Skip to main content




That title is clickbait, but I will tell you the full story soon.

FIRST, my dear friend Kelly is the only winner of my contest to explain the fraudulent New England Journal study published in March, Effect of Early Treatment with Ivermectin among Patients with Covid-19. They used one of big Pharma’s old tricks—the trial was designed to fail because the doses that were used were too low. See HERE for an explanation.

If he comes around for dinner, Kelly gets a free copy of:

If I have convinced you that the (formerly) respected medical journal NEJM is a pack of lying liars, what can we conclude about other sources?

Pharma sponsors nearly all network news shows and 75 percent of the rest of television advertising. Pfizer sponsored the Oscars. It was an embarrassing show this year. So many stars had dropped dead but were not mentioned. For more about why see Mark Crispin Miller’s interview by RFK Jr. HERE.

Wikipedia is rewritten daily by industry and government propagandists. For example, they say that environmentalist and Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore:

denied the consensus of the scientific community on climate change, for example by claiming that increased carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere is beneficial, that there is no proof that anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions are responsible for global warming, and that even if true, the increased temperature would be beneficial to life on Earth.

In their article on climate change, they say:

The temperature increase over the past 50 years is distinctly more rapid (and) not due to natural causes… (this is) caused by the emission of greenhouse gasses, mostly CO2 and methane. Burning fossil fuels… creates most of these emissions… Agriculture, steelmaking, cement production, and forest loss are additional sources… Increased warming in the Arctic has contributed to… melting permafrost, glacial retreat, and sea ice loss… Making deep cuts in emissions will require switching away from burning fossil fuels…

The WHO calls climate change the greatest threat to global health in the 21st century.

And they claim the following fifty-year trend is catastrophic:

These ideas and many others are entirely debunked by Moore’s presentation that I presented HERE and HERE. View his original talk HERE. Anyone can understand this science.

A few salient points follow:

There is no consensus: 31,000 US scientists and professionals signed a document repudiating the CO2 theory of climate disaster.

See below: CO2 (purple) does not correlate with global temperature. See the tiny recent uptick at the end of the CO2 graph. Fifty-year trends mean next to nothing.

And the recent increase in CO2 mirrors similar increases in the past hundred years, long before the recent surge in CO2 production.

Arctic ice is shrinking… but Antarctic ice is growing and there is no net trend. This is likely caused by the Milankovitch Cycles, which have to do with the tilt of the Earth.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide follows temperature change—it does not lead it. When the sea warms, gasses come out, and when the sea cools, gasses go in. (See graphs in the presentation.)

We need high levels of CO2 in the atmosphere for life on earth. At the lowest atmospheric CO2 levels, the earth was only 30 PPM over the levels where plants start to die.

The sea levels have not risen for 6,000 years.

CO2 is great for the Earth’s plant life, and we have witnessed a greening effect lately.

Water vapor has a FAR BIGGER influence on greenhouse effects than CO2 or methane, which are by comparison inconsequential.

If we would not have “polluted” by burning fossil fuels into the atmosphere over the past 200 years, life might have been nearly extinguished by carbon starvation. We may have unknowingly saved ourselves.

WHY IS UNDERSTANDING THIS ISSUE IMPORTANT? We are being swindled into thinking that energy use is immoral and that we must sacrifice ourselves to prevent it. Eighty-eight percent of world energy is produced by fossil fuels. They are safe, efficient, and good for the planet. There is little prospect of replacing much of it with solar and wind sources.


Leave a Reply