1. Dig into the
Data
Very few people actually dig
into the data, they simply accept the UN IPPC reports.
Yet many
highly respectable and distinguished scientists have done exactly
that and found that the UN-promoted manmade climate change theory is
seriously flawed.
Are you
aware that almost
2,000 of the world's leading climate scientists
and professionals in over 30 countries have signed a declaration
that there is no climate emergency and have refuted the United Nations claims in
relation to man-made climate change?
See
this...
2. Declaration that there is
No Climate Emergency
I have also signed this
declaration.
How can I make such an assertion?
I have experience in
the field as a former scientist at the Department of Energy and
Climate Change, UK Government; and as former staff member at United
Nations Environment, where I was responsible for servicing the
Pollution Release and Transfer Register Protocol, a Multinational
Environmental Agreement, involving the monitoring of pollutants to
land, air, and water worldwide.
Real pollution exists, but the
problem is not CO2...!
Industrial globalization has produced
many substances that are registered as pollutants, including
thousands of new man-made chemical compounds, toxins, nano-particles
and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that are in violation of
the scientific pre-cautionary principle...
A book I published also provides ample evidence
and testimony from renowned scientists that there is no 'CO2-induced'
Climate emergency.
The book titled 'Climate
CO2 Hoax - How Bankers Hijacked the Environment Movement'.
3. The
Irish Climate Science Forum (ICSF)
Next, I will mention the
Irish Climate Science Forum (ICSF)
website, a
valuable resource founded by Jim O'Brien.
I am grateful to the ICSF
for their excellent work in highlighting the scientific flaws in the
UN climate narrative. The ICSF provides a comprehensive lecture
series from renowned international scientists providing much
evidence, analysis, and data that contradicts the UN assertions.
The
lectures are available
here.
The ICSF scientific view coincides with those of
the Climate Intelligence (CLINTEL) foundation that operates in the
fields of climate change and climate policy.
CLINTEL was founded in
2019 by emeritus professor of geophysics Guus Berkhout and science
journalist Marcel Crok.
Based on this common conviction, 20 Irish
scientists and several ICSF members have co-signed the CLINTEL World
Climate Declaration "There is No Climate Emergency" (see
this).
4. The Climate
has always been Changing
The reality is that the
climate has always been changing, the climate changes naturally and
slowly in its own cycle, and CO2 emissions (and methane
from livestock, such as cows) are not dominant factors in climate
change.
In essence, therefore,
the incessant UN, government, and
corporate-media-produced climate hysteria in relation to CO2
emissions (and also methane from cows) has no scientific basis.
It
appears to me the UN narrative is yet another example of fake
science being used to drive an ulterior agenda, see also the book
Godless Fake Science.
In truth I am against 'real' pollution, and the
reality is that the CO2 component is not a pollutant.
Unfortunately,
many misinformed environmentalists are driving around in electric
cars, the battery production for which has caused vast amounts
of 'real' pollution via the industrial mining and processing of rare
earth metals, and the consequent pollution to land, air and water
systems.
See also this
article.
Note that the UN does not focus on the thousands of
real pollutants that corporate industrial globalization creates.
5. The conclusions of the
Climate Intelligence foundation
There is no climate emergency.
Therefore, there
is no cause for panic and alarm.
-
Natural as well as anthropogenic factors
cause warming:
The geological archive reveals that Earth's
climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural
cold and warm phases.
The
Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850.
Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period
of warming.
-
Warming is far slower than predicted:
The world has warmed significantly less than predicted
by IPCC on
the basis of "modeled" anthropogenic forcing.
The gap between the real
world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from
understanding climate change.
-
Climate policy relies on inadequate
models:
Climate models have many shortcomings and are not
remotely plausible as global policy tools.
They blow up the effect
of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore
the fact that enriching the atmosphere with
CO2 is
beneficial.
-
CO2 is plant food, the basis
of all life on Earth:
CO2 is not a pollutant. It
is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing.
More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth:
additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global
plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the
yields of crops worldwide.
-
Global warming has not increased natural
disasters:
There is no statistical evidence that global
warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike
natural disasters, or making them more frequent.
It also appears to me that various catastrophes
attributed to "CO2-induced climate change" are nothing of
the sort.
I note the following articles:
6. Let us examine some of
the work and testimonies of these scientists
In the above
book
I reference the relevant work and scientific presentations of
some of the world's leading climate scientists:
"deeply flawed logic, obscured by shrewd and
unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful
special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that CO2
from human industry was a dangerous plant destroying toxin.
It will
be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the
world - that CO2 the life of plants was considered for a time to be
a deadly poison."
Professor Richard Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of
Atmospheric Sciences at MIT.
Dr Nils-Axel Mörner was a former Committee
Chairman at the UN International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He
was an expert involved in reviewing the first IPPC documents.
He
says the UN IPPC is misleading humanity about climate change. He
tried to warn that the IPPC were publishing lies and false
information that would inevitably be discredited. In an interview,
he stated:
"This is the most dangerous and frightening part of it.
How a lobbyist group, such as the IPPC, has been able to fool the
whole world.
These organized and deceitful forces are dangerous" and
expressed shock "that the UN and governments would parade children
around the place at UN Climate summits as propaganda props".
He
states:
"solar activity is the dominant factor in climate
and not CO2... something is basically sick in the blame CO2
hypothesis...
It was launched more than 100 years ago and almost
immediately excellent physicists demonstrated that the hypothesis
did not work.
I was the chairman of the only international
committee on sea levels changes and as such a person I was elected
to be the expert reviewer on the (UN IPPC) sea levels chapter. It
was written by 38 persons and not a single one was a sea level
specialist...
I was shocked by the low quality it was like a student
paper... I went through it and showed them that it was wrong and wrong
and wrong...
The scientific truth is on the side of the
skeptics... I
have thousands of high ranked scientists all over the world who
agree that NO, CO2 is not the driving mechanism and that everything
is exaggerated.
In the field of physics 80 to 90% of physicists
know that the CO2 hypothesis is wrong... Of course, metrologists they
believe in this because that is their own profession - they live on
it....
I suspect that behind-the-scenes promoters... have an ulterior
motive...
It's a wonderful way of controlling taxation controlling
people".
Dr Nils-Axel Mörner, a former Committee Chairman at the UN
IPPC, and former head of the Paleo Geo-physics and Geo-dynamics
department in Stockholm
Another climate scientist with impeccable
credentials that has broken rank is Dr Mototaka
Nakamura.
He asserts:
"Our models are mickey-mouse mockeries of the
real world".
Dr Nakamura received a Doctorate of
Science from MIT, and for nearly 25 years specialized in abnormal
weather and climate change at prestigious institutions that included,
MIT, Georgia Institute of Technology, NASA, Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, JAMSTEC and Duke
University.
Dr Nakamura explains why the data foundation
underpinning global warming science is "untrustworthy" and cannot be
relied on and that:
"Global mean temperatures
before 1980 are based on untrustworthy data".
Professor John R. Christy, Director of
Atmospheric and Earth Sciences, University of Alabama, has provided
detailed analysis of climate data. 1
I summarize the main points
from his analysis below:
"The established global warming theory,
-
significantly misrepresents the
impact of extra greenhouse gases
-
the weather that affects people the
most is not becoming more extreme or more dangerous
-
temperatures were higher in the 1930s
than today
-
between 1895 and 2015, 14 of the top
15 years with the highest heat records occurred before
1960
-
the temperatures we are experiencing
now in 2021 were the same as 120 years ago...
-
the number of major tornadoes between 1954 and
1986 averaged 56/year, but between 1987 and 2020 the average was
only 34/year
-
between 1895 and 2015 on average there has been no
change in the number of very wet days per month, and no change in
the number of very dry days per month, and the 20 driest months were
before 1988"
Between 1950 and 2019 the percentage of land area
experiencing droughts has not increased globally:
Sea levels rose 12.5 cm per decade
for 8,000 years and then it levelled off, now it rising only 2.5 cm
per decade... worrying about 30 cm rise in sea level in a
decade is ridiculous, in a hurricane the east coast of the
U.S. gets a 20 foot rise in 6 hours, so a 30 cm rise will be
easily handled!"
In a lecture titled The
imaginary climate crisis - how can we change the message? available
on the Irish Climate Science Forum website. 2
Richard L Lindzen,
Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences at MIT summarizes the
battle against the climate hysteria as follows:
"in the long history of the earth there has been
almost no correlation between climate and CO2... the paleoclimate
record shows unambiguously that CO2 is not a control knob... the
narrative is absurd...
It gives governments the power to control the
energy sector... for about 33 years, many of us have been battling
against the climate hysteria...
There were more important leading people
who were objecting to it, they were unfortunately older and
by now most of them dead...
Elites are always searching for ways to
advertise their virtue and assert their authority.
They believe they are entitled to view
science as a source of authority rather than a process, and
they try to appropriate science, suitably and incorrectly
simplified, as the basis for their movement."
"CO2... it's not a pollutant... it's the product of
all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and
photosynthesis... if you ever wanted a leverage point to control
everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream.
So it
has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to
bureaucratic mentality."
Prof. Richard Lindzen, Professor
Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences at MIT
Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, and
President of Greenpeace in Canada for seven years, states:
"the whole climate crisis is not only fake news
its fake science... of course climate change is real it's been
happening since the beginning of time, but it's not dangerous and
it's not caused by people...
Climate change is a perfectly natural
phenomenon and this modern warming period actually began about 300
years ago when the little ice age began to come to an end.
There is
nothing to be afraid of and all they are doing is instilling fear. Most of the scientists who are saying it's a crisis are on perpetual
government grants.
I was one of the (Greenpeace) founders...
by the mid-80s...
We were hijacked by the extreme left who basically
took Greenpeace from a science-based organization to
an organization
based on sensationalism, misinformation and fear...
You don't have a plan to feed 8 billion
people without fossils fuels or get the food into the
cities..."
Patrick Moore
co-founder of Greenpeace
Professor William Happer, Princeton University,
Former Director of Science at the US Department of Energy, is also a
strong voice against the myth of man-made global warming.
He states:
"More CO2 benefits the Earth".
7. The UN IPCC cherry picks data, uses
flawed modelling and scenarios not remotely related to the real
world
The UN climate crisis predictions are not based
on physical evidence, rather they are based on complex computer
modeling.
One has to decode and analyze the modeling process to
ascertain whether or not the models are valid and accurate or
whether they have obvious flaws.
The vast majority of scientists,
economists, politicians and the general public have simply assumed
that the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) models
are accurate.
Very few people have the time or skills to analyse
these models, not to mention actually dispute them.
Nonetheless,
there were many senior and highly distinguished scientists that did
exactly that - they claimed the UN narrative was incorrect and that
there was no climate emergency.
Their voices have been drowned out
by a vast money-driven political and media establishment of the
globalised 'system'.
The
vitally important work of some of these renowned scientists is
referenced in the above
book.
"The computer models are making systematic
dramatic errors... they are all parameterized... fudged... the models
really don't work".
Patrick J. Michaels, Director, Cato Institute
Center for the Study of Science
Dr Roger Pielke Jr, University of Colorado, has
conducted a detailed scientific review and analysis of the UN IPCC
AR6 report. 3
He describes that in relation to climate
modeling,
the IPCC detached the models from socio-economic plausibility.
In
creating the models, instead of first completing integrative
assessment models (IAMs), the IPCC skipped this essential step and
jumped straight to radiative forcing scenarios and thus these
scenarios are not based on competed IAMs.
This led much of climate modeling down the wrong track.
I quote points from Dr Pielke's
analysis as follows:
"The four IPCC scenarios came from a large family
of models so instead of splitting modeling from socio-economic
assumptions the models already had the assumptions faked and baked
in to them, because they had to have those assumptions to produce
the required radiative forcing (to produce a desired climate 'crisis
scenario' outcome).
In another fateful decision the 4 representative
concentration pathways (RCPs) came from 4 different IAMs, which was
a huge mistake.
These models are completely unrelated to each other,
but the impression has been given that they are of a common set,
only differing in their radiative forcing, this was a huge mistake.
Furthermore, no-one has responsibility for determining whether these
scenarios are plausible. The climate community decided which
scenario to prioritise and they chose the two most implausible
scenarios!
There are thousands of climate assumptions, but only 8 to
12 of them are available currently for climate research.
The IPCC
report even states that "no likelihood is attached to the scenarios
in this report". The likelihood is considered low they admit - This
is an incredible admission by the IPCC.
These extreme unlikely scenarios dominate the
literature and the IPCC report; therefore, the IPCC report is
biased. Bottom line is that there is massive confusion.
The IPCCs'
Richard Moss warned that RCP 8.5 was not to be used as a reference
for the other RCPs, but 5,800 scientific papers worldwide misuse it
like that... The whole process is seriously flawed...
Nothing close to
the real world is represented by the IPCC scenarios.
Climate science
has a huge problem!
The IPCC currently uses RCP 8.5 as the 'business
as usual' scenario, but RCP 8.5 is wild fantasy land and not
remotely related to current reality at all... climate science has a
scientific integrity crisis."
Dr Roger Pielke Jr, University of
Colorado
8. Financialization of the entire world
economy is now based on a life-killing 'net-zero' greenhouse gas
emissions strategy
The
UN Agenda 2030 plan and the Paris Agreement goal to reduce CO2
emissions by 7% per annum until 2030 is in effect a plan that would
seemingly disable the current fossil-fuel-based mechanisms of the
industrial economy for the food, energy and goods that enable human
life and survival.
Yet the narrative is quite hypocritical as the
production of green energy infrastructure, and mining of rare earth
metals for batteries for electric vehicles, is, and will most likely
continue to be, very fossil-fuel intensive.
Globalization resulted
in much of humanity becoming largely dependent on the trans-national
industrial economy rather than on traditional more self-sufficient
local/regional economies.
Therefore, one has to ask where is this
all going to lead if the plug is truly pulled on fossil fuels?
Almost all of us are seemingly locked into, and have become
dependent upon, the current economic paradigm of globalization.
A
system rigged by debt-money created from nothing; created and
controlled by private mega-banks and behind the scenes
money-masters; and which can induce
boom, bust, bailout scenarios that detrimentally effect the populace.
It should be noted that for decades, these same
political, government, and corporate powers have rampantly promoted
corporate economic globalization and fossil fuel dependency.
Whilst,
at the same time actively hindering the funding, creation, or
government support of, more self-sufficient local
communities/regions, and local co-operatives. Most of the world
population thus became reliant on the globalized fossil-fuel driven
system.
I explore this topic in the books
Demonic Economics and the Tricks of the Bankers and
Transcending the Climate Change Deception Toward Real Sustainability
Zero carbon emissions, in essence, means pulling
the plug on current systems of industrial agriculture, transport,
goods production, electricity production, etc. This could have
terrible consequences, particularly in locations and countries, that
are currently unable to produce much food.
In Ireland, the
deluded greens in government had planned to close the coal-fired
power station Moneypoint, in the name of reducing CO2 emissions.
However, as the price of electricity increased and the dawn of
so-called 'green energy' began to evaporate like the Irish morning
mist, the government scrapped this plan in 2022, instead deciding to
convert the station to an oil-burning facility.
The Irish Times
newspaper reported:
"With growing concerns over security of the
energy supply in the State, the Government is not in a position to
decommission Moneypoint as a fuel-burning station in the near
future.
It was confirmed by the Irish Government in 2022 that Moneypoint will convert to oil generation from 2023."
4
The so-called 'green economy' (for it is
not environmentally friendly in reality) and
UN Agenda 2030 are resulting in increased energy poverty and
decreased energy independence for the masses, while also developing
trillions of dollars for the behind-the-scenes mega-banks.
"Stop
burning coal and wood logs that causes climate change don't ya know",
...my deluded neighbor informed me last year, having threw out her
wood burning stove and installed solar panels.
Then a typical winter
storm in Ireland last month left many thousands of people without
electricity or heating for almost a week, shivering and wishing for
a wood burning stove, while their solar panels produced little
electricity in winter.
9. Central bankers are entirely funding /
controlling the advancement of the worldwide climate change
'project'
The decision to drastically reduce CO2,
one of the most essential compounds to sustain all life, is no
co-incidence.
It should be noted that it is the world's
central bankers that are behind this decision and are entirely
funding and controlling the advancement of the worldwide project
of 'combating
man-made climate-change'.
This project involves an attempt to de-carbonise
the activities of the entire world population. In December 2015, the
Bank for International Settlements (BIS) created the Task Force on
Climate-related Financial Disclosure (TCFD), which represents $118
trillion
of assets globally.
5
In essence this means that the financialization of the entire world economy is based on meeting
nonsensical aims such as "net-zero greenhouse gas emissions".
The
TCFD includes key
people from the world's mega-banks and asset management companies,
including,
JP Morgan Chase; BlackRock; Barclays Bank; HSBC; China's ICBC bank; Tata Steel, ENI oil, Dow Chemical, and more...
The fact that the world's largest banks and asset
management corporations, including,
BlackRock, Goldman Sachs, the UN,
the World Bank, the Bank of England and other central banks of the
BIS,
...have all linked to push a vague, mathematically nonsensical
'green' economy, is no coincidence.
There is another agenda at play
that has nothing to do with environmentalism.
When the world largest
banks, corporations, and institutions, all align to push a climate
change agenda that has zero evidence, one can see there is another
major agenda going on behind the scenes.
This agenda tries to
convince the common people of the world to make huge sacrifices
under the emotive guise of "saving our planet.".
While all the time
the corporations and banks make vast profits, and political
institutions implement worldwide technocratic control systems under
the banner of combating, and adapting to, so-called man-made
climate change.
"The links between the world's largest financial
groups, central banks and global corporations to the current push
for a radical climate strategy to abandon the fossil fuel economy in
favor of a vague, unexplained Green economy, it seems, is less about
genuine concern to make our planet a clean and healthy environment
to live.
Rather it is an agenda, intimately tied to the UN Agenda
2030 for "sustainable" economy, and to developing literally
trillions of dollars in new wealth for the global banks and
financial giants who constitute the real powers that be... "
F.
William Engdahl, strategic risk consultant and lecturer
Back in 2010, the head of Working Group 3 of the
UN IPCC, Dr Otmar Edenhofer, told an interviewer,
"...one must say clearly that we
redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy.
One has to free oneself from the illusion
that international climate policy is environmental policy.
This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy
anymore."
To better perceive what is 'behind the curtain'
of the
climate hoax and the UN/WEF agenda it also helps to examine what
has happened in the decades beforehand.
It is important to perceive
the implications of the worldwide fractional-reserve debt-money
banking scam and the subtle system of debt-slavery that has existed
for decades.
If you look at the World Bank website you will see that
virtually every nation on Earth is in vast debt. In debt to who you
may ask? The answer is to privately owned mega-banks.
See also the
book Demonic Economics and the Tricks of the Bankers.
For many decades the so-called banking and
corporate elites have had full control of the source of money
creation and its allocation, via the debt-money system, and have
therefore, by default, been able to fund, and increasingly control
and manipulate the entire world spectrum of industry, media,
government, education, ideological supremacy and war to their own
design, agenda and benefit.
Mayer Amschel Rothschild (banker) is
widely reported to have said:
"Give me control of a nation's money
supply and I care not who makes its laws."
10. Central bankers hijacked the real
environmental movement in 1992 creating the fake climate change
agenda
Psychopaths can utilize any ideology and, change
it from within to something that may eventually be entirely
different to its original purpose.
Meanwhile, the original followers
and advocates continue to pursue what they believe is the original
ideology, but gradually become
mere pawns in the agenda of a self-serving elite.
Unfortunately,
over the past decades, this is exactly what has happened in the
environmental movement.
Whistleblower George Hunt served as an official
host at a key environmental meeting in Denver, Colorado in 1987, and
states that,
David Rockefeller; Baron Edmund De Rothschild; US
Secretary of State Baker; Maurice Strong, a UN official and an
employee of the Rockefeller and Rothschild trusts; EPA administrator
William Ruccleshaus; UN Secretary General in Geneva MacNeill, along
with World Bank and IMF officials,
...were at this meeting.
Hunt was
surprised to see all these rich elite bankers at the meeting and
questioned what they were doing there at an environmental congress.
In a
video
recording (How
the Illuminati Gained Control of the Earth's Land) Hunt later provided important evidence
from the documents of the United Nations Conference on Environment
and Development (UNCED), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3-14 June 1992.
This conference was the well-known UN '92 Earth Summit and was run
by UNCED.
According to Hunt, via the Earth summit, the UN was
setting a net, an agenda, to place the power over the Earth and its
peoples into their own hands.
The world private banking cartel are
the same ultra-rich banking families that had been instrumental in
the setting up of the World Bank, the UN, and other international
institutions,
after WW2.
Their political cohorts included Stalin (the leader
of a
brutal communist regime in the USSR that committed genocide of
millions of people), UK Prime minister Churchill, and US President
Roosevelt.
Hunt refers to these banking families and their financial
and international institutional networks as:
"The same world order that tricked third world
countries to borrow funds and rack up enormous debts... and
purposely creating war and debt to bring societies into
their control.
The world order crowd are not a nice
group of people..."
George Hunt,
Whistleblower speaking about the UN Earth summit of 1992
As a consequence of the UN Earth Summit, it
appears the genuine environment movement that actually cared about
real pollution to land, air and water, was politically hi-jacked by
powerful political and financial interests with a different agenda.
Maurice Strong, a UN official and an employee of the Rockefeller and
Rothschild trusts, had convened the first UNCED congress in
Stockholm, Sweden, in 1972.
Then, 20 years later he was the convenor
and secretary general of UNCED.
Hunt also provided video evidence
from the Fourth UNCED World Congress meeting in 1987 of an
international investment banker, stating that:
"I suggest therefore that this be sold
not through a democratic process that would take too long
and require far too much funds to educate the cannon-fodder,
unfortunately, which populates the Earth.
We have to take almost an elitist
program..."
Thus, the decrees leading to the 1992 UN Earth
summit were dictated without debate or opportunity for dissent and
would supersede national laws.
According to Hunt, the decrees were
dictated into existence by the banker Edmund de Rothschild, who got
these major decrees into the '92 UN resolutions without debate or
challenge.
Hunt asserts that he was denied the opportunity to openly
challenge Rothschild's remarks by the meeting Chairman, and that the
Rothschild bank of Geneva is the nucleus of the World Conservation
bank and the wealthy elite are integrated into the bank via the Rothschilds private offering of shares.
11. Despite the deceptive and fake
environmental facade, it has adopted, the vast institutional entity
of the UN has fully endorsed environmentally destructive industrial
globalisation for the past 70 years
The UN climate change, sustainable development
and green economy policies over the past 30 years are little more
than
worldwide marketing tricks that have tragically brainwashed two
generations of young people who do not understand what
the UN actually is, and who is it is really designed to serve.
This current globalised system involves the
promotion of beliefs and fake science that claim to be
unchallengeable truths, but are, in fact, ideologies in which
evidence is manipulated, twisted, and distorted to prove the
'governing idea', and thus promote its worldwide dissemination.
They
start with the conclusion they want and then wrench and manipulate
what scant evidence they can to fit that conclusion.
"Man-made
climate change" due to anthropogenic carbon emission (sic) is a major
example of this.
Institutions, including,
...are
privately-motivated unelected unaccountable organizations controlled
by the source of debt-money creation, i.e.,
the world
private-banking cartel, and are just clever marketing tools and
political mechanisms for implementing and maintaining a corrupt
worldwide system, under the clever guise of 'fixing the problems of the world'.
These powerful special interests have been
promoting certain 'ideologies' for decades to advance their
corporate and political aims.
The word "sustainable" was hijacked
decades ago, and it is now deceptively used to advance the agendas
of globalist mega-corporate interests who couldn't care less about
the environment.
The aim is to catapult humanity into the arms of
UN Agenda 2030 and the WEF
'reset' plan, which are clever
marketing plans entirely designed by the so-called elite
mega-corporate interests of the WEF
Davos group.
12. The Current
Green Energy/renewableTechnologies
Furthermore, the current
green energy/renewable technologies being promoted by the UN and WEF,
are not a viable solution for the world's energy supply.
Although
these technologies have some limited viability in certain locations
and scenarios, the fact remains that the Energy Returned on Energy
Invested is much too low - in essence the entire process is
mathematically flawed.
This is evidenced by the work of scientists,
including Professor David MacKay (1967 - 2016), former Regius
Professor of Engineering at Cambridge University, and former Chief
Scientific Advisor at the UK Department of Energy and Climate
Change.
