has pointed out, this isn’t about facts or data. It’s about accepting or not accepting the version of “reality” we’re told to accept. I’ve never been inclined to do that.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. i love that…”dispensing salvation”..
          yes, for me here it is: just look around you; life is as “normal ” as ever and the only way you would even know about a virus and masks and vaccines is if you are plugged into media (and neighbors) This is the only proof i need; where is the virus? where are the sick and dying people? no where, Ask your friends and family if they know anyone who has died of corona; they do not and so thats it; end of subject; i refuse to even discuss the issue with anyone who tries to discuss it with me; i wave them off with a sort of guffaw and contemptuous wave of my hand: does not exist…where is it…next subject; i simply refuse to discuss it with ANYONE…this works for me; i refuse to THINK about it in my day to day life…and anyway, in the end this issue is not so different than a million other issues:

          as i have said, it is no small thing to change a persons mind on such an issue; to do so is to literally bring their world crashing down; when you realize that, ww learn to just shut up, and leave the others be unless they get in our faces….

          it is way beyond epistemology; it is existential, metaphysical.

          Like

        2. Well said – if you step back and look at the “big picture” view of things, it’s just too absurd to be believed… Lucky us, we live at the pinnacle of human achievement, so we can all be “saved” by modern science. The terror at the heart of human existence, need not be faced by us, as it was by previous generations. Continue munching your popcorn, good people, and watching your flims! We will save you all…! Just don these religious garments, no biggie…

          Like

      2. Godfly, running a blog is a constant source of self-examination. Just as with the Kary Mullis thread, people are constantly putting a different view of reality before me. I once made a list of things that I have changed my mind about. In January of 2020, I believed in viruses and contagion. I live with the idea that I can be and have been wrong. Everything is fluid.

        Like

    5. TimR, “the reasonableness of great faith in official science”, that alone is a gem. Really sums up all that’s involved in the belief systems of the time we live in.

      Like

    1. Hard to judge a man so well spoken … acting? I doubt it. He tends to say what he is thinking, which is rare. As my mother used to say (she loved Bill Buckley and Firing Line), she loved to hear the thoughts and exchanges between people who knew how to think well.

      Like

      1. the jews say that there are two kinds of people in the world: those who are jews and those who are not; but more to the truth is that there are two kinds of jews in the world: those who are in the know and control everything (like my paternal side of the family) and those who think they are in the know (like my maternal side of the family) ; the first kind of jew finds the second kind of jew very useful. Jordan peterson thinks he is in the know, a typical east coast aske-nazi who actually believes in the left right thing, the “democracy” thing and all those other absurd things; he is not controlled opposition or anything like that; he is just a jewish intellectual who thinks he knows something; it is said he was influenced by the likes of doestoyeski and Nietzsche? now that is so ridiculous, no further comment is necessary.
        this might answer your question: the most naïve are always those who think they know something but have not got a clue what is really going on; their belief in government is just in their blood, even when they call themselves anarchists…

        Like

  6. Seems to me this is rapidly evolving into the QR-code nightmare Stephers wrote about earlier this year. https://pieceofmindful.com/2021/04/13/part-8-trust-codes-vaccine-passports-and-scannable-humans/#more-93008

    Peter Koenig’s recent essay, The Final Solution. Full Digitization. “The QR Codification of the World,” brings us up to date with a clearer picture of the rapid movement toward the stated global trans-human agenda.
    https://www.globalresearch.ca/final-solution/5758334

    Like

  7. I’m actually VERY optimistic about all what happened since Corona. There is a saying in Germany: “now the cat is out of the sack”. Like two years ago there were maybe a few thousand people in the world who would dare to question the existence of viruses, myself included. Religious morons not included of course. Now the number goes in millions. Two years ago people believed they live in democracies and constitutional countries and could relay on their law systems. Now everybody knows, or at least can be told any time that this is but an illusion existing as long as nobody calls for his rights. Western medicine still has a very strong position though. That’s a toughie. My impression is that only a small minority still believes in masks and all that. The majority of the masked are just followers who because of convenience or politeness are following the rules. When the right signal comes, they will tip over to the other side. Some will stick to their religion no matter what. But that is ok. As Mark mentioned above, there are some states in the USA and also some states in Europe already who don’t play along anymore. It’s crumbling and it just takes some more time. It’s like in the war. The generals are long gone and soldiers just execute the last command until told otherwise. On the other side, I’m convinced this was all planned this way all along. The system is so perfect, secured several times and nothing can change that except TPTB itself. It seems to me the current NWO had it’s chance and lost.

    Like

    1. “when the right signal comes they will tip over to the other side”
      Exactly and then they will tip again over to the other side and then when the signal comes again, they will once again tip over to the other side and then when the signal comes….and so on..

      you cannot change the nature of the “common man”

      Again, i will repeat myself:
      there has always been a tiny minority ruling a vast majority and another tiny minority refusing to rule or be ruled.
      That is the way it has ALWAYS been and that is the way it will ALWAYS be.

      uhh Amen

      Liked by 2 people

      1. “– liberty is the natural condition of the people. Servitude, however, is fostered when people are raised in subjection. People are trained to adore rulers. All freedom is forgotten by many but there are always some who will never submit.”

        The Politics of Obedience. The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude,by Étienne de La Boétie, 1530-1563 (Yes, he died at age 33, or so we are told.)

        Like

        1. It seems you cannot agree with Boetie and me at the same time since i do not believe liberty is the natrual condition of the people, unless it can be understood that the common man is by nature a follower and gains his freedom by obeying ; this is not doublespeak in any way; those that do not have the will to guide themselves must follow a stronger will and in that following, they find their freedom; after all we need limits in order to be free, all of us…
          boeties idea is deliberate misdirection it seems to me, giving the commoner false ideas about themselves. But then we should not expect much less from the aristocratic Ashkenazi homosexual lover of Montaigne……

          ….. …hummm who died at age 33, which by the way is just a marker, later given to him by certain people so that other certain people know to read him; it does not necessarily mean he was part of the families but in this case he was. i mean who would notice , if in the last 400 years they changed his death age from 44 to 33 or whatever

          Like

          1. Words of wisdom, Godfly: “the common man is by nature a follower and gains his freedom by obeying ; this is not doublespeak in any way; those that do not have the will to guide themselves must follow a stronger will and in that following, they find their freedom; after all we need limits in order to be free, all of us…”

            Like

  8. “All we can do is maintain steady optimism, and speak up. Do not try to argue facts with Alarmists. Merely inform them that their worries are baseless, their data missing, and fears unfounded. Do so stridently, if we must. Do not waste facts and evidence on them.”

    This is excellent advice, Mark. Thanks. The reason this is the way to go is that the alarmist’s belief is not rooted in facts and evidence anyway, but in a mental disposition akin to the one that made people accept the doctrine propagated by the Church that man is fundamentally bad and must bow down. That mental disposition must be shown to be the mental prison that it really is.

    Like

  9. “They provide this information running back to the seventh century.”

    The existence of the seventh century, along with that of the eigth and ninth centuries, and of course the historiography contained therein, notably including Charlemagne, has been called into question, in a very well substantiated way, by German chronology researcher and freethinker Heribert Illig.

    http://www.zeitensprünge.de/

    Like

      1. Yes. Heribert Illig hasn’t been translated yet, which shouldn’t detract from the quality of his work, but arguably makes it difficult to assess for people who don’t read German. And even if you do, his work is pretty involved as it requires being prepared to follow along arguments in various domains of knowledge, such as astronomy, archaeology and history of arts, architecture and technology.

        There’s a (biased and partial) rendition of his case against the Early Middle Ages on the English Wikipedia:

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_time_hypothesis

        Unsurprisingly, he is considered by the scholars of the field to be a heretic whose name shouldn’t be mentioned any more (damnatio memoriae). When Illig drew attention to the topic of the Early Middle Ages in the 1990ies, there was quite a lot of discussion in Germany about his work, a discussion that reached the mainstream, much to the dismay, it appears, of the scholars who were unable to refute Illig and had to concede, unwillingly, that there is a hell of a lot of falsifying and fakery going on in medieval documents, mostly done by the scholars of the time, the clerics, and so effectively by the institution of the Church, done to claim titles to land and work and livestock and harvest of the common people living on the land. Sounds familiar?

        Like

  10. I know Heribert Illig from his books about the “invented” middle age, where he demonstrates that there are no proof Charlemagne ever existed. He wrote this 1996 or something. It completes perfectly my current view about The Vatican controlling the world and the Jesuits working for the Vatican and controlling the flow of information worldwide since there was written information. All ever printed word come from the Jesuits. All education, school programs, mass media, etc., all this comes from the Jesuits. You don’t believe me, read Edmond Paris, or in German Markus Friedrich.

    Like

    1. Barb, thanks for answering. It is hard for me to believe, however, that every word ever printed came from the Jesuits as Gutenberg and, incidentally, Luther predated them. But you were probably just exaggerating.

      I looked up Markus Friedrich. He appears to be a mainstream university historian, born 1974, who holds that the Jesuits were basically a kind of scientific community, interested in revealing the presence of God to mankind and help the people save their soul, without any political or other suspicious agenda, unfortunately, however, becoming the target of ultimately baseless conspiracy-minded suspicions because of their closeness to the power hierarchy.

      https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/markus-friedrich-die-jesuiten-die-wahrheit-ueber-roms.1270.de.html?dram:article_id=374098

      I also looked up Edmond Paris, a French writer born 1894, who published books against the Vatican after WW2, blaming the Holy See for having sided with the enemy (with us) twice in 1914 and 1939; books which seem based on an association of the enemy (us) with Evil Incarnate, and again by association, same deal for the Vatican. (See link below, if you happen to read French.) In my opinion, that is a very low-quality kind of an argument.

      https://www.chronicart.com/livres/edmond-paris-le-vatican-contre-l-europe/

      But I located a copy of his book on the history of the Jesuites, and maybe that is more interesting.

      Like

      1. M.Friedrich is a mainstream historian but his book still contains lots of useful information if properly read. He also researched lots of rare references. He defends Jesuits against critics but still delivers the proper information even if you don’t share his views. It contains a detailed chronology of events the Jesuits are responsible for. And it’s a good read too. Not boring. E. Paris demonstrates how The Vatican initiated and scripted the World War (I and II) between 1914 and 1945. You’ll then see it wasn’t Churchill or Hitler or Stalin who did it as it is not Fauci or Schwab who do it now. It’s always The Firm and everybody works for The Firm. My conclusion is that this System Vatican is invincible. They have hundreds of years of experience and foresee every reaction and what ever you’ll do it will always be what they expect. The Jesuits traveled the world for centuries before The Vatican entered the stage. They’ve studied humans in all cultures and found a way to save and pass this knowledge on to next generations of Jesuits. It’s a perfect system to control the entire world and all humans. It doesn’t matter whom you elect or against what do you protest.
        It can only be changed from the inside which seems to be happening now. IMO 911 started the change. It was the first time when they exaggerated so grossly it started to awaken people.
        Jesuits had always the complete control of all information. They taught the Chinese , Indians and Japanese about world history while studying their cultures and looking for weak points. The Chinese were very decadent after thousands years of isolation and the Jesuits defeated them with opium they got from India. In India they brought new weapons in making their old war strategies obsolete and carefully installed their own leaders. Japan was much harder to break and it took them till the 19-th century to replace the shoguns with their own people.

        Like

        1. Thank you for this extensive answer.

          “The Chinese were very decadent after thousands years of isolation and the Jesuits defeated them with opium they got from India.”

          And I used to think that was the Brits, see opium wars.

          Like

    1. They use CO2 as teh demon because it is a byproduct of oil, gas and coal. They want to get rid of cheap energy, which makes people wealthier. They also want to avoid Africa and South American from coming to better living standards, so there is racism behind it too.

      CO2 in the atmosphere has some effect on temperature, but not much, and is certainly not harmful.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s