USDA “did a trial with 500 pigs. Within the first couple of weeks they had about 100 of them die,” says rancher Trevor Cowley.
A rancher is warning of the government’s experimentation with mRNA vaccines on the U.S. meat supply, noting that 25% of the pigs that received the shots have died.
“The USDA came out with a study on pigs because pigs were the first to be trialed with the mRNA vaccines. They did a trial with 500 pigs. Within the first couple of weeks they had about 100 of them die,” rancher Trevor Cowley said on the “Real Business Owners” podcast last month.
“They analyzed the pigs after they had died…They were still finding traces of the vaccine inside the meat,” he added.
Cowley said the government is also using the bird flu outbreak to advocate for injecting beef cattle with more experimental mRNA vaccines.
Cowley also explained that the federal government pushed for mandatory ID chipping of cattle in response to the bird flu outbreak after failing to implement them earlier in the face of massive public outcry.
There is an apochryphal phrase that, despite its disputed source, probably everyone can agree with: “Control the Food and You Control the People.”
Our grandparents and great grandparents produced much of their own food in their gardens or on their farms. Food choices in stores were limited, with little frozen food available and fewer fresh and canned foods for sale.
In 1850, 64% of American workers worked on farms.1 In 1900 there were still 6 million US farms, with an average size of 150 acres.2 By 1920, 30% of US workers still did farm work.3 But after World War 2, the US government adopted policies to reduce the number of farmers and expand the size of farms–for more efficiency, it was said.4 5 6 Today, only 1% of Americans work on farms7 and the number of farms has dropped by 2/3.
Most US farmland belongs to farms that are over 2,000 acres in size, or more than 3 square miles. But along with efficiency came worsening food quality. The so-called “Green Revolution” allowed farmers to apply chemical fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides while ignoring the overall fertility, quality and texture of their soils. Depleted soils subsequently produced less nutritious foods, while accumulating low levels of neurotoxins and carcinogens.
Decades of consolidation of food production, processing and distribution has steadily increased the size and power of a small group of global agricultural corporations. Most of those companies are in turn members of the World Economic Forum (WEF) or its Food Action Alliance, and they are wielding unelected power to influence food production and distribution in the name of climate change, sustainability,8 health, and equity.9
For example, the WEF had this to say about food systems in 2022:
“In the face of volatile global shocks from conflicts such as the war in Ukraine, the COVID-19 pandemic, and extreme weather events, it has become more urgent than ever to transition food systems to a net-zero, nature-positive infrastructure that nourishes and feeds everyone.10
Net zero means “removing an equal amount of CO2 from the atmosphere as we release into it.”11 This has never been accomplished by any food system, and the implications could drastically reduce the food supply–yet it is said to be the reason we must change the way we produce food.
The WEF and other international entities have recently increased the intensity of this concerted push, most visibly in policies targeting the reduction or elimination of livestock and related farming activities.
Climate change as a justification to attack food production
Advocates of climate change urgency have steadily honed their concerns about agriculture. The WEF boldly proclaims:
With the food system responsible for a third of overall global CO2 emissions, attention on ‘climate-beneficial’ foods has been slowly but steadily increasing.
The US EPA disagrees with the WEF that agriculture plays such a large role in global CO2 emissions.12 Nor are the many CO2-lowering effects of regenerative agriculture (like sinking CO2 into the soil from the air) mentioned as offsets.
Organic and regenerative agriculture, in which topsoil is rebuilt through composting, “green manure” plantings that enrich the soil, and good forestry practices, can sequester more CO2 in the soil and trees than is lost through other agricultural processes. These could potentially achieve ‘net zero’– and increase the production of more nutritious foods and healthier soils, but are not being touted as solutions. One must ask then, is the goal really “net-zero” or is there another goal?
Numerous international agencies and NGOs have converged to accuse cows and farming of harming the climate. They offer technological rescues, to be provided by corporate WEF members. These include the United Nations Environment Program and AIM for Climate.
Like carbon dioxide, methane is a greenhouse gas that is said to contribute to global warming. Over 150 nations have signed the “Global Methane Pledge” to reduce methane emissions by 30% by 203013–and some are reducing dairy and beef cows because the gas produced in their intestines contains methane. (Humans also expel methane.14) Methane is released naturally from cracks in the earth, as well as from fracking and oil drilling–which were recently shown to release 5x as much methane as earlier estimates suggested.15 But it is the gas produced by cows that is the current target for methane reduction.
Issues that have not been satisfactorily addressed include:
whether our methods for measuring temperature in comparison to past decades provide accurate comparative results,
how the doomsday targets for temperature and CO2 were arrived at,
how members of the IPCC, an unaccountable body responsible for climate targets and projections were selected and retained,
since scientists worried about a coming ice age during the 1970s, doesn’t that suggest considerable changes in climate (both up and down) over relatively short periods of time,
what is the evidence that increased heat and increased CO2 are dangerous when both contribute to increased growth of plants,
while it was claimed that sea level rises would be catastrophic, what we are seeing in fact is evidence of small changes in sea level in both directions.
Health
WHO’s Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus stated that “a transformation of the world’s food systems is needed urgently, based on a One Health approach that protects and promotes the health of humans, animals and the planet.” We all want to protect animals and environment, as well as our own health, but it seems the obvious way to do that is to address the evils of factory farming and excess chemical additives used for crops and livestock, rather than a major transformation of what we eat. Consuming large amounts of insect proteins, or lab-grown ‘meat,’ for example, will have unpredictable effects on health. Do we really want to perform these experiments on billions of people at once?
“One Health” is also being used as the justification to vaccinate fur farm workers against bird flu in Finland,16 even though there have been no human cases in Finland, the disease does not spread person-to-person, and everyone in the US who has developed bird flu in the past 2 years has had an extremely mild illness: conjunctivitis +/- symptoms of a cold. None were hospitalized or died. The excuse is that vaccinating people will allow continued farming of mink and foxes, which were culled last year due to alleged bird flu infections. Here is how Finland’s health department draws from “One Health” to wordsmith the need to give experimental vaccines, never before tested in humans, to farmworkers in expectation that an outbreak of bird flu might occur:
“This issue must be evaluated within a framework which considers the intricate interplay between the environment, animals, and humans. Recognising this interconnectedness and the vast array of environmental impacts of human activity is crucial, and our protective measures should consider the overarching goal of maintaining and enhancing planetary health.”17
Equity
Equity is repeatedly embraced as the justification to change the way food is allocated. The roster of corporate players at AIM for Climate proclaims “Diversity, gender equity, and inclusion are critical to the success of the mission.” But real equity is allowing people to choose the food they eat, without interference, rather than restricting populations from accessing the foods they prefer and imposing new foods on them.
Animal Rights
The World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) joined the plan to balance environmental demands against human needs for food through adherence to the loose “One Health” approach. At the same time, WOAH admits, “More than 75% of the billion people who live on less than $2 per day depend on subsistence farming and raising livestock to survive.”18
The world’s largest food producers, processors, and retail sellers are joined with governments and NGOs through the WHO, UN, WEF, and a plethora of interconnected organizations. Yet all these supposedly charitable organizations have become focused on reducing or eliminating livestock, despite the fact that the poorest peoples as well as the wealthiest rely on livestock for meat, dairy and for enriching the soil. The multinational organizations and food conglomerates want humans to convert to a state-specified diet comprised instead of synthetic meats, insects, and other novel food products manufactured by these companies, which have not previously been known for their concerns about our health.
Many question whether a group of global industrialists and politicians have either the expertise or desire to “improve the state of the world,” but there is no question that the proposed intention is to consolidate and control food production and distribution, thereby improving the state of member corporations’ profits. GMO crops and related chemical applications will be increased under the pretense of climate rescue, and synthetic meats will be favored in government food programs. Even more small farms will be shuttered.
This coordinated justification for global/government food control is presented in the name of sustainability, reducing global temperature, improving animal welfare, nurturing human health, and improving equity. However, there is no evidence it does even one of these things.
We do not intend to allow a small group of globalists to control global food production and thereby achieve control of the population.
This is why Door to Freedom will place a major focus on turning this agenda around. We will encourage government (at all levels) to support small farmers rather than industrial giants, to improve animal husbandry practices, to incentivize enhancing the soil and to achieve a much healthier food supply for all.
Our methods include education, policy development, and working for change at all levels of government. We will use the same strategy we used to stop the WHO’s agenda. Basically, once people understand what is happening and what is at stake, they refuse to go along–whether they are citizens or political leaders.
Our first large project will be a 2-day Symposium September 6-7 (online only, and I put in the wrong dates earlier) titled The Attack on Food and Agriculture, 2nd Annual. Please join us, support us, and work with us to heal our food systems and our planet.
On a wisp of land in the Indian Ocean, two hops by plane and one bumpy speedboat ride from the nearest continent, the sublime blue waves lapping at the bone-white sand are just about all that breaks the stillness of a hot, windless afternoon.
The very existence of low-slung tropical islands seems improbable, a glitch. A nearly seamless meeting of land and sea, peeking up like an illusion above the violent oceanic expanse, they are among the most marginal environments humans have ever called home.
And indeed, when the world began paying attention to global warming decades ago, these islands, which form atop coral reefs in clusters called atolls, were quickly identified as some of the first places climate change might ravage in their entirety. As the ice caps melted and the seas crept higher, these accidents of geologic history were bound to be corrected and the tiny islands returned to watery oblivion, probably in this century.
Then, not very long ago, researchers began sifting through aerial images and found something startling. They looked at a couple dozen islands first, then several hundred, and by now close to 1,000. They found that over the past few decades, the islands’ edges had wobbled this way and that, eroding here, building there. By and large, though, their area hadn’t shrunk. In some cases, it was the opposite: They grew. The seas rose, and the islands expanded with them.
Scientists have come to understand some but not all of the reasons for this. Which is why a team of them recently converged in the Maldives, on an island they’d spend weeks outfitting with instruments and sensors and cameras.
They were there to learn more about how the steady collision of blue waves and white sand does surprising and seemingly magical things to coastlines, both destroying land and extending it. Really, though, they were trying to answer a bigger question: If atoll nations aren’t facing certain and imminent erasure, then what are they facing? For having a future is not the same thing as having a secure future.
If, for instance, some of their islands become difficult to live on but others do not, then atoll governments will have to make hard choices about which places to save and which to sacrifice. In the places they save, they will have to plan for the long term about supplying fresh water, about creating jobs, about providing schools and health care and infrastructure. They will have to invent the best future they can with the limited resources they have.
In short, atolls might not be such outliers in this world after all. Look hard enough, and they start to look a lot like everywhere else…
To understand what had happened to the atolls since this acceleration began, two researchers, Arthur Webb and Paul Kench, decided to look down at them from above. The scientists collected aerial photos of 27 Pacific islands from the middle of the 20th century. Then, they compared them to recent satellite images. “I’m not sure we really knew what we would find,” Dr. Kench recalled.
Their findings caused an uproar.
The seas had risen an inch or so each decade, yet the waves had kept piling sediment on the islands’ shores, enough to mean that most of them hadn’t changed much in size. Their position on the reef might have shifted. Their shape might be different. Whatever was going on, it clearly wasn’t as simple as oceans rise, islands wash away.
Dr. Webb and Dr. Kench’s study, which came out in 2010, inspired other scientists to hunt for more old photos and conduct further analysis. The patterns they’ve uncovered in recent years are remarkably consistent across the 1,000 or so islands they’ve studied: Some shrank, others grew. Many, however, were stable. These studies have also added to the intrigue by revealing another pattern: Islands in ocean regions where sea level rise is fastest generally haven’t eroded more than those elsewhere…
People want names, so let’s start here. This is a big part of the hierarchy, leaving some unknowns hidden behind the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). In Corey Lynn’s 3-part report on Laundering with Immunity, it explains in explicit detail as to how and when BIS came about and how BIS and 63 central banks devised a plan to hold immunities and privileges. Shortly thereafter, in 1945 the UN was manifested by some of the plotters for this grand takeover, and immunities and privileges came right along with it the following day. This was the beginning of the control framework and how they would be able to carry out their agendas while operating entirely outside the law. All arms of the UN have these immunities and can extend them to organizations working with them. Long before the UN being established, the Organization of American States (OAS) was created. They too were the first to receive immunities and privileges, alongside the UN, as they work in conjunction with one another. And, they too can extend these immunities to organizations they work with. In addition to the banks, the UN and OAS, the Global Fund, Gavi, and WEF were also given these immunities, and numerous other key international organizations as well. In total, there are 76 international organizations that hold these immunities and privileges, and that’s on top of BIS and the central banks.
Whereas the UN and OAS hold treaties with a slew of countries giving them ironclad layers of protections, the other international organizations hold immunities, privileges, and headquarters agreements independently with each country who opted to do so, and there are many! The U.S. set the stage for this, doling them out to 76 organizations throughout every presidency except for Trump and Biden.
Read Laundering with Immunity to grasp the full scope of what these immunities and privileges entail. For starters, all of their archives are inviolable, their property and assets are immune from search and seizure, they are exempt from every kind of tax regular people pay, including property taxes, officers and employees are exempt from legal suits, employees and their family members can travel the world without checks from customs, military and police are not allowed to enter their headquarters, and much more.
Once people understand that THIS is the control framework – the structure that was created nearly 80 years ago so that they can operate outside the law and never be held accountable, it’s easy to see how all of the other pieces fall into place.
Who is THEY? That alone is the key list of 76 organizations, BIS, and 63 central banks at the top of the pyramid, bearing in mind there are wealthy, strategic players behind this pyramid whose names we may never know. Those leading these organizations are the key names purposefully put in a position of power to carry out specific agendas. Those key players move around within that group of organizations and sometimes head up affiliated organizations in order to maintain their strategy. Some of those agendas come straight from the pyramid organizations, while others are contracted out to their affiliates at NGOs, corporations, universities, lawmakers, governments, 3-letter agencies, news media, and private equity firms. For example, CIA agents often move into news media positions, FDA directors often move over to big pharma, CDC directors move over to Rockefeller Foundation or Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and so on.
They keep their key players in positions they need them in at specific times and then move them around to other leadership positions when they need certain actions carried out. Jim Yong Kim is a prime example of this, from co-founding Partners in Health to advising the Director-General of the WHO and Director of HIV/AIDS department, then fulfilling outcomes required at Harvard in various positions, on to President of Dartmouth College then to President of the World Bank – coincidentally resigning early in 2019, and now a partner at Global Infrastructure Partners. Kim has been instrumental in nefarious actions in Haiti, the AIDS agenda, vaccines, Covid contact tracing, pressuring countries in order to receive funding from the World Bank, and the climate agenda, and each position was timed right. It is no coincidence that BlackRock is acquiring Global Infrastructure Partners in the 3rd quarter of 2024. You can read more about Jim Yong Kim’s connections and involvement in Corey Lynn’s reports here, hereand here. They have done an incredible job trying to bury his childhood and family. CEO of BlackRock, Larry Fink, also went above and beyond to hide his family connections and childhood, with a father who would appear to be a ghost. It’s understandable to want to keep family from the public eye when in high profile positions, but there is far more than meets the eye with these cats.
There are countless smaller companies who have had good intentions to provide great products and services to people or the land, but as they began to grow and gain attention, these corrupt organizations stepped in trying to co-opt them and eventually acquiring them. Whole Foods being gobbled up by Amazon is a good example of this. These organizations, including so-called billionaire philanthropists, are behind every major industry and “reimagining” it to essentially cut out everyone else from financial prosperity so that everyone can fall prey to their planned enslavement system.
Ultimately, Congress needs to revoke these immunities and privileges. Any lawmaker saying that the U.S. needs to defund the WHO (part of the UN) or the UN itself, clearly isn’t aware of this control framework because if they were, they would know that defunding isn’t going to solve anything…
The chicken egg has a storied history in medicine. Even today, millions of ordinary fertilized eggs are each punctured with a drill and injected with flu virus to make vaccines. Now, scientists at the same research institute that cloned Dolly the sheep have produced a genetically modified rooster whose female descendants lay eggs that produce medicines in place of a protein in egg whites.
Helen Sang of the Roslin Institute in Edinburgh, Scotland, and her colleagues used lentivirus to introduce a gene into freshly fertilized chicken embryos that trigger the production of various drugs rather than the protein ovalbumin, which normally makes up roughly 54 percent of egg whites. The researchers screened the resultant cockerels for one that produced the new gene in its semen. They then bred him with normal hens to produce a flock of chickens that carried the inserted gene thereby producing medicines in their egg’s whites.m
Tests of the flocks’ eggs showed that they could produce either miR24–a monoclonal antibody used in treating melanoma–or interferon b-1a–an immune system protein used against multiple sclerosis, among other things–depending on which gene was inserted. The chickens produce 15 to 50 micrograms per milliliter of egg white, the researchers found, and though this is not as efficient as the expression of ovalbumin, it is efficient enough to allow for subsequent purification into therapeutic drugs. “We would expect the transgene not to be as efficient as the endogenous gene it was based on as only some of the regulatory elements were used and the transgene may be inserted in the chromosome at a position that does not favor anywhere near maximal expression,” notes Roslin’s Adrian Sherman, who also participated in the research. “I’m sure there is potential for improvement.”
Chicken eggs may prove a better way to producepharmaceuticals than other genetically modified products (such as goat milk) that have been previously explored. Chickens are easy to raise, produce numerous eggs, and are cheap to keep. And, after raising five generations of the modified birds, the researchers have observed no adverse health effects, according to the paper published online January 15 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA.
Even though the therapeutic proteins worked as intended during in vitro assays, it will be years before the process is ready to be used to produce drugs for human consumption, researchers say. Roslin’s chickens join a similar effort using stem cells developed by Origen Therapeutics. Regardless of which “biofactory” delivers drugs first, a new medicinal use for the venerable egg is now apparent.
‘Biosolids’ is sewage sludge that has been flushed down toilets and includes waste, chemicals, microplastics, heavy metals and more, and it is being used as fertilizer on American farmlands. The EPA estimates more than 2.4 million tons of biosolids are applied to land annually as fertilizer on farms, pastures, parks, home gardens, and other lands. A group of farmers and ranchers whose livelihoods and health were decimated after PFAS-laden biosolids from neighboring properties leached onto their land have filed a lawsuit against the US Environmental Protection Agency. PFAS are known as “forever chemicals” because they do not readily break down in the environment and they bioaccumulate in our bodies and biomagnify in the food chain. Under the Clean Water Act, the EPA is required to identify toxic pollutants in biosolids and adopt regulations to prevent harm to human health or the environment, but it has failed to do so.
Dr. Kaufman has a video about how you can avoid biosolid pollution. Dr. Kaufman will be a speaker at G. Edward Griffin’s Red Pill Expo this weekend, June 15 and 16 in Rapid City, South Dakota. You can watch all of the Red Pill Expo speakers from the comfort of your home online by clicking on this link: https://redpilluniversity.org/expo-homepage/
In the video, Dr. Kaufman discusses how biosolids are poisoning our food supply (and ruining your health); How farmers have been tricked into using a “cost-effective,” yet toxic, fertilizer without knowing it; And how you can evade this synthetic pollutant and its dangerous effects once and for all.
.Washington, DC — Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) faces a federal lawsuit over its failure to prevent toxic per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in biosolid fertilizers from contaminating farmlands, livestock, crops, and water supplies. Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) filed the lawsuit on behalf of a group of farmers and ranchers whose livelihoods and health were decimated after PFAS-laden biosolids from neighboring properties leached onto their land.
Biosolids is a term used to refer to sewage sludge. EPA estimates more than 2.4 million tons are applied to land annually as fertilizer on farms, pastures, parks, home gardens, and other lands. Biosolids are made from both municipal and industrial waste, and although they are treated to remove pathogens and some other materials, PFAS are not removed during treatment and EPA does not currently limit the amount of PFAS they can contain.
PFAS are known as “forever chemicals” because they do not readily break down in the environment and they bioaccumulate in our bodies and biomagnify in the food chain. When biosolids containing PFAS are land-applied, these dangerous chemicals leach into soil and ground water, and are then taken up by plants, which are then consumed by humans, livestock, and wildlife.
Under the Clean Water Act, EPA is required to identify toxic pollutants in biosolids and adopt regulations to prevent harm to human health or the environment. However, in the more than 35 years this law has been on the books, EPA has only promulgated nine sewage sludge regulations for land application despite having identified more than 350 pollutants, including at least 10 PFAS in biosolids for which, in PEER’s view, there is sufficient scientific evidence to regulate.
“EPA is avoiding its longstanding legal responsibility to protect our health and environment from PFAS in biosolids,” stated PEER Science Policy Director Kyla Bennett, a scientist and attorney formerly with EPA. “It is unconscionable that EPA has allowed these toxic chemicals to threaten our nation’s food and water supply.”
The plaintiffs in this case are just a few of the many farmers across the country grappling with agricultural contamination calamities linked to biosolids. Moreover, each subsequent application of biosolids increases the PFAS levels in soils and waters, thereby exacerbating existing problems.
In PEER’s discussions with EPA staff following the filing of its Notice of Intent to Sue this February, it became clear that the agency has no definitive timeline for regulatory action and that the scope of its current efforts would be inadequate. PEER believes that litigation is the only avenue for establishing a concrete and expeditious timeline for stemming what is becoming a threat to America’s food security.
“PFAS poisoning of farmlands is fast becoming a national agricultural emergency,” added PEER Staff Counsel Laura Dumais. “Farmers whose lands have been decimated by biosolids consistently ask, ‘why does EPA allow this?’ And they’re absolutely right. EPA needs to act immediately to protect farmers and our food supply from this toxic mess.”
Since the plaintiffs filed their notice of intent to sue EPA, several other groups have submitted their own notices of intent and are preparing to join the suit.
We all know the problems of the modern factory farming system. But, as bad as things are, they’re about to get even worse. New technologies are coming online that threaten to upend our understanding of food altogether. Technologies that could, ultimately, begin altering the human species itself. This is The Future of Food on The Corbett Report.
Video player not working? Use these links to watch it somewhere else!
If it is true that “you are what you eat,” as the old adage has it, then what does that make us?
As consumers of heavily processed, chemically treated, GMO-infested gunk, we in the modern, developed world have solved the problem of hunger that plagued our forebears since time immemorial by handing our food sovereignty over to a handful of corporate conglomerates.
The result of this handover has been the creation of a factory farming system in which genetically engineered crops are doused in glyphosate and livestock are herded into tiny pens where they live their entire lives in fetid squalor, pumped up with antibiotics and growth hormones until they are slaughtered and shipped off to the supermarkets and fast food chains.
There are plenty of documentaries and exposés detailing the dangers of this industrial farming system that we find ourselves beholden to. Any number of activists ringing the alarm about these problems. Numerous campaigns and marches organized to raise awareness about these issues.
Yet still, nation after nation gets fatter and sicker as traditional diets based on fresh produce sourced from local farmers are displaced by the fast food pink slime sourced from the industrial farms of the Big Food oligopoly.
But, as bad as things may be, they’re about to get even worse. As crisis after crisis disrupts the food supply, the “solution” to these problems has already been prepared.
New technologies are coming online that threaten to upend our understanding of food altogether. Technologies that could, ultimately, begin altering the human species itself.
This is your guide to The Future of Food. You are watching The Corbett Report.
Food As A Weapon
So what is food, anyway?
To a normal human being whose head is screwed on straight, that sounds like a dumb question. Food is fuel for the body, obviously.
To read the rest of the transcript, go to the source: https://corbettreport.com/future-of-food/
Cows Do NOT Cause ‘Climate Change,’ Top Study Confirms
Frank Bergman12 Comments
A bombshell new study has debunked the globalist narrative that emissions from cows are causing “climate change” while proving that cattle herds actually lower methane gas levels in the atmosphere.
Bill Gates is also pushing for cows to be genetically “modified” to advance this agenda.
The additives seek to reduce the amount of methane emissions coming out of the animal.
In Ireland, dairy farmers were looking at possibly having to kill a lot of healthy cattle in order to comply with the WEF’s “Net Zero” emission reduction targets.
Dr. Vaughn Holder, research project manager for beef nutrition at Alltech, and Dr. Betsey Boughton, director of agroecology at Archbold, studied the impacts that cattle production has on the ecosystem on a wetlands pasture at Buck Island Ranch.
The ranch is about 150 miles northwest of Miami, Florida.
The researchers found that 19%-30% of methane emissions were from the cattle.
However, the rest of the methane was from the wetland soils.
If the cows are removed, it actually increases the amount of methane the wetland ecosystems give off, the research shows.
Globalists argue that methane is more potent in terms of “greenhouse warming” than carbon dioxide.
So reducing methane can have a more immediate impact on warming than reducing carbon dioxide, according to the study.
Cattle emissions are often demonized in a similar way to fossil fuel emissions, the researchers note.
When we burn fossil fuels, the emissions go into the air. So eliminating a coal-fired power plant, for example, removes an emissions source, which produces a drop in emissions.
“There is a far more complex process in agriculture than it is in fossil fuel systems,” Holder said.
Ruminants, as they’re called, which includes cattle and sheep, have a large chamber in front of their stomach that acts as a fermentation factory.
Inside are bacteria, yeasts, fungi, and other microorganisms that help the animals digest grasses that humans can’t.
Methane is a natural waste product of that process.
In a series of videos on the Buck Island research, Holder explains that cattle take a lot of plants humans can’t eat.
The cows turn them into edible proteins humans can consume, increasing global food security.
WATCH:
The animals also consume a lot of food byproducts that can’t be used for human consumption.
For example, orange pulp used in orange juice production can be fed to livestock.
Those byproducts can be used in composting, but composting increases emissions five times more than feeding it to dairy cows, Holder said.
If byproducts are disposed of in landfills, the emissions go up 50 times over feeding it to dairy cows.
It is possible to put additives in the cows’ diet to inhibit that methane production, but at about 30% inhibition, Holder explained, you start to see negative effects.
There are some viable strategies to reduce emissions with additives, but that can only go so far.
Additionally, cattle are part of a carbon cycle.
If studies only model the emissions coming from the animal, the rest of the ecosystem is being ignored, Holder said.
The study notes that the ecosystem is absorbing carbon as a result of the animals being on the land.
The research alliance between Archbold and Alltech is increasing their understanding of this process, Dr. Holder explained.
“We weren’t looking at food production from an ecosystem standpoint before we came together with Betsey’s [Boughton] group,” Holder said.
“So it really has adjusted our perspective on how big we need to be looking at these systems in order to get this right.”
When cattle graze on land, the plants prioritize root growth over the plant matter above the surface.
The deeper the roots, the more plants sequester carbon in the soil through the photosynthesis process.
Grazing also removes grasses from a pasture, reducing the dead plant matter that falls into the soil and decomposes, which also produces greenhouse gasses.
“It’s a natural process,” Dr. Boughton said.
“We’re not saying that’s bad. Wetlands are good.
“That’s just a natural part of a wetland.”
At the Buck Island Ranch, Boughton and her team measured the amount of greenhouse gasses emitted on a pasture that had no grazing.
They compared it to pasture that had grazing.
What they found is that cattle grazing ends up as a carbon sink, meaning there’s a net reduction in the amount of emissions from that pasture compared to pastures with no cows.
“From my perspective, it’s more of a proof-of-concept type evaluation,” Holder said.
“We’re showing that we need to be looking at more than just emissions if we want to have a decent idea what’s happening in those ecosystems and what the effects are on global warming or food security or whatever it might be.”
There’s a lot of carbon locked up in the soil, he said.
The exact impact of removing grazing from those lands isn’t fully understood.
“It’s sort of an unintended consequence if we pull animals off the land and we don’t know what effect the next land use is going to have on those carbon stocks,” Holder said.
The livestock industry has long held that it’s being unfairly demonized in the effort to stop “climate change.”
The Alltech-Archbold research is showing that farmers are correct and the globalist narrative is nothing more than a hoax.
This news comes after a recent peer-reviewed study provided conclusive scientific evidence proving that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in Earth’s atmosphere cannot cause “global warming.”
Dr. Jan Kubicki led a group of world-renowned Polish scientists to study the impact of increases in CO2 emissions on the Earth’s global temperatures.
However, not only did they find that higher levels of CO2 made no difference, but they also proved that it simply isn’t possible for increases in carbon dioxide to cause temperatures to rise.
Kubicki and his team recently published three papers which all conclude that Earth’s atmosphere is already “saturated” with carbon dioxide.
This saturation means that, even at greatly increased levels of CO2, the “greenhouse gas” will not cause temperatures to rise.
The United Nations’ World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros declared that farming accounts for 30% of greenhouse gas emissions and that the world needs to shift to plant-based diets. He said that that 130 countries have signed the COPD 28 Declaration on Climate and Health to implement bad policies. UN globalists consider beneficial carbon dioxide toxic and now say that methane is also toxic, and they are targeting rice farming for destruction. Half the world gets 60% of their calories and nutrition from rice.
The UN claims that starvation was caused from the COVID pandemic, but the cause was the lockdowns. There has been a 40% average increase in global mortality following the COVID shots. The UN should be rejected rather than trusted.
Alex Jones said that when populations in the third world spend half of its money on food and energy, there is civil unrest; when 60% or more is spent on food and energy, the country is set for destruction. Most of the world is now spending more than 50% off its income on food and energy. He said that our food is soaked in glyphosate and that most breast cancer is caused by this herbicide poison. US mayors are selling out the American public by endorsing UN programs. Dr. Peter McCullough says authorities are doing mass PCR testing on animals and that the Bird Flu is an artificial crisis used for mass culling of poultry that will lead to food shortages. He said it will drive fear going into US elections.
.
John Williams explains how the UN WHO policies will affect the availability and cost of meat in the US. Ranchers are being pushed out of business and meat will become scarce, which will lead to skyrocketing prices. Some people will turn to “plant-based meat” that will cost a fraction of the price of meat. He explained that the business model for plant-based food as restaurants across the US are closing. New treaties are being introduced to change food production. Food quality is likely to drop in the US.
Dark matter mysteries unraveled by researchers in underground South Dakota mine
Lindsey Valich|Senior Communications Officer, Science and Engineering
July 7, 2022
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.”
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.
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 Bodek, Aran 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.
