Their Scam is Obvious Now

Why is this the greatest scam in history?

To begin we have the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) who are the Government department responsible for this and they were caught out falsifying the conclusions of renowned climate scientists claiming they couldn’t find evidence of global warming and when they submitted their findings to the IPCC their conclusions suddenly found evidence of global warming. This happened several times with several different scientists and organisations and they told the IPCC to take these fraudulent documents down or take their amendments out and give their true conclusions, they refused so a scientist threatened High Court action. When he began his action he was soon joined by many other scientists and organisations and basically the IPCC were falsifying the research and the data submitted by the scientists; suddenly these reputable scientists and organisations stopped receiving Government funding and many others began receiving it and the common denominator was all those in receipt of Government funded were giving the conclusions the Government wanted.

Next we have the media who never tell the truth and always embellish and there are seven major news agencies in the world and they keep pushing the green agenda and when the newspapers, TV, and magazines get their news from these agencies they automatically follow suit and embellish the already embellished news and push the green agenda.

Now we have the Pope and I am neither catholic or religious but when the Pope says it is all tosh even I sit up and take notice and when he claims it is a way of taxing most of the world for decades it is at least worth checking out and looking into it so like many others, I did.
How many people noticed claimed green taxes, taxes on fuels, taxes on gas and electricity in the form of both direct and indirect taxation and VAT was one in the UK and where does this money go? Straight into the Government general coffers.

If we actually look at their alleged green claims we can see they never add up and if we look at cars and see their tax was based upon emissions and to a point many would expect that all cars would be taxed upon their TOTAL emissions but they weren’t they were taxed solely upon their CO2 emissions and this is problematic. They taxed upon CO2 as it was the cheapest to implement and would yield the most financial returns, so look at this, the most money for paying the least money out, ring any bells.
This only hits the private motorist as any business can get fuel cards and with a fuel card you never pay the pole price for fuel as you pay the daily average price so if you fill up on the motorway advertising fuel at £2 a litre and the country average for that day is £1.65 then you only pay £1.65. You can then reclaim the VAT on this every quarter (3 months) and offset the rest of this cost annually against tax as it is a legitimate business expense and you can reclaim your business expenses by adding up your expenses and offsetting against your profits.
Now we have the real contradictions as emissions are all lumped under one banner and applied to all vehicles but petrol and diesel engines put out different emissions so you cannot compare their emissions as they are totally different and like comparing apples with bananas. In most cases emissions of oxides of nitrogen are more damaging to human beings and the planet than CO2 is as this is a natural feed for trees and bushes which devour it and produce nice oxygen as do most plants so why tax CO2 as it has no scientific or logical sense.
This gets worse as the latest phenomenon is the laziest of the lazy and is called the inverse pyramid scam as it takes one document and other people write an article based solely upon reading this document and they never do any research themselves or even try to check the validity of such documents and then try passing them off as credible research. If you get one incorrect report and two articles are written based solely upon this incorrect and potentially fraudulent report then you have three incorrect reports and if they all spawn two reports based upon them then this number doubles. Why is this done? In reality it is always down to money and in this case Government funding and many organisations wanting to keep their snouts firmly in the taxpayer funded trough and keep most of the money themselves for their profits and nice business expenses for all concerned.

Let’s put this into context; one company spends the money and sends a team of scientists to the poles and this is expensive as they have to provide accommodation is severely low temperatures, food and other essential supplies to allow them to remain there and generally it has to be transported in the most expensive way, flying. Now we have one organisation who thinks sod this expense as we will get someone to read this report and give their opinions and this is one individual then carefully words it and types it up and passes it off as legitimate research and get paid for it. Now the crux of the matter as in such cases one piece of legitimate research will spawn in excess of 50 such reports passed off as credible research when no research had taken place and this is the back slapping and mutual adoration of holding other in high esteem and collecting the cash, the taxpayer cash.

NOW YOU’RE BEING GREENWASHED.
You will submit to the agenda we cannot prove or disprove.
You will be a good submissive slave and give us your money

Greenwashing works by telling the same lie long enough and loud enough to people will believe it so why is this different? Because this is not a country or continent scam it is a worldwide scam and many people pander to it and we have the recycle and reuse message and sites such as Vinted pop up and make money from it and it is generally the rich who set these sites up and introduce other companies such as the warehouses and couriers for example. How many companies are showing their green credentials and using them to brainwash people into using them over their competitors.

Greenhouse gases are always referred to so what are they and how do they work? Essentially they are a group of gasses which surround the earth and shield it from something called radiant heat which is heat emitted by infra red radiation and heats anything up which can absorb IR radiation and water is the largest absorber of IR.
If we refer to alleged scientific claims they claim to be using data from 1750 and this gives details of both nitrogen and oxygen levels measured in Parts Per Million so how did they do this? Records show they couldn’t do this until the early 1900’s and exactly when is open to interpretation so how did they do this in 1750 and using what equipment? Basically they couldn’t and didn’t. This type of measurement came about because of the Victorian Industrial Revolution and was designed to measure the environment and air quality and this is proven by the occupation of Chimney Watcher which was a legitimate occupation of Victorian England. Chimney watchers had the job of watching chimneys in industrial areas and monitoring their emissions for both type and quantity and if they could measure nitrogen and oxygen levels in PPM (parts per million) in 1750 then why did they need chimney watchers when they could measure the emissions in PPM and more interestingly the measurement parts per million (PPM) didn’t come into popular use until 1952 so more contradictions. If we look at this measurement it is not recognised anywhere so is not a truly defined measurement such as Celsius for heat or Pascals or Pounds Per Square Inch for pressure as it is only known in scientific and engineering circles and is called a Term of Notation and a term of Notation is defined as a pseudo term or a term with no real meaning. It’s like the term “a gnats cod” when measuring as it means nothing whereas a Pascal, PSI, or Celsius is internationally recognised and means exactly the same thing wherever in the world you are so why use such terms if they are not designed to be vague and meaningless.

Now we have something dating back to the 1750’s which only one scientist had read and cannot be corroborated and proven or disproven which measures things which couldn’t be measured for another 200 years using vague and meaningless terms passed off as legitimate and they expect people to buy this drivel and tosh? Actually many more aren’t buying it.

What is its intended goal?

Take away peoples choices and you take back more control of the people and they bend more towards your will and if you take away their private transport you get the double edged sword of monitoring people at all levels. You go on a train or bus and in most cases you pay upfront and often use a credit or debit or other card and this transaction is monitored and logged so those monitoring know where you came from and travelled to at what date and time and as most forms of public transport have cameras they can confirm it was you who travelled. When they know where you came from and went to they can use CCTV at both ends to monitor you, perhaps you left home and were caught on a Council camera at the end of your street and then went into a local coffee shop because you were early and they caught you on their CCTV entering and leaving and you were caught on the bus or train station cameras. Get on the bus or train and again you are caught on camera and again at the other end on the train or bus station cameras and many times during your onward journey and if you take a taxi they will likely have CCTV as will your intended destination.
From this information they can nearly monitor you and most activities and the watchers are watching you and from this they can glean other information such as the time it takes you to walk from the coffee shop to the station and from the destination station to your final destination. From this they can deduce whether you are a fast or slow walker and estimate times it would take you to get there and provide useful (in their eyes) that you might of committed a crime and you become a suspect on no evidence other than someone or an algorithm’s opinions.

Money is another motive and you can partially reset something such as cars and lorries and you begin with introducing a new power source called electricity to cars and you change your spoken terms from vehicle emissions to tailpipe emissions and hope people don’t notice; but people did notice and this became yet another contradiction in their hype and agenda. This is a two pronged attack as vehicles in real terms have never been cheaper thanks to competition and world manufacturing as you can source components from all over the world and fit more things as standard to your vehicles to give them an edge over your competition so how many components are sourced from countries with the cheapest overheads and labour.
Electric cars have many issues and are actually the dirtiest of all vehicles and in the only survey done the cleanest vehicles were actually classic vehicles as they have worked their lives and now often do few miles and often not in rush hours and use the highest quantities of recycled or remanufactured parts. Next was the traditional 4X4 which are real 4X4’s and not the faux 4X4’s such as SUV’s as they are merely jacked up cars and have little to no off road ability and the traditional 4X4’s are the diesel powered types so why is this. Traditional 4X4’s are heavily built with low powered high torque engines which rarely rev highly and never or rarely produce full emissions as they don’t need to and generally they have a life exceeding 20 years and they are built of standard steels which consume less power to press than the carbon steel panels of a super mini and this is why a large 4X4 only consumes 10% more energy to manufacture than a supermini. In the life of a traditional 4X4 you would have to build 3 or 4 superminis so you are producing much more emissions by producing superminis so let’s ignore this fact as it doesn’t fit the current agenda so look away folks; nothing to see here. When it comes to recycling the plain mild steel of a traditional 4X4 only consumes 20% of the power needed to recycle a carbon steel supermini body shell and when we factor in the fact a supermini tyres last around 17,000 – 20.000 miles and the large 4X4 tyres cost twice as much to make in emissions terms but last between 60,000 – 100,000 miles you are replacing 3 – 5 sets of supermini tyres to every set of 4X4 tyres and the facts speak volumes so are never mentioned and when pressed the facts are spun (lies) to try to give a different opinion to the real facts.

Put this into perspective and most battery cars now cost more to run than a diesel and this fact is not lost on industry and when we factor in battery life being short and needing replacing every 70 – 80,000 miles at a cost of £4000-£11,000 then they aren’t viable when most modern diesels will last over 300,000 miles without major issues why would people pay twice as much for a car which is inherently more unreliable. I did exceptional mileages at 50 – 80,000 miles per year and a full tank off diesel lasted around 700miles and it took less than 5 minutes to refuel and be on my way to my next appointment, if I had an electric car I worked out it would add an extra 3-4 hours to my 12 hour day while it recharged and that assumed I could get straight onto a super charger for rapid charging and at my local motorway services they have many chargers and you can’t get on them so this adds extra queuing time and makes you less productive than other countries or it increases your costs or both. Why do battery cars cost twice as much as petrol or diesel cars?

Now yet another issue and this is again cost as electric cars cost more to buy them petrol’s or diesels and at twice the price means many people cannot afford to buy them and certainly cannot afford them so instantly you take many vehicles off the road and you can claim it’s the green agenda while penalising the elderly, inform and disabled people and potentially killing them off. You force people back onto public transport and you can wholly monitor them nearly every time they are outside in the public.
Now for the real killer????? Currently you can get a car which runs on diesel, petrol, electric and various gas mixtures and this includes injecting gases into diesel so note the fact that everyone has a choice and if there is a carbon fuel shortage they hike the price, so why are they trying to take away peoples choices. Put this into some form of context and you get everyone onto electric cars, run their homes, heating and everything else from electricity and all you have to control is the electricity and the EU demonstrate this admirably with both their gas and electricity super grids as they were designed from the outset to be something which is weaponised for the purposes of controlling a continent. If one country doesn’t comply with the EU demands and they refuse to comply you simply shut off their gas and electricity and if people on medical devices die because of it you merely blame the individual countries Government and nicely deflect the blame to the countries Government.

Now we can understand why the EU wanted to close the UK and other member states coal mining industries and how they contrived the way to do this by creating panic and fear by claiming the world would self destruct if we keep using coal and to date NOBODY can corroborate these claims with actual evidence.

Let us look further and we note the controversy surrounding the huge quantities of raw sewage escaping directly into water courses, rivers, and the sea while the Government are extolling the virtues of going green and saving the planet for our children; fine rhetoric but the actions don’t match the claims. Why is this escaping? If we were to do an oil change on our car and half found its way into the local river a full investigation would be launched and we would be prosecuted so why aren’t they and again we are paying them to treat our sewage so why are they allowed to breach the contract and get away with it? If you paid a garage to service your car and found they only dropped the oil and changed the oil filter and charged you for a full service you would have recourse to law, so why are water companies protected. You pay the water company to provide a service and they aren’t providing it so a clear case of breach of contract and is irrefutable.

Who makes money from green energy? Who owns the land these wind turbines sit on and they are all wealthy people and the scam works to keep them wealthy and the general population pays for their wealth and it works as follows. Company sets up wind turbines and gets planning permission and they pay the landowner an annual rent for the ground and this is for the long term and generally 20-25 years and often with a small percentage of the energy companies profits from the sale of their electricity back to the grid. Electricity Company goes bust after 2 years and has a 25 year contract which is ring fenced by the taxpayer and for the next 23 years the landowner gets his annual rents paid for the taxpayer so they always get their money and the taxpayer always pays it.

Most of the components for a wind turbine are made abroad and only the turbine blades were made on the Isle of Wight but the company went bust so now many come from central Spain so the Spanish profit from the blades and the gearboxes are made in Germany using knock off British technologies. Now both these major components have to be shipped and this is by road and as each blade must be individually shipped it means three lorry trips from central Spain for the blades and a trip from Germany for the gearbox and with so many other parts coming from around the globe their countries benefit. What do the UK get? Sometimes we build the foundations and the towers so in reality very little but with the gearboxes igniting and setting fire to the wind turbines we do get the extortionate bill for the damage and that for the fire brigade attending these incidents and being able to do nothing.
Long term reports taken from actual output shows they are anything but green as they use three to four times the energy to build than they save and around the same in emissions, so they aren’t even carbon neutral’ who owns below the seas surface? Yes the monarch and the Queen made Billions from the turbines in the sea.

Where does this leave us? As consumers many of our goods come from abroad and if we sell large companies large lorries, vans and cars at twice the price of diesel and petrol powered models then we double this company budget and they have to pass this cost onto the consumer. If we have a shortage of battery chargers and queuing at the available chargers we can lengthen the working day and decrease the logistics efficiencies and drivers do much less work in a shift which means employing more drivers and buying more vehicles and this increases the costs again and these are also passed onto the consumers. This will often lean to two lorries being used to complete a journey which will be done in relays.

At the same time as banging their agenda drum the UK are issuing record numbers of licenses for oil and gas drilling and fracking so where is their green agenda now? Its suddenly disappeared when there are profits to be made by the few and the majority pay for these profits. As we can see nothing about the green agenda quite marries up and the green agenda is unproven and the facts speak for themselves, they don’t exist.

This backs up the above and expands upon it.

https://rumble.com/v1o1pq2-professor-ian-plimer-renowned-australian-geologist-discusses-real-science-b.html