Coming Out of the Dark

Dark matter mysteries unraveled by researchers in underground South Dakota mine

In this 2019 image, components used to assemble the dark matter-search experiment LZ—including digital electronics developed at Rochester—are transported down a shaft and installed in the nearly mile-deep research cavern at the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF) in South Dakota. The dark-matter detector is now complete and initial data shows that it is the most powerful dark-matter detector to date. If LZ is able to detect elusive dark matter—as researchers expect it may eventually do—it will profoundly expand our understanding of the universe. (Sanford Underground Research Facility photo)

Rochester physicists are part of a team that has deployed the world’s most sensitive dark matter detector, which may profoundly expand our understanding of the universe.

Scientists around the world have attempted for decades to solve the mystery of dark matter, which accounts for about 85 percent of all matter in the universe. Proof of dark matter particles would fundamentally change our understanding of the makeup of the universe. However, researchers have so far only inferred dark matter indirectly by observing gravitational effects that cannot be explained by standard theories of gravity.

This may be about to change.

Students and researchers from the University of Rochester are involved in an international collaboration of about 250 scientists from 35 institutions, led by Lawrence Berkeley National Lab (Berkeley Lab), assembling an innovative underground dark matter-search experiment called LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ). Nestled deep below the Black Hills of South Dakota at the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF), the dark matter detector recently passed a check-out phase of startup operations and delivered its first data points. And this is only the beginning.

“We did not see any dark matter, but the first results of LZ show that it is currently the most sensitive dark matter detector in the world,” says Frank Wolfs, a professor of physics and astronomy at Rochester, who is overseeing Rochester’s efforts in the project. “LZ will collect data for about 1,000 days, significantly improving the sensitivity for dark matter detection that was achieved during the first data collection period.”

Large electronics arrays used to detect dark matter being prepared for installation.
Lower and upper photomultiplier tube arrays—shown here being prepared for installation for the LZ experiment—are connected to digitizing electronics developed at Rochester through more than 28 miles of coaxial cable. (SURF photo / Matt Kapust)

 

The quest for dark matter

Although dark matter particles have never actually been detected, researchers believe it will only be a matter of time; the countdown may have already started with results from LZ’s first 60 “live days” of testing. These data points were collected over a span of initial operations beginning at the end of December 2021, a period long enough to confirm that all aspects of the detector were functioning well.

Dark matter remains unseen because it does not emit, absorb, or scatter light, but its presence and gravitational pull are nonetheless fundamental to an understanding of the universe. For example, the presence of dark matter shapes the form and movement of galaxies, and it is invoked by researchers to explain what is known about the large-scale structure and expansion of the universe.

The Rochester team is responsible for designing and developing electronic components for LZ, an integral piece of the puzzle in detecting dark matter; the electronics enable the readout of signals from particle interactions.

“All of our electronics have been designed specifically for LZ with the goal of maximizing our sensitivity for the smallest possible signals,” Wolfs says.

Members of the Rochester group include Eryk Druszkiewicz ’17 (PhD), research engineer; Dev Ashish Khaitan ’19 (PhD), a postdoctoral research associate; graduate students Marcus Converse, Elise McCarthy, and Yufan Qie; and undergraduate student Andy Freeman ’25. The hardware used for the digital electronics was designed in collaboration with a local electronics company, Skutek Instrumentation.

An underground detector

SURF, the site of a former gold mine, is now dedicated to a broad spectrum of scientific research. All of the components for LZ were transported down a shaft and installed in a nearly mile-deep research cavern. The rock above provides a natural shield against much of the constant bombardment of particles raining down on the planet’s surface, which produce unwanted “noise” that could drown out dark matter signals.

LZ is particularly focused on finding a type of theoretical particle called weakly interacting massive particles, or WIMPs, by triggering sequences of light and electrical signals in two nested tanks. The tanks are filled with 10 metric tons of highly purified liquid xenon, which is among Earth’s rarest elements. The properties of xenon atoms allow them to produce light in certain particle interactions.

 

Dark matter experts with hard hats in a group photo.
In 2019, a team of Rochester researchers, faculty, and alumni completed the installation of the LZ dark matter experiment’s electronics and posed for a photo 4,800 feet below the surface, in Lead, South Dakota. These team members included, from left, Erik Druszkiewicz ’17 (PhD), now a research engineer; Dev Ashish Khaitan ’19 (PhD), now a postdoctoral research associate; Yufan Qie ’20, now a physics PhD student; Jean Wolfs ’18, now a physics PhD student; Frank Wolfs, professor of physics and astronomy; and Marcus Converse, physics PhD student. (University of Maryland photo / Douglas Tiedt )

The liquid xenon projection chambers contain about 500 photomultiplier tubes (PMTs). Particle collisions in the xenon produce visible flashes of light, which are recorded by the PMTs. More than 28 miles of coaxial cable connects the PMTs and their amplifying electronics to the digital electronics developed at Rochester. The electronics digitize the waveforms from the PMTs and carry out a preliminary waveform analysis in order to select events of interest.

“The signals from every WIMP that LZ detects will first be processed by electronics made in Rochester,” Wolfs says.

The University of Rochester’s contribution to LZ is the latest example of Rochester researchers developing technologies for groundbreaking projects that seek to understand the mysterious particles in our universe. Physicists Segev BenZvi and Regina Demina are involved in the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) project, a multi-institutional effort to create the most detailed 3D map ever made of the universe. Demina and Rochester researchers Arie BodekAran Garcia-Bellido, and Sergei Korjenevski were part of an experimental team whose results made possible the discovery of the Higgs boson. Wolfs was also involved in developing signal processing electronics for LUX, the predecessor to LZ.

LZ is supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of High Energy Physics, and the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, a DOE Office of Science user facility. LZ is also supported by the Science & Technology Facilities Council of the United Kingdom; the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology; and the Institute for Basic Science, Korea.

Editor’s note: An earlier version of this piece was published on July 22, 2019. It has been updated to reflect new developments in the LZ experiment.  

from:    https://www.rochester.edu/newscenter/dark-matter-particles-experiment-south-dakota-390272/

What Are You Breathing In???

The Military Routinely Disperses Aluminum-Coated Fiberglass Into the Air

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola 
military disperses fiberglass in air

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Militaries around the world routinely disperse tiny bits of aluminum-coated fiberglass and plastic — known as “chaff” — into the air column, to shield aircraft and ships from enemy radar
  • Chaff has been used for decades, without clear evidence that it’s safe for humans and the environment
  • In response to a United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report issued in August 2021, the U.N. announced it’s considering spraying sulfate aerosols into the Earth’s stratosphere to modify climate. The tiny reflective particles would act as reflectors, bouncing sunlight back into space instead of onto the Earth’s surface
  • The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is using “climate science” as a vehicle to promote socialist ideology
  • According to Dane Wigington, founder of Geoengineeringwatch.org, the risks of geoengineering are so immense, it poses an extinction-level threat to humanity, and the window of opportunity to save ourselves is rapidly closing

In addition to the weather modification1 going on around the world, militaries around the world are also routinely dispersing tiny bits of aluminum-coated fiberglass and plastic — known as “chaff” — into the air column, to shield aircraft and ships from enemy radar.2 Not surprisingly, this has been done for decades, without clear evidence that it’s safe for humans and the environment.

According to a 1998 General Accounting Office report3 and a 1999 follow-up report4 by the Naval Research Laboratory, the environmental, human and agricultural impacts of chaff used in military training scenarios at the time were “negligible and far less than those from other man-made emissions,” but does that really mean it’s safe? As explained in a 2001 Navy Medicine paper:5

“Radiofrequency (RF) chaff is an electronic countermeasure designed to reflect radar waves and obscure planes, ships, and other assets from radar tracking sources.

Chaff consists of aluminum-coated glass fibers (also referred to as dipoles) ranging in lengths from 0.8 to 0.75 cm. Chaff is released or dispensed from military vehicles in cartridges or projectiles that contain millions of dipoles.

When deployed, a diffuse cloud of dipoles is formed that is undetectable to the human eye. Chaff is a very light material that can remain suspended in air anywhere from 10 minutes to 10 hours and can travel considerable distances from its release point, depending on prevailing atmospheric conditions.

Training for military personnel, particularly aircraft pilots, in the use of chaff is necessary to deploy this electronic countermeasure effectively. As with most acquired skills, the deployment of chaff must be maintained by practicing in-flight release during training.

It is estimated that the U.S. Armed Forces dispense about 500 tons of chaff per year, with most chaff being released during training exercises within the continental United States.”

Is Chaff Safe?

According to the Naval Medicine investigation, inhalation of whole, intact chaff fibers pose “no risk” to humans due to their larger size. “If inhaled, dipoles are predicted to deposit in the nose, mouth, or trachea and are either swallowed or expelled,” the paper states.6

Note the use of the word “predicted,” however. Predictions are not evidence. They’re basically guessing. Open questions also remain about what happens when the fibers degrade.

“Several investigations have demonstrated that Al-coated dipoles are resistant to weathering and breakdown under desert conditions,” the paper states.7

“A 1977 US Navy-sponsored a study found no evidence to indicate that chaff degrades significantly or quickly in water from the Chesapeake Bay nor did this material leach significant amounts of aluminum into the Bay.

A recent study by our group found no evidence that 25 years of chaff operations at the Naval Research Laboratory detachment at Chesapeake Beach, MD resulted in a significant increase in sediment or soil aluminum concentrations (Wilson et al 2000).

However, additional studies are needed to determine the half-life of chaff dipoles in various soils and environmental conditions and whether dipoles breakdown to respirable particles …

Although there is no definitive evidence from the epidemiological literature that chaff exposure is not harmful, there is epidemiological information available on workers involved in the glass fiber manufacturing industry. Data from these studies suggests that exposure to fibrous glass is not associated with increased risk of death from respiratory disease.”

The problem with that is that fiberglass workers are equipped with protective gear, including respirators, Tyvek suits and safety goggles8 — gear that normal people don’t wear when they’re out and about. All this tells us is that chaff is unlikely to cause harm to public health, provided people are wearing respirators, which they don’t.

Remarkably, not much beyond these three reports exist. While all admitted the need for continued research, none appears to have been published, so there’s really no telling what the real-world impact might be. That said, common sense tells us that air dispersed aluminum and fiberglass is highly likely to have some sort of impact on the environment and human health.

Geoengineering Has Been Going on for Decades

Aluminum and fiberglass are not the only toxins being sprayed across our skies. As detailed by Dane Wigington, founder of Geoengineeringwatch.org, weather modification, also known as geoengineering, in which various toxic metals and chemicals are dispersed at high altitude, has been going on for more than 70 years, and is increasing rather than declining.

In response to a United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report issued in August 2021,9,10 which called for radical measures to prevent further global warming, the Biden Administration launched a research effort in 2022 to determine the most effective way to dim the sun.11

One proposal involves injecting sulfur dioxide aerosols into the Earth’s stratosphere. The tiny reflective particles would bounce sunlight back into space instead of onto the Earth’s surface.12 According to Harvard researchers,13 this strategy is not only “technically possible” but also “remarkably inexpensive,” having a price tag that is “well within the reach of several nations.”

Earth’s climate is largely controlled by how much solar radiation reaches the Earth and how much is absorbed by its surface or reradiated to space. Cloud coverage and greenhouse gasses are examples of factors that influence the reflectance of solar radiation.14

“If geoengineering proposals are to influence global climate in any meaningful way, they must intentionally alter the relative influence of one of these controlling mechanisms,” Britannica explains.15

The U.N. report mentions solar radiation management and greenhouse gas removal as forms of geoengineering.16 Sulfate aerosols fall into the solar radiation management category. By reflecting more solar radiation back into space, the aerosols lower global temperatures but also have a serious “side effect” — they lower average precipitation.

As a result, additional geoengineering techniques — such as thinning out cirrus clouds in the upper atmosphere — would be necessary to counteract the decrease in precipitation. What could possibly go wrong?

Supercomputers have run models to predict how solar radiation management may affect different parts of the Earth, not only in terms of temperature but also rainfall and snowfall. Report author Govindasamy Bala, from the Indian Institute of Science, said “the science is there,”17 but it’s far from an exact one.

“I think the next big question,” Bala told Reuters, “is, do you want to do it? … That involves uncertainty, moral issues, ethical issues and governance.” As Reuters reported, “That’s because every region would be affected differently. While some regions could gain in an artificially cooler world, others could suffer by, for example, no longer having conditions to grow crops.”18

‘Catastrophic Risks’

Three months after the IPCC published its panic-inciting report, Australian and British researchers published an original research article warning that stratospheric aerosol injection carries “catastrophic risks” that may well lead us into “a fate worse than [global] warming”:19

“Injecting particles into atmosphere to reflect sunlight, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), represents a potential technological solution to the threat of climate change. But could the cure be worse than the disease? …

SAI plausibly interacts with other catastrophic calamities, most notably by potentially exacerbating the impacts of nuclear war or an extreme space weather event. SAI could contribute to systemic risk by introducing stressors into critical systems such as agriculture.

SAI’s systemic stressors, and risks of systemic cascades and synchronous failures, are highly understudied. SAI deployment more tightly couples different ecological, economic, and political systems. This creates a precarious condition of latent risk, the largest cause for concern …

A well-coordinated use of a small amount of SAI would incur negligible risks, but this is an optimistic scenario. Conversely, larger use of SAI used in an uncoordinated manner poses many potential dangers. We cannot equivocally determine whether SAI will be worse than warming. For now, a heavy reliance on SAI seems an imprudent policy response.”

In June 2023, the European Commission put out a call for “international talks on the dangers and governance of geoengineering,” warning that geoengineering schemes aimed at altering the global climate pose “unacceptable” risks. During a news conference, EU climate policy chief Frans Timmermans stated:

“Nobody should be conducting experiments alone with our shared planet. This should be discussed in the right forum, at the highest international level.”

Time will tell whether such talks ever take place. In September 2023, the Climate Overshoot Commission, chaired by Pascal Lamy, a former World Trade Organization chief, called for a worldwide moratorium on solar radiation modification experiments “that would carry risk of significant transboundary harm,” and to focus instead on strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.20,21 But, as of yet, no such moratorium has been agreed upon.

Socialist Ideology, Not Climate Science

Zuzana Janosova Den Boer experienced Communist rule in Czechoslovakia before moving to Canada. In her article, “I Survived Communism — Are You Ready for Your Turn?” she detailed the “all-too familiar signs of the same propaganda” starting to permeate her adopted country.22

In relation to geoengineering, she points out that communism has been subverting the environmentalist movement since the 1970s, when then-chairman of the Communist Party USA, Gus Hall, published a book called “Ecology,” in which he stated:23

“Human society cannot basically stop the destruction of the environment under capitalism. Socialism is the only structure that makes it possible … We must be the organizers, the leaders of these movements.”

Den Boer writes:24

“This idea was incorporated into the U.S. Green Party program in 1989 … in which the fictitious threats of ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ are used to scare the public into believing humanity must ‘save the planet’:

‘This urgency, along with other Green issues and themes it interrelates, makes confronting the greenhouse [effect] a powerful organizing tool … Survival is highly motivating, and may help us to build a mass movement that will lead to large-scale political and societal change in a very short time …

First of all, we [must] inform the public that the crisis is more immediate and severe than [they] are being told, [that] its implications are too great to wait for the universal scientific confirmation that only eco-catastrophe would establish.’”

The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Den Boer suggests, is promoting not climate science but socialist ideology, citing as evidence comments made by Ottmar Georg Edenhofer, former co-chair of the IPCC Working Group III, who in a 2010 interview stated that climate issues are about economics, and that:25

“We must free ourselves from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy … We must state clearly that we use climate policy de facto to redistribute the world’s wealth.”

Geoengineering Poses Extinction-Level Threat to Humanity

Even without factoring in social control, the practical risks of geoengineering are impossible to ignore. According to scientific studies, the particulates dispersed during these geoengineering events “shred” the ozone layer. They also disrupt the hydrological (rain) cycle, which leads to another host of downstream effects, and this is in addition to spreading toxins across the entire planet surface.

So, while some of the planet might benefit from these programs, other parts could be decimated by droughts, raging forest fires, flooding or storms. Moreover, while global cooling is the stated aim of most of these geoengineering programs, as the planet warms, the laws of physics state you need more precipitation to cool it, not less, because the atmosphere carries more moisture as the temperature rises.

To cool the planet, you need to create more rain, but these programs have resulted in less rain, and the reason for the reduction in rain fall is due to the particulates in the atmosphere. In addition to deflecting heat from the outside, these particles also trap heat down below, making the overall heating of the planet massively worse.

The risks are so immense, Wigington warns geoengineering already poses an extinction-level threat to humanity. The window of opportunity to save ourselves is rapidly closing.

Unfortunately, if people really understood the totality of the situation — not just that the climate is being manipulated, but that as a result, the global climate systems have deteriorated to the point that the entire Earth is in serious trouble; in short, that these programs may have created a runaway extinction event — the emotional impact might be too great to bear for many. Wigington addressed this in an interview I did with him back in 2016:

“Our situation is far more severe than most people have any understanding of,” he said. “Climate engineering is making the situation worse, not better.

So [they must] try to keep the population from panicking because of the severity and immediacy of the climate implosion, and keep the population in the dark because the climate intervention programs have helped to accelerate this process and toxified every single one of us in the process.

Every single human subject we test is packed full of aluminum, barium — all the heavy metals we know are associated with these programs. It doesn’t matter where they live.

And we know it’s coming down in the precipitation in unimaginable quantities — quantities enough to change soil pH values in the Pacific Northwest 10 to 12 times total alkaline — that’s an unimaginable amount of metal coming down in the rain.

If populations understood, truly, what’s been done to them, what’s been done to the planet … they’d be taking to the streets with pitchforks and torches all over the globe.”

California Aquatic and Terrestrial Insect Life Has Been Decimated

Geoengineeringwatch.org lists a number of lab tests that have been performed on rain water, air sample and more, and their results. You can find them under the Tests section.

“In regard to the effect in the environment, in Northern California alone … what we’ve seen in the last decade … is a 90% decline in aquatic and terrestrial insect life — a virtual crash,” Wigington told me in 2016.

“There’s so much aluminum coming down the precipitation, affecting the soil pH, and — this is very important — the UV radiation level is off the charts, and that we can link directly to climate engineering … We’re seeing UVB levels about 1,000% higher than we’re being told. It’s burning the bark off of trees. It’s killing plankton. It’s affecting insect life …

[It increases UVB radiation] because it shreds the natural protection for the planet. When you put a particle in the atmosphere, it doesn’t matter whether it’s from a back of a jet or a volcano; it causes a chemical reaction in the atmosphere that destroys ozone. Period. So the more of these particles you put in the atmosphere, the more rapid the ozone destruction is.”

With all of that in mind, it’s highly unlikely that military chaff dispersements have no negative impact. An argument could be made that chaff is too important of a defense system to get rid of, and that may be true. But the climate-specific engineering is another matter altogether.

In years past, it was kept hush-hush, and dismissed as a conspiracy theory. Since then, however, governments around the world, and international bodies like the U.N. have become quite open about the use of geoengineering for climate control, and if the global public does not push back against these efforts, we might not survive to regret it.

Geoengineeringwatch.org has a list of action items you can review if you want to get involved and get the word out. I also recommend watching Wigington’s documentary “The Dimming,” below, to learn more.

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2024/02/08/military-disperses-fiberglass-in-air.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20240208&foDate=true&mid=DM1528693&rid=2040057911

Who Owns the American Farmland?

As Chinese Purchases Of US Farmland Soar, It’s Impossible To Track How Much It Owns

Bloomberg noted that America “is seeing more and more of its most fertile land snapped up by China and other foreign buyers.” It is difficult to know just how much farmland China has bought due to problems with how the US tracks such data. According to Department of Agriculture data, foreign ownership and investment in US farmland, pastures and forests jumped to about 40 million acres in 2021, up 40% from 2016. The USDA’s data is flawed and depends on foreigners self-reporting their activity. Food supply lines may be at risk due to foreigners owning US land.

.The topic of China’s ownership of US farmlands is starting to boil over.

Six months after we reported that a “Bipartisan Bill Aims To Block Chinese Purchase Of US Farmland”, more are starting to pay attention yet as even Bloomberg notes that America “is seeing more and more of its most fertile land snapped up by China and other foreign buyers” the big problem remains: it’s difficult to know just how much farmland China has bought due to problem with how the US tracks such data.

Here’s what we do know: according to Department of Agriculture data foreign ownership and investment in US farmland, pastures and forests jumped to about 40 million acres in 2021, up 40% from 2016; but an analysis conducted by the US Government Accountability Office — a non-partisan watchdog that reports to Congress — found mistakes in the data, including the largest land holding linked with China being counted twice. Other challenges include the USDA’s reliance on foreigners self-reporting their activity.

As a result, foreign ownership of US cropland is drawing attention from Washington as concern rises about possible threats to food supply chains and other national security risks. And, as we reported last summer, lawmakers have called for a crackdown on sales of farmland to China and other nations.

 

  • Foreign investors own 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land, which is 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all U.S. land.
(Source: USDA)

“Without improving its internal processes, USDA cannot report reliable information to Congress or the public about where and how much US agricultural land is held by foreign persons,” the report said.

Read full article here…

from:    https://needtoknow.news/2024/01/as-chinese-purchases-of-us-farmland-soar-its-impossible-to-track-how-much-it-owns/

Stand Up for Berkey!

How the EPA Is Attempting to Kill the Berkey Water Filter

By Derrick Broze

The U.S. EPA is attempting to label the popular Berkey Water Filters a pesticide in order to regulate the product under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.

Over the last year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been pursuing a case against the owner of the Berkey Water Systems which produces the popular Berkey filters. The EPA is attempting to classify the Berkey filters as pesticides because they incorporate silver in their design, a feature which the EPA claims qualifies the filters as a pesticide under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The move has already lead to one authorized dealer of the Berkey Water Systems being forced to shut down.

On August 9, New Millennium Concepts, Ltd. (NMCL) and the James B. Shepherd Trust, the owners of the Berkey Water Systems, filed a lawsuit against EPA, suing for violations of the Administrative Procedures Act and due process for their attempts to regulate the water filters. The NMCL said the EPA is labeling the filters a pesticide because of the use of silver to prevent biological growth inside the filters, a feature shared by many water filtration systems. NMCL says the silver does not leach into the water itself and thus the filters should not be regulated as a pesticide. Silver is currently a registered pesticide with the EPA.

NMCL notes that the EPA has not utilized this new re-interpretation to stop the sale of any other outdoor water filter. They go on to state that the “real issue” is that the EPA does not like that Berkey filters have been advertised as capable of removing the COVID-19 virus from your water.

In November, the case was dismissed after the judge claimed that the company doesn’t have standing in their claims. This means that Berkey Water Systems will likely face regulation as a pesticide unless appeals are successful.

“We are now in appeal because, amazingly, the district court ruled that New Millennium had not been harmed by the EPA issuing Stop-Sale orders to its dealers, its manufacturing facility and other vendors, and therefore had no standing in that court,” they wrote in a blog response.

In October, U.S. Congressman Matt Gaetz (FL-01) sent a letter to EPA Administrator Michael Regan regarding the agency’s new ruling classifying the Berkey Water Systems as pesticides. Gaetz’s letter highlights the EPA’s unprecedented attempt to put Berkey out of business. Gaetz requested the EPA provide specific documents to his office showing the process the EPA used to determine its actions.

“At a time when Americans are increasingly unhealthy and their water filled with contaminants, such as endocrine disrupters, heavy metals, and ‘forever’ chemicals, such as PFAS, the EPA should be pursuing policies within its regulatory authority that incentivize increased use of water-filtration systems, not less,” the letter states.

“The EPA must end its attack on Berkey Water Systems immediately and focus on the job it was created to do – keep Americans safe – a job Berkey Water Systems has arguably done more effectively.”

Berkey Dealer Forced to Shut Down

In mid-December, BerkeyFilters.com, an official distributor of the Berkey water filter, announced that they would be going out of business as a result of the lawsuit against the EPA. BerkeyFilters.com is owned by James Enterprise Inc. (JEI). The company said they were the first Berkey dealer to receive a Stop-Sale Order from the EPA.

In a now deleted blog post on BerkeyFilters.com, the company explained their side of the story. They say the whole fiasco began in November 2022 with an “unannounced, unscheduled inspection of JEI facilities.” The blog notes that an EPA inspector also told JEI that the EPA is “cracking down” on virus claims because of COVID-19, and that “the EPA had stepped up its enforcement efforts, particularly in regard to anti-microbial devices.”

In January 2023, JEI says they removed all references and statements relating to the filters removing waterborne pathogens, or pests. The company spent “hundreds of hours” deleting content on websites, social media accounts, and packaging. However, the Stop-Sale Order has not been lifted and, according to JEI, their business has been negatively impacted. They say have been forced to fire employees, cease certain services, and pause third-party parternships.

In the end, JEI was forced to close their doors as an official dealer of the Berkey Water Systems.

The official Berkey Water Systems posted a blog making it clear that although BerkeyFilters.com is no longer an official dealer of the Berkey Filter, the company is still producing the filters and not closing down.

They acknowledge that BerkeyFilters.com was the first dealer to receive the Stop-Sale Order and that both parties attempted to work with the EPA. Berkey Filters said they worked with the EPA for eight months but could not reach a resolution.

“It became apparent that the EPA would accept nothing less than the bankruptcy of New Millennium, its dealers, and more importantly preventing you the public from being self sufficient in terms of cleaning difficult to remove contaminants from your drinking water,” Berkey Water wrote.

“Unfortunately, over the course of the past year the folks at BerkeyFilters.com have fallen victim to this overreach by the EPA. We wish them the best.”

NMCL says they are committed to “fighting the EPA’s overreach” and its attempts to “control and prevent the public from purifying their drinking water.”

While Americans are exposed to water filled with fluoridePFASendocrine disrupting chemicals, and other toxins, the federal government is doing their best to destroy, or at the least weaken, a company which has been providing clean water to millions of people in America. If the EPA had done their job and kept the water supply clean, Americans would not need to seek out filters like the Berkey Water System.

Source: The Last American Vagabond

Visit TheLastAmericanVagabond.com. Subscribe to TLAV’s independent news broadcast on iTunes. Follow on Facebook and Minds. Support with Bitcoin.

Derrick Broze, a staff writer for The Last American Vagabond, is a journalist, author, public speaker, and activist. He is the co-host of Free Thinker Radio on 90.1 Houston, as well as the founder of The Conscious Resistance Network & The Houston Free Thinkers.

https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/category/derrick-broze/

from:    https://www.activistpost.com/2023/12/how-the-epa-is-attempting-to-kill-the-berkey-water-filter.html

Is It the Cow Farts After All?

Vivek Ramaswamy Exposes Globalist Carbon Capture Plot to Shut Down America

Presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy criticized Republicans for supporting the global warming hoax and the carbon capture scheme that is being used to conduct eminent domain to seize land to build underground pipelines. He said that the US is subservient to the religion of climate and that “crony Republicans” are complicit in offering carbon capture subsidies in order to pass eminent domain laws that allow the seizure of farm land. People are affected every day by the climate cult.

 

Alex Jones reported that the Biden administration is spending $451 billion per year to pay for illegal alien and asylum seeker benefits to attract more people and then the benefits are cut off after a few months. Ramaswamy revealed that there is a federal law 287(g) that allows local law enforcement officers to serve warrants for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers to help them remove illegal aliens in this country.

Check out the Video:

Link for video:          https://www.bitchute.com/video/Ty8JWo3cC2Iw/

from:    https://needtoknow.news/2023/12/vivek-ramaswamy-exposes-globalist-carbon-capture-plot-to-shut-down-america/

Using The Excuse of HEALTH to Enslave Humanity

Launch of a New Doorway to Freedom

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

Here is the lnk for the Video with Dr. Meryl Nass:

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The World Health Organization is laying the foundation to take control over all aspects of everyone’s lives, across the world, under the auspice of “biosecurity”
  • A new organization called Door to Freedom is being set up as a one-stop shop where everyone can learn what the plan is and what we can do to stop it. Door to Freedom also hopes to align freedom organizations around the world to act in concert to get the word out more widely
  • The global cabal that is trying to seize control over the world have access to loads of capital, but they’re also using our tax dollars. The U.S. government has spent some $5 trillion on the pandemic response. Much of that money went to bribe media, hospitals, influencers, churches, medical groups and other social organizations to push the official narrative
  • Current laws give immunity to a lot of bad actors, including the Federal Reserve, the Bank of International Settlements, everybody who works for the WHO and the UN, federal government employees as well as many private organizations. Vaccines and their manufacturers are also indemnified
  • We need to pass new laws that eliminate all of these indemnifications, so that we can retroactively take them to court for the crimes they’ve committed

In this video, I interview repeat guest Dr. Meryl Nass, who has a monthly podcast with journalist James Corbett on Children’s Health Defense (CHD) TV. Their show is focused on the implementation of the World Health Organization’s efforts to install global tyranny with respect to health and global governance.

The implications for public health are enormous and extremely troubling. The WHO is basically laying the foundation to take control over all aspects of everyone’s lives, across the world, under the auspice of “biosecurity.”

In this interview, Nass explains how the WHO is being set up as a central governing body for the world, and what we can do to stop it. She also details the price she’s paid for taking a stand against the false COVID narrative and offering early treatment.

Sacrificial Lamb

Nass was one of the doctors who, during the COVID pandemic, offered patients early treatment in Maine and Maryland. As a result, her medical license was suspended and the medical board forced her to undergo psychiatric evaluation. Apparently, in the present era, doctors who think saving lives is more important than following unscientific medical advice created by bureaucrats is considered insanity. She comments:

“This whole pandemic, and the takeover of the world by ‘elites, (global cabal)’ has been orchestrated primarily through fear, and one thing that’s necessary is to make doctors cooperate. To do that, the best way is to scare them, and the best way to scare them is to threaten their medical licenses …

In July and August of 2021, there were national news reports of several doctors who were prescribing ivermectin and [who] were being investigated, but none of them actually lost their licenses.

Apparently, this was not enough to stop doctors from prescribing ivermectin, and in states where it was allowed, hydroxychloroquine. These are both licensed drugs and the federal government had no legal authority to take them off the menu.

Licensed doctors could prescribe licensed drugs, as could nurse practitioners, PAs [physician’s assistants], et cetera. Neither one had a black box warning, neither one was a controlled substance. They were both safe, and they both had been used for a number of decades.

So, instead, it had to be done through the states — because states regulate medical practice in the U.S., and pharmacy practice — so, about 30 states issued either guidelines or rules to pharmacists and doctors telling them whether they could prescribe these drugs and under what circumstances.

That had happened in early 2020. In my case, the board got an anonymous complaint against me saying I was spreading misinformation — another charge that the government really needed to control people on. They couldn’t have the truth coming out about COVID, the drugs, the vaccines, and about this whole takeover.

So, they created this baloney concept of ‘misinformation,’ ‘disinformation’ and ‘malinformation’ and pretended that it was the law, that people who spread misinformation could be charged, and had to stop. A whole huge system was created within the federal government to surveil our online presence and go after people [who went against the narrative].

So, I was accused, initially, not of using these drugs, because I used them legally, but of spreading misinformation. And I think that the feds were looking for an excuse to really scare doctors … I was fairly well known.

So they went after me and said, ‘Not only are we investigating you, but we find, even before an investigation goes forward, even before any hearing, before the medical board even gets to see you and you get to say one word to them, we’ve decided that you are such a danger to the people of Maine, we must immediately suspend your license.’ They did that on January 12, 2022.”

Kangaroo Court

Nass has not been able to practice medicine since. Before the first hearing, the state medical board tried to get her to plea bargain and surrender her license voluntarily. She refused. By then, she was already working with CHD, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who founded CHD, offered to pay for her legal defense.

Of course, before the first hearing, they realized they couldn’t possibly take Nass to court for misinformation. After all, the First Amendment allows her to say whatever she wants. So, they dropped the misinformation charges and charged her with using medications off-label instead — only, that’s perfectly legal as well.

So, they dropped that charge, and instead argued she’d been speaking ill of the COVID vaccines. But that wasn’t a winning strategy either, because, of course, they didn’t want to defend the shots in court.

“So, basically, they went through my records and they tried to find little piddly things, like my records weren’t neat enough. I had been doing telemedicine and I hadn’t written down the vital signs for a patient, things like that,” Nass says.

“So in the hearings that have gone on so far, we’ve managed to shoot down all of those charges. There’s nothing substantive, there’s nothing left for them. In fact, the attorney general didn’t even question my last witness, who was Harvey Risch, an emeritus professor and M.D., Ph.D., from Yale, who blew apart the part-time ER doctor’s testimony that I hadn’t done things correctly.

So, that’s where we are. They don’t have a case, so what they want to do instead is drag this out forever, which will do two things that are good for them: One, prevent me from being able to say I won my case and get national attention for that, because they managed to put me in the national news when they took my license;

No. 2, they want to cost Children’s Health Defense a whole lot of money by just dragging it out, and it doesn’t cost them anything to drag it out. They’ve got the assistant attorney generals who are already working for the state managing the case.

Somebody up there is pulling the strings and figured out how to make this as painful as possible for myself and CHD. Well, I want to assure them that it’s not painful at all because we’ve had up to 180,000 people watching each hearing in real time.

CHD and Epoch Times have streamed every one, so everyone has been able to see what kind of kangaroo court this is, and the state of Maine has a black eye already. So let’s go forward. Let’s give them some more black eyes.”

Most Doctors Are Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Unfortunately, threatening a doctor’s medical license is an exceptionally effective way to ensure compliance, and an effective coercion to follow the rules even though they are wholly unlawful. The reason for this is simple economics. Most doctors owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loans, and unless they’re independently wealthy, they can’t afford to go into private practice.

That means they work as an employee for a hospital or big clinic, where the rules are being set by hospital administrators. In addition to that, medical education is wholly captured by Big Pharma, and has been for the last 100 years. As such, medical students are being brainwashed from Day One. On top of that, you have peer pressure.

“We’re in the middle of a war,” Nass says. “It’s a war about who gets control of people, and doctors just happened to be a necessary chess piece for them. By doing this to me and others, the state has been very successful at getting most doctors to keep their mouth shut and go along, and comply with what they want.”

Indeed, it takes enormous courage and commitment to patient welfare to buck a system that has all these built-in pressures. In my estimate, perhaps only 5% of the 1 million doctors in America took a stand against the COVID tyranny.

“More than 75% of doctors are employed by somebody else, and that means they don’t have a say,” Nass explains. “If they’re employed by a hospital, the hospital bean-counters said, ‘Look, everybody who comes in is getting remdesivir, that’s it, if they’re admitted with COVID.’ And they can’t fight back.

There was so much money involved that people who tried to fight back lost their jobs. And this was what hospitals and employers were told to do by government and so-called ethicists like Art Caplan. You fire people and then everybody else goes along. So that’s what happened.

The other thing is … you can’t expect someone to believe something if their salary depends on their not believing it. So there’s that. The peer pressure is huge, for several reasons. One is malpractice. If you don’t go along with everybody else, you are liable for malpractice if your patient doesn’t do well.

So if I give someone hydroxychloroquine for COVID and they wind up dying, I can be sued for malpractice because I wasn’t following the standard of care. But if I gave them remdesivir and they die, I was following the standard of care, and I can’t be sued for that.

These are terrible things. This means that the entire profession has been pushed — through these rules and standards — to do things wrong. And all of this was probably thought of, or even planned, long ago, so that it would be relatively easy to control all the doctors.”

The Global Takeover Is Well Underway

As noted by Nass, most of you who are paying attention will have noticed that all kinds of crazy things are now happening all at once. We were mandated to get fast-tracked “vaccines” that turned out to be both ineffective and extremely dangerous, and even though the proverbial cat is now out of the bag, government is still trying to pressure people into taking additional boosters.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has authorized vaccine manufacturers to make a third, bivalent, version of the mRNA shot, to be rolled out in the fall in combination with the flu shots.

“Why would that be, when everyone knows that after a few weeks, [the shots] make you more susceptible to get the disease, as well as have heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, et cetera, and sudden death?” Nass asks.

We’re also facing the rollout of a central bank digital currency (CBDC) and an international digital vaccine passport. We also know that the U.S. government was funding the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) to design more lethal coronaviruses. Why did they do that? To what end?

We’ve also seen stupendous changes within our school system. Transgender ideology now trumps everything else. We’ve seen a rapid growth of online schooling and the lowering of educational standards at all levels, all while using the right pronoun has become incredibly important.

We’ve also seen a radical shift away from true environmentalism in favor of a “green” agenda that forces the poor and middle class to lower their standard of living while the wealthy profit. The fact is, the destruction of our environment and the raping of underdeveloped countries for their natural resources was done by the same globalists that now blame all of these problems on the public.

“What’s going on now is that the ‘elites’ (global cabal) have somehow gained control of enough pieces of our culture and our education system, and certainly our mass media and government, to roll out these cultural concepts and convince people of their validity,” Nass says.

“The elites have decided — they’ve got the ability now, through surveillance, through control of media and control of governments — to take over much of the world. The simplest and most legal way for them to do that, without having to fight wars, is to take over public health, and wrap the rest of the world into public health.

So public health is not just between you and your doctor. Public health now involves wild animals … They want to control the interactions of humans and wild animals.

They also want to control what happens with our livestock … so, livestock have become part of health. Ecosystems have also become part of health, and so has everything else. The name for this is ‘One Health.’

The WHO, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) — the world organization on animal health — and the UN Environmental Program, are all pushing for these things to be part of One Health and public health.

This didn’t happen by chance. It’s a scheme … funded by the Rockefeller Foundation around 2009. Many U.S. federal agencies are supposed to be using the One Health approach. This means that health problems have to be solved with a whole committee of people, not just doctors, not just veterinarians, but you need the ecologists, the plant pathologists, the livestock people, et cetera.

Everybody has to work together. But that’s not enough. You also have to throw in the police. You also have to throw in governments and legislators and everyone else into this concept of One Health.”

As noted by Nass, One Health is already enshrined in U.S. law in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), so there’s no question that U.S. agencies are all on the same track as the WHO.

Who’s Part of the Global Cabal?

In the interview, Nass goes on to name some of the organizations that are part of the global cabal that is reworking society for their own aims. Named players include the Rhodes organization, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and Chatham House, which is the equivalent of the Council on Foreign Relations in the U.K.

All these groups, and many more, are linked to each other. Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger cofounded the Trilateral Commission and was a Rhodes scholar and member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Kissinger selected Klaus Schwab to create the World Economic Forum (WEF) in 1971, and they’ve been working together ever since.

In 1993, the WEF founded a Young Global Leaders program to groom international heads of state. Today, Germany, France, Canada, Finland and other countries are led by graduates of this program.

“It’s not exactly a secret society, but Klaus Schwab and his group have managed to identify people who would go along with their program,” Nass says. “I suspect these are people who are not the most intelligent, who lack imagination and are very obedient.

Therefore, they have been convinced that climate change is a dire emergency, and that they need to take extraordinary measures to deal with it — even if they have to reduce the population, even if they have to reduce our standard of living, even if they have to impose 15-minute cities, get rid of air travel and … eat bugs.”

How the WHO Is Being Set Up as the Central Authority

As explained by Nass, from its inception in 1948, the WHO has been an organization that transferred money from wealthier countries to poorer countries to help them with health problems like tuberculosis, AIDS and malaria.

During the COVID pandemic, the WHO and diplomats from member countries decided that a comprehensive pandemic treaty was necessary. The justification was that COVID had been mismanaged, hence we need a central decision-maker.

“Of course, what was never said is that things were managed so poorly because most countries were following the WHO advice, which was absolutely awful,” Nass says.

If this pandemic treaty goes through, either a regional epidemic or global pandemic would authorize the WHO to step in and dictate how the matter should be addressed. WHO members are also working on amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHRs), which would strip member nations of their sovereignty to make health-related decisions.

And, recall that “health” is being redefined to include all aspects of life, under the already existing One Health paradigm. As Nass explains:

“What has been proposed is that either a regional director-general or the WHO director-general can simply declare a public health emergency of international concern, or the potential for a public health emergency of international concern.

Once they make that declaration, all these powers would then accrue to the director-general of the WHO, if it’s for all countries, or if it’s regional, to that regional director-general.

That person could then say, ‘OK, medicines in your country need to be shipped to this other country.’ Intellectual property on how to make vaccines need to go away. Let’s say Abbott has a vaccine to combat whatever it is. They have to now give the recipe to Rwanda so they can make that vaccine in their own country and use it for their own people.

They can close borders. The WHO director-generals could basically take control of anything. If they say, ‘Oh, people are getting this from animals,’ they can stop contact with animals, stop you eating chicken or whatever, because One Health has taken jurisdiction over ecosystems.

The entire planet is ecosystems, and that’s part of One Health. Animals and plants are also part of One Health. So, they can tell you what to eat, they can tell you where to go and where not to go. They can lock you in your home. They can put masks on you, they can mandate vaccinations — if these [IHR] amendments and the pandemic treaty are passed.

They’re still being negotiated. The final versions are not out. But we have certainly criticized and analyzed the early versions, and they will be voted on next May [2024], and could potentially go into force on a provisional basis. The treaty could go into force almost immediately.”

How These Instruments Alter the WHO’s Existing Authority

In many ways, it seems the WHO was already exercising these powers, or at least attempting to, during the COVID pandemic. So, how do these two instruments — the IHR amendments and the pandemic treaty — alter their existing authority? Nass explains:

“There are existing international health regulations and they’ve been in existence since at least 1969 … Although the WHO claims that part of the IHRs that exist right now are binding, they aren’t binding. So, countries followed them, but there was no legal requirement for them to do so.

The International Health Regulations stated very clearly that the way they were to be carried out was with ‘full respect for freedom of persons’ dignity and human rights.’ In the new version that is being negotiated, they have struck that out. There is no longer a need to respect human rights, dignity or freedom of persons.

And, they have specifically said that these new regulations will be binding on countries, and countries are required to have a focal point that is required to carry them out and report back to the WHO how they’ve been carried out.

There are additional new provisions that countries are required to perform surveillance of their populations. They want you to think this is surveillance of only bacteria or surveillance of only social media, but it’s both. So, the WHO could require people to be swabbed in your country, whether or not they’re crossing a border.

Say there’s an outbreak. Everybody has to line up and get swabbed to see if they’re infected with X. And animals have to be surveilled as well, because they’re looking for pathogens that have the potential to be become pandemics. So that is supposed to happen.

Now, there’s a huge problem with that, and that is, you can always find viruses that have the potential to become pandemics … So, if you start surveilling for them, you’re going to find them, which means that would allow the director-general of the WHO to declare a public health emergency anytime he or she wants.

The other surveillance is they require countries to surveil their social media and mainstream media, and censor anything that goes against the public health messaging of the WHO. So this is big. This is huge.”

Is Global Tyranny an Inevitability?

While it may seem there’s no way to derail this proverbial bullet train, Nass remains optimistic. “This is a dystopian future that actually is not good for anybody. Even the people who want it are going to find it’s not good for them either,” Nass says.

Now, the global cabal that is trying to seize control have access to essentially unlimited capital. But they’re also using our tax dollars. As noted by Nass, the U.S. government has spent some $5 trillion on the pandemic response.

“That’s our money, not theirs,” she says, “and a lot of that money, most likely, went to bribe media.” Hospitals were also paid to go along with the narrative, as were celebrities, churches, medical groups and other social organizations.

“These very wealthy people do not want to spend their own money to take over the world. They want to spend our money or put us in debt. But are these expenditures justified and legal?

If we get governments of people who are responsive to normal life, we can investigate where that money went. What are these public officials doing? We can put them on trial, and we can probably even claw back a lot of this money.

Now, to do that might require some new laws, but if we had really good people in office — like Bobby Kennedy — we could potentially create the laws, very quickly, that will allow us to try government officials and others, heads of media, et cetera, if they’re doing things that are against the law.”

Why We Need New Laws

The reason we need new laws is because current laws give immunity to a lot of bad actors, including the Federal Reserve, the Bank of International Settlements, everybody who works for the WHO and the UN, and federal government employees as well as many private organizations.

Vaccines and their manufacturers are also indemnified. We need to pass new laws that eliminate all these indemnifications, so that we can retroactively take them to court for the crimes they’ve committed.

“This whole thing goes against the principles of the Constitution, the principles of natural law. This is a dystopian nightmare that was figured out by some very clever people in public relations and in consulting groups. We know the French government paid something like €1 billion or €2 billion to McKinsey to help manage the pandemic response.

So we can identify organizations that have brought these things on us and go after them. We also need to tell our members of Congress, our parliamentarians, and legislators, we don’t want this dystopia. Government doesn’t give us rights. We have rights. We are giving government authority. Government doesn’t have authority and own us. We own the government.

We’ve been led to believe that it’s the other way around, but it isn’t. And we can fix all this. There are about 50 members of Congress already who have signed on as co-sponsors to HR79 [the WHO Withdrawal Act1]. We need to get out of these international organizations.

The UN is trying to do something similar. The WHO was simply pulled in because there was an opportunity to gain control legally through the WHO because of the way its constitution exists, because of several Supreme Court cases, et cetera, there was an ability to use the WHO. The cabal may try to use other international organizations or other means to gain control.

But look, there’s a few thousand of them. There’s 8 billion of us. This is like a million to one. We can beat them. We don’t have to go along with any of it. If everybody says no, if the police don’t enforce, if the Army doesn’t enforce, it’s not going to happen. So people just need to realize what’s going on.”

Door to Freedom

To that end, Nass is working with a new organization called Door to Freedom. Their website, which will launch shortly, will contain all the relevant WHO and UN documents, criticisms of those documents, and both long and short explanations of what’s going on.

It’ll be a one-stop shop where everyone can learn what the plan is and what we can do to stop it. Door to Freedom also hopes to align freedom organizations around the world to act in concert to get the word out more widely.

Personally, I’m skeptical about the likelihood of winning this battle through legislative efforts because this cabal has been working on this plan for decades, if not centuries. So, they already have everything buttoned up, or close to it. Perhaps someone like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. could get it done, but it will take a small miracle to get him into office as well.

What I do hold out hope for is that public resistance will block attempts of implementation. So, the key, I think, is to educate people. Henceforth, most of the day-to-day choices you make will take the world either closer to freedom, or closer to slavery, so it’s crucial to understand where we are, where the cabal intends to take us, and how they intend to get us there.

That way, you can make decisions and take actions that will move us in the opposite direction. Door to Freedom will be able to help you understand all of that, so please bookmark doortofreedom.org, and check back regularly.

from:    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/07/16/who-global-tyranny.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20230716&foDate=true&mid=DM1433941&rid=1857121056

“Greening” You to Death

13 Nations Agree to Convert to ‘Green’ Farming Methods that Will Reduce the Food Supply

Destructive food policies in the name of climate are weapons in the war on food. Reduction of methane emissions from livestock animals, especially beef and dairy cattle, is planned, along with switching from current farming practices to undefined “innovative” methods. 13 countries have committed to the Global Methane Pledge to transform their farm policies include the United States, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Chile, Czech Republic, Ecuador, Germany, Panama, Peru and Spain.The UN, World Economic Forum and other NGOs have been promoting meatless diets and the consumption of insect protein for years. There has been heavy investment in insect factories to add processed bugs into foods. It is doubtful that labels will inform people of what they are eating. Cancer cells from cows, chickens and pigs are used to quickly grow artificial meat in laboratories. Meanwhile, the UN’s World Bank is warning of a global famine.

.The global climate cult is getting ready to kick its war on food into overdrive with 13 nations – many of them major cattle and food-producing states led by the United States, Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Spain – signing onto a commitment to place farmers under new restrictions intended to reduce emissions of methane gas.

The Global Methane Hub announced in a May 17 press release that agriculture and environmental ministers and ambassadors from 13 countries, including the United States, have signed a commitment that pledges to reduce methane emissions in agriculture. The U.S. was represented by Biden’s climate czar, John Kerry.

What does this mean and why should you care? We’ll break it down.

According to the press release issued by these nations and posted at Global Methane Hub:

“Last month (in April 2023), the Global Methane Hub collaborated with the Ministries of Agriculture of Chile and Spain to convene the first-ever global ministerial on agricultural practices to reduce methane emissions. The ministerial brought together high-ranking government members to share global perspectives on methane reduction and low-emission food systems. The gathering led to a statement in which the nations committed to support efforts to improve the quality and quantity of, and access to, finance for climate change adaptation and mitigation measures in the agriculture and food sectors and to collaborate on efforts aimed at lowering methane emissions in agriculture and food systems.”

Conference participants included the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Climate & Clean Air Coalition, Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture, the World Bank, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, and the Inter-American Development Bank.

The World Bank, another creation of the post-World War II, U.S.-led liberal rules-based order, has been talking a lot lately, along with the U.N., about a coming famine. The World Bank issued a white paper just last week, on May 22, titled Food Security Update: World Bank Response to Rising Food Insecurity.

The director of the United Nations World Food Program has also been putting out, starting in September of last year, dire warnings about a coming global famine.

So it’s curious to me that, at the very time the globalists are warning about food shortages and famine, their mouthpieces at the World Bank, the U.N., and within the administrations of the U.S. and its allies (notice China and Russia are nowhere to be found in these preposterous anti-food policies), are talking about converting over to a new and unproven form of “sustainable” farming that’s focused more on reducing methane than it is on producing the highest yields of food.

Modern food production is bad, they tell us, because it produces methane which supposedly harms the environment.

“Food systems are responsible for 60% of methane emissions,” said Marcelo Mena, CEO of Global Methane Hub. “We congratulate countries willing to take the lead in food systems methane mitigation and confirm our commitment to support this type of initiative with programs that explore promising methane mitigation technologies and the underpinning research of methane mitigation mechanisms to create new technologies.”

John Kerry is also very excited about taking valuable, productive farmland offline, reducing the size of cattle herds, and turning our food-production systems over to technocrats and globalists offering vague promises of “new technologies.”

Read full article here…

from:    https://needtoknow.news/2023/06/13-nations-agree-to-convert-to-green-farming-methods-that-will-reduce-the-food-supply/

Tackling Systemic Glyphosate

MIT Researcher Explains How Chlorine Dioxide/ MMS Destroys the Toxicity of Glyphosate Poison

Dr. Stephanie Seneff, who holds a PhD in computer science and electrical engineering and is a senior research scientist at MIT, says that Chlorine Dioxide (CD), also known as MMS, destroys the toxicity of glyphosate, a weed killer that was patented by Monsanto and marketed as RoundUp Ready. Glyphosate is ubiquitous in the US and is also sprayed on many crops after harvest. It is potentially linked to diseases that include cancer, endocrine disruption, reduced reproduction and more. 

Notice: This article is not intended as medical advice as we are reporting on the findings of Stephanie Seneff and Kerri Rivera.

.

 

  • Save

Link for video:    https://ugetube.com/watch/kerri-rivera-and-dr-seneff-chlorine-dioxide-destroys-glyphosate_zjWqqQYeod1euCg.html

.

Summary by JW WIlliams

Kerri Rivera, a mother an autistic child, a doctor of homeopathy, and author of Healing the Symptoms Known As Autism, has been successful in helping parents reverse autism in children. She interviewed Stephanie Seneff, who holds a doctoral degree (PhD) in computer science and electrical engineering and is a a senior research scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL).

Glyphosate is a poison that is used as a weed killer; it was patented by Monsanto and called RoundUp Ready for use on patented GMO crops. It is also sprayed on many crops after harvest as a desiccant. Glyphosate has been potentially linked to cancer, endocrine disruption, thyroid problems, adverse effects on reproduction, fatty liver disease and negative effects on gut microbiome.

Stephanie Seneff said that she believes glyphosate substitutes for glycine in protein synthesis, which she said explains the increase in so many diseases, including autism and Alzheimer’s Disease.

Dr. Seneff stated that MMS neutralizes glyphosate toxicity. She said that MMS provides chlorine and and also provides super oxide that is needed to produce sulfate.

from:    https://needtoknow.news/2023/05/mit-researcher-explains-how-chlorine-dioxide-mms-destroys-the-toxicity-of-glyphosate-poison/

THe Big Global Warming Schmooze

Top 15 Unbelievable Reasons That Prove Global Warming Might be a Hoax

Global Warming is the name given to the current belief that the earth’s temperature has been gradually increasing over the past few hundred years since the dawn of the industrial revolution.

The human impact on this is believed to only account for 10% of all the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and as such, it is highly unlikely that we, as a species, are having a massive negative impact on the stability of the earth’s climate. In this article, we will be giving you 15 reasons that prove global warming might be a hoax.

More from global warming:

Top 15 Unbelievable Reasons That Prove Global Warming Might be a Hoax

1. The climate of the earth is warming up rapidly

If you look at the HadCRUT3 surface temperature index, which is based in the UK, records show warming to 1878, cooling to 1911, warming to 1941, cooling to 1964, warming to 1998 and cooling to 2011. The increase in temperature between 1964 was the same rate as recorded between 1911 to 1941. Numerous satellites, ground stations, and weather balloons show recorded cooling since 2001.

The current warnings of a temperature increase of 0.6 degrees to 0.8 degrees are nothing irregular and fit into the natural rate of the warming recorded over the last few centuries.

The placement of these global weather stations should be taken into account. They are mostly based in so-called heat islands in cities where temperatures are normally higher, and few have been placed in rural countryside locations.

Two teams have corrected the average temperature readings between all the stations and have reduced the reported increase in temperature by half since 1980. Up to today, there has never been any sort of significantly extreme event caused by warming.

There was global warming about a thousand years ago (Medieval Warm Period) – it’s a cyclic matter, no need for alarmism.

2. Reports show that the global climate has been cooling for the past 1000 years and recently, temperatures have skyrocketed

Throughout history, the climate of this planet has fluctuated greatly, many ancient people and religions alike talk about a great flood, which was probably caused by the melting ice caps or glaciers. Recorded history tells us of a warm period from around 1000 to 1200 AD, which allowed the Vikings to farm crops on Greenland. This was followed by the little ice age.

Since the end of the 17th century, the average global temperature has been rising at a steady rate, except for the period of 1940 to 1970 in which the climate cooled off, which in turn led to a global panic about global cooling!

Over a century, stratocumulus clouds forming off the coastlines can turn the global temperature up or down by a few degrees, and the “climate models” cannot predict which way it will go. (July 2018 issue of “Science).”

3. The rate of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been directly credited to the human species and greenhouse gasses, causing the current warming trend

The carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere has fluctuated due to various reasons over time. Since the industrial revolution, the CO2 levels in the atmosphere have increased on average by roughly 120 parts per million. Most of this is linked to the human cause, and during the current century, the increase is approximately 0.55% per year.

See also  Causes, Effects and Solutions to Global Dimming

Though there is absolutely no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As ancient ice core measurements have proven that CO2 levels in the past have often changed after a temperature drop or increase. Solid evidence exists that shows that as temperatures fluctuate naturally through solar radiation and other galactic and local influences, the warming of the surface levels of the planet results in more CO2 being released into the atmosphere.

The ratio of man-made CO2 to natural CO2 on Earth is about 1 to 2400. That means man’s portion is about 2 drops if a 12 ounce glass held Earth’s CO2.

Recent findings show Mt. Katla buried under a glacier in Iceland emits up to 24,000 tons CO2 per day; it’s possible that many more other sub-glacial volcanoes worldwide are dumping much more CO2 into the atmosphere. There are 40,000 miles of volcanically active mid-ocean ridges, of which only a tiny fraction has been mapped. That’s a real big thermal and CO2 output area we know little about.

4. The poles are warming, and ice caps are melting, apparently

Updated data from NASA satellite instruments reveal the Earth’s polar ice caps have not receded at all since the satellite instruments began measuring the ice caps in 1979. Temperatures at the poles have not increased since 2005. In fact, apart from the Palmer Peninsula, the entire Antarctic region is cooling down. Icecap thickness in the arctic and north poles are increasing in size and will continue to do so until things naturally warm up.

5. Computer models are being used to calculate the future impacts of CO2

These computer models are programmed to assume that CO2 is the largest climate driver and that the sun has little effect on the climate. These computer models can be programmed with a large number of variables in order to come to the conclusion that the earth will cool down or warm-up. A computer model is no way to measure anything, as it is purely a matter of who inputs the data for the model.

The sun is a major driver of the climate, with daily additions of solar radiation that are completely random and follow no pattern at all. These computer models do not take this into account and, therefore, do not give a true representation of the actual climate. And as such, they should not be used as a base for such claims.

6. The melting of natural glaciers proves global warming?

Glaciers have naturally receded and grown countless times throughout history. Recent glacier receding is simply an outcome of the warming planet after the little ice age of the early medieval period. Scientists have discovered evidence that the ice caps and glaciers have receded and increased in size on numerous occasions throughout history.

It is a normal thing for the glaciers to shrink and expand over time. Anyway, this is more driven by precipitation than temperature.

7. CO2 is a toxin?

A lot of people believe this, and it plays a part in many scientific studies from a purely theoretical standpoint. CO2 is just as important as nitrogen to the atmosphere.

CO2 plays a major role in the bringing about of life on earth, it is necessary for plant growth, and in some areas with higher levels of CO2, records show that some tree and plant life can grow at extraordinary rates. The assumption that CO2 is a pollutant is completely false.

melting-glacier-global-warming
Source: Canva

8. Global warming apparently will cause storms and extreme weather

These claims are completely baseless. No evidence exists of the weather being affected by global warming on a global scale. Regional variations do occur. Extreme weather can be affected by a large number of variables; things like the jet stream, for example, can change the weather for many seasons in different European countries. Even sand swept up from the Sahara desert can change the climate of the northernmost European nations.

See also  Various Human Activities That Affect an Ecosystem

Global warming has no impact on these weather systems. Some argue that global warming will lead to droughts across the world, but if global warming happens the way we are being told, there should be more moisture in the air all around us as the moisture evaporates due to high temperatures.

9. Does global warming cause a shorter lifespan?

Considering that the earth’s climate has been forever changing since the formation of the planet. It didn’t stop just because our human race popped up. Even during our history, the earth’s climate has fluctuated from cold to hot and back again; we do what we have always done, and what life always does, we adapt.

Due to all the major increases in scientific and medical studies, our current lifespan is vastly superior to our ancestors, and this will continue to grow as time goes on.

10. Does CO2 form the largest part of the greenhouse gases?

Greenhouse effect causing gas forms roughly 3% of the volume of the atmosphere. 97% of which is water vapor and clouds, with the remaining percentages being gases like CO2, CH4, Ozone, and N20. CO2 makes up about 0.4% of our atmosphere.

The small amounts of gasses in the atmosphere are capable of retaining the heat from solar radiation, but due to the relatively small amounts of them in comparison to the other 90% of water vapor. That 90% is believed to cause 75% of the greenhouse effect.

At their current levels, if water vapor were to increase just 3%, that would amount to the same level of the greenhouse effect as if CO2 increased by 100%.

11. “The impacts of climate change are expected to act as a ‘threat multiplier’ in many of the world’s most unstable regions, exacerbating droughts and other natural disasters as well as leading to food, water and other resource shortages that may spur mass migrations.”

Regarding food and water supplies, global crop production has soared as the Earth gradually warms. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is essential to plant life, and more it added to the atmosphere enhances plant growth and crop production. Plant growth and crop production also benefit from longer growing seasons and fewer frost events. Global crops set new production records virtually every year as our planet modestly warms.

The same holds true as per objective data for water supplies. As our planet warms, there is a gradual increase in global precipitation and soil moisture. Warmer temperatures evaporate more water from the oceans, which in turn stimulates more frequent precipitation over continental landmasses. This results in enhanced precipitation, which means an improvement in soil moisture at almost all sites in the Global Soil Moisture Data Bank.

If crop shortages, declining precipitation and declining soil moisture cause national security threats, then global warming benefits rather than jeopardizes national security.

12. “Sea Levels Rising – Warmer temperatures are causing glaciers and polar ice sheets to melt, increasing the amount of water in the world’s seas and oceans.”

The pace of sea-level rise remained relatively constant throughout the 20th century, even when global temperatures rose gradually. In recent decades, there has similarly been no increase in the pace of sea-level rise.

When utilizing 20th-century technologies, humans effectively adapted to global sea-level rise, then utilizing 21st-century technologies, humans will be much more equipped to adapt to global sea-level rise.

Although alarmists frequently point melting of polar ice sheets and a recent modest shrinkage in the Arctic ice sheet, that decline has been completely offset by ice sheet expansion in the Antarctic. Since NASA precisely began measuring those 35 years ago with satellite instruments, cumulatively, polar ice sheets have not declined at all.

13. “Economic Consequences – The costs associated with climate change rise along with the temperatures. Severe storms and floods combined with agricultural losses cause billions of dollars in damages, and money is needed to treat and control the spread of disease”

Extreme events such as severe storms, floods and agricultural losses may cost a great deal of money, but such costs are dramatically declining as the Earth modestly warms. Therefore, EDF’s asserted economic costs are actually economic benefits.

As per the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, severe storms are becoming less frequent and severe as the Earth modestly warms. The hurricane and tornado activity both are at historic lows.

Similarly, scientific measurements and peer-reviewed studies report no increase in flooding events regarding natural-flowing rivers and streams. If there was an increase in flooding activity, that is due to human alterations of river and stream flow rather than precipitation changes.

Also, the modest recent warming is producing the U.S., and global crop production records virtually every year, creating billions of dollars in new economic and human welfare benefits each and every year. This creates a net economic benefit completely ignored by EDF.

14. 31,000 scientists say “no convincing evidence”

While polls of scientists actively working in the field of climate science indicate strong general agreement that Earth is warming and human activity is a significant factor, 31,000 scientists say there is “no convincing evidence” that humans can or will cause “catastrophic” heating of the atmosphere.

This claim originates from the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, which has an online petition (petitionproject.org) that states:

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.

Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

15. No Real Proof or Evidence

According to an article by the Huffington Post, President Donald Trump told the American public about his disbelief in climate change because he didn’t see any real evidence. This comment has been made by millions of other people since the 2016 election, and since the American President pulled out of the Paris Accords, an agreement signed by several countries to change their environmental practices.

Geo-engineering scientists working on blocking the sun’s rays to cool the planet say that: “Even if we completely stopped carbon dioxide emissions today, the earth will continue warming over the next several decades.”

from:    https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/top-10-unbelievable-reasons-that-prove-global-warming-might-be-hoax.php

Hmm, Maybe the Population Bomb Fizzled

The ‘Population Explosion’ Myth Blows Up

The 'Population Explosion' Myth Blows Up
(AP Photo/Bullit Marquez)
People in the United States and Europe have long taken for granted the idea that the world is in the midst of a “population explosion” that threatens to cause the starvation of millions and render the earth uninhabitable The world, we were told, would simply run out of food, and could not possibly sustain the population it would soon have. This was how generations of people were sold on the idea that it was the “responsible” thing to do to have small families, and it even led to the weakening of the idea of the family itself as contributing to the looming problem that looked as if it would kill us all. There was just one problem with the whole scenario: there was no population explosion at all, as a new study has now confirmed.

The UK’s far-Left Guardian admitted Monday that “the long-feared ‘population bomb’ may not go off, according to the authors of a new report that estimates that human numbers will peak lower and sooner than previously forecast.” The Club of Rome study, which was “carried out by the Earth4All collective of leading environmental science and economic institutions, including the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Stockholm Resilience Centre and the BI Norwegian Business School,” predicts that “on current trends the world population will reach a high of 8.8 billion before the middle of the century, then decline rapidly.” This being the Guardian, it added: “The peak could come earlier still if governments take progressive steps to raise average incomes and education levels.”

It’s jarring to read this. Population explosion hysteria has been a staple of education for decades, and there are no doubt millions of people who still take the idea that soon there will be many more people on earth than can possibly be fed as axiomatic fact. Americans have so internalized this belief that people with large families are guilt-tripped on a routine basis. I myself can remember being inundated with this propaganda in public school at all levels, although of course, no one recognized it as propaganda in those palmy days, as far back as the early 1970s. The population explosion myth became the basis for many of the Left’s other favored agendas, including the “climate crisis,” the bug-eating plan, and even the sexual revolution, which was in large part made possible by the contraception and abortion that we were told had to be readily available in order to try to bring the world’s population under control.

All this is largely the work of one man, Paul Ehrlich, who despite being an obvious fraud (or perhaps because he’s an obvious fraud) is enjoying a new vogue among Leftists today. The Wall Street Journal noted in Jan. 2023 that the establishment media treats the 90-year-old Ehrlich “with an obsequious deference,” as evidenced in a “recent cringe-worthy segment on CBS’s ‘60 Minutes’” that retailed the population explosion myth yet again.

Ehrlich started the hysteria rolling in 1968 with his bestselling book The Population Bomb. It began, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.” In April 1970, he amplified the warning, saying: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” Ehrlich even predicted that England would cease to exist by the year 2000.

England still exists as of this writing (although some may think it is in such bad shape that it would have been better off shuffling off this mortal coil 23 years ago), and 100-200 million people have not been starving to death every year. And now we learn that the whole thing was false.

But Leftist hysteria doesn’t die that easily. The authors of the new study that definitively debunks the idea of the population explosion still “caution that falling birthrates alone will not solve the planet’s environmental problems, which are already serious at the 8 billion level and are primarily caused by the excess consumption of a wealthy minority.” See? We need global socialism, with the forced confiscation and redistribution of wealth. That’ll fix everything!

Ben Callegari, one of the authors of the new study, emphasized this: “This gives us evidence to believe the population bomb won’t go off, but we still face significant challenges from an environmental perspective. We need a lot of effort to address the current development paradigm of overconsumption and overproduction, which are bigger problems than population.” What is coming? Socialism is coming, and the resulting famines and starvation will take care of overconsumption once and for all.

from:    https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/robert-spencer/2023/03/27/now-they-tell-us-new-study-shows-that-the-population-explosion-was-a-myth-n1681928