“Gates now thinks scientific innovation will curb any threats — real and perceived — to the planet’s climate and it’s instead time for a “strategic pivot” away from focusing on limiting rising temperatures to fighting poverty and preventing disease.”
To paraphrase Willie Sutton – disease is where the money is.
Bill Gates, chair of the Gates Foundation, during the Bloomberg Philanthropies 2025 Global Business Forum in New York, US, on Wednesday, Sept. 24, 2025. The forum will bring together heads of state, CEOs, and global leaders to chart what comes next for global cooperation and how to deliver real-world impact. Photographer: Michael Nagle/Bloomberg
Why are people panicking about the weather? Climate doomer Bill Gates thinks everyone should just calm down. He believes “climate change” is a serious problem but it won’t be the end of humanity as we know it, a 17-page memo released Tuesday by the billionaire reveals.
Gates now thinks scientific innovation will curb any threats — real and perceived — to the planet’s climate and it’s instead time for a “strategic pivot” away from focusing on limiting rising temperatures to fighting poverty and preventing disease.
The 70-year-old said in the memo the world’s primary goal should now work to prevent suffering, particularly for those in the toughest conditions in the world’s poorest countries.
AP reports if given a choice between eradicating malaria and a tenth of a degree increase in warming, Gates told reporters, “I’ll let the temperature go up 0.1 degree to get rid of malaria. People don’t understand the suffering that exists today.”
The Microsoft co-founder wrote his 17-page memo – as seen by AP – hoping to have an impact on next month’s U.N. climate change conference in Brazil.
He’s urging world leaders to ask whether the little money designated for climate is being spent on the “right things,” AP notes, in an apparent back flip from all his past warnings on the future of the planet.
But as former NYU professor Michael Rectenwald has explained:
Everything evil under the sun is deemed causally connected to climate change, including war and genocide, terrorism, poverty, inequality, inclusion, the condition of women, and population growth.
“Climate change” functions as a catch-all phrase for sequestering the world’s problems under a single, global crisis rubric. As such, it is believed, a global governance system must be put in place to address it.
The economics of climate change catastrophism involve global centralized planning and interventionism on a scale hitherto unexampled.
The real crisis in America has nothing to do with climate, capitalism, cattle, coal, or combustion. The real crisis in America has everything to do with the monstrosity known as the federal government.
According to employment numbers released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the number of people employed by federal, state, and local governments in the United States has now surpassed 23 million.
For several years now, and especially since the beginning of the COVID-19 “pandemic” fiasco, we have been told that the world needs a “great reset.” World Economic Forum (WEF) executive chairman Klaus Schwab famously said in June of 2020: “The COVID- 19 crisis has shown us that our old systems are not fit any more for the 21st century. In short, we need a great reset.”
He challenged the world to “act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions.” He called for every county, “from the United States to China,” and every industry, “from oil and gas to tech,” to be transformed. The need of the world is a “‘Great Reset’ of capitalism.” This will require “stronger and more effective governments” to “implement long-overdue reforms that promote more equitable outcomes,” make “large-scale spending programs” to “advance shared goals, such as equality and sustainability,” and “harness the innovations of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to support the public good, especially by addressing health and social challenges.”
When you dig a little deeper, you find that the “great reset” of capitalism includes such nefarious things as reducing global population, medical tyranny, drastic and detrimental reductions in carbon emissions, the imposition of carbon taxes, and the gradual “transition away” from meat, fossil fuels, coal, and the internal combustion engine — all in the name of combating climate change and saving the planet from humans.
In the United States, there is talk of the need for “stakeholder capitalism,” “smart cities,” “build back better,” and a “green new deal.” On the eve of the recent UN Climate Conference (COP28), the White House referred to climate change as “the existential threat of our time.” But as former NYU professor Michael Rectenwald has explained:
Everything evil under the sun is deemed causally connected to climate change, including war and genocide, terrorism, poverty, inequality, inclusion, the condition of women, and population growth.
“Climate change” functions as a catch-all phrase for sequestering the world’s problems under a single, global crisis rubric. As such, it is believed, a global governance system must be put in place to address it.
The economics of climate change catastrophism involve global centralized planning and interventionism on a scale hitherto unexampled.
The real crisis
The real crisis in America has nothing to do with climate, capitalism, cattle, coal, or combustion. The real crisis in America has everything to do with the monstrosity known as the federal government.
According to employment numbers released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the number of people employed by federal, state, and local governments in the United States has now surpassed 23 million. In 2023, government at all levels added an average of 56,000 jobs per month. Leading the way, of course, is the federal government, which contains hundreds of agencies, bureaus, corporations, commissions, administrations, authorities, offices, and boards organized under 15 departments. There is also the alphabet soup of independent agencies of the federal government (EPA, SEC, FTC, etc.) and the federal corporations (TVA, CPB, Amtrak, etc.). According to a report on the federal workforce by the Congressional Research Service, over 2.1 million federal civilian employees work for the federal government. And this doesn’t include the Postal Service (about 580,000 people) or the legislative and judicial branches (about 64,000 people). And then there are the 1.4 million active-duty uniformed military personnel spread out all over the world.
It wasn’t that long ago (1987) that the entire budget of the federal government was “only” a trillion dollars. It didn’t reach the $2 trillion mark until 2002. For fiscal year 2024 (Oct. 1, 2022, to Sept. 30, 2024), President Biden’s proposed federal budget is a whopping $6.9 trillion.
The free market is what the name implies, a voluntary social and economic arrangement. 1984 was not about life in a free society. Turning problems of any nature over to an organization founded on theft, violence, and lies — government as it exists — should give anyone reason to reject the idea out of hand.
To paraphrase Thomas Paine, in the name of saving the planet freedom is being hunted “round the world.”
Let’s get sober. Two plus two really does equal four, and empirical science — which deals with testable hypotheses and outcomes — is never settled. An example of an empirical science that is never settled is climatology, the dictionary definition of which is the scientific study of climate.
Yet not all science is empirical. Scientific conclusions and everyday observations obey certain axioms, or laws, that have proved favorable to understanding reality. These laws had to be discovered, and in this respect could be considered the science of correct reasoning. For more on this topic see Hazlitt’s Thinking as a Science, W. Stanley Jevons Elementary Lessons in Logic, or go to the original source in Aristotle. You might also find deliverance in my article “Too Many Economic ‘Truths’ Are Built on Fallacies.”
Let’s go to court
In dealing with any issue it often helps to think like a defense attorney. The following is from my book, Write like they’re your last words. The scene is a courtroom where a man is being tried for murdering his girlfriend, taken from an old movie.
The prosecution put a male witness on the stand who testified he had sometimes heard the accused and his girlfriend exchanging heated words.
“So, are you saying the accused had woman troubles?” the prosecutor summarized.
“I think that’s fair to say.”
“Thank you.”
He turned to the defense attorney. “Your witness.”
The defense lawyer approached the witness and hit him square on the nose:
“Have you ever murdered a woman?”
“No! Of course not!”
“Have you ever had woman troubles?”
“Yes.”
“Have you ever known a man who didn’t have woman troubles?”
“No.”
“Thank you. That’s all.”
Like the prosecution in the scene above, anyone with a weak argument might slip a fallacy into the debate to make their point.
What about the priests of climate change? The argument they want us to accept runs something like this:
Certain human activities are making our climate life-threatening.
Since we need a favorable climate to sustain life these activities should be eliminated.
Therefore, governments, which have the power to control human behavior, should mitigate and ultimately eliminate the aforementioned activities.
How would you go about “trying” this syllogism in court?
CBDCs will allow central banks to impose deeply negative interest rates, which are just a euphemism for a tax on saving money.
Suppose governments impose lockdowns again for flu season, so-called “climate change,” or whatever pretext they find convenient. CBDCs could be programmed to work only in a geographic area, and the government could deny your payments if you travel more than a mile from your home during a lockdown.
It’s important to remember the wise words of Ron Paul:
“What none of them (politicians) will admit is that the market is more powerful than the central banks and all the economic planners put together. Although it may take time, the market always wins.”
There’s an excellent chance governments worldwide will soon force their citizens to use central bank digital currencies (CBDCs).
CBDCs enable all sorts of horrible, totalitarian things.
They allow governments to track and control every penny you earn, save, and spend. They are a powerful tool for politicians to confiscate and redistribute wealth as they see fit.
CBDCs will allow central banks to impose deeply negative interest rates, which are just a euphemism for a tax on saving money.
Governments could program CBDCs to have an expiration date—like some airline frequent flyer miles—forcing people to spend them, for example, before the end of the month when they’d become worthless.
CBDCs will enable devious social engineering by allowing governments to punish and reward people in ways they previously couldn’t.
Suppose governments impose lockdowns again for flu season, so-called “climate change,” or whatever pretext they find convenient. CBDCs could be programmed to work only in a geographic area, and the government could deny your payments if you travel more than a mile from your home during a lockdown.
Suppose the people in charge want to encourage people to take a pharmaceutical product or some other poison. With CBDCs, they could deposit money into the accounts of those who complied and deduct it from those who didn’t.
Governments and large corporations will undoubtedly pair CBDCs with a social credit system.
Did you commit a thought crime on social media? Or perhaps you read too many politically incorrect articles online? Did you exceed your monthly meat consumption allowance? Then, expect some financial punishment thanks to the CBDCs.
CBDCs are, without a doubt, an instrument of enslavement. They represent a quantum leap backward in human freedom.
Unfortunately, they’re coming soon.
Governments will probably mandate CBDCs as the “solution” when the next real or contrived crisis hits—which is likely not far off.
June headlines: “Germany is facing permanent drought.” August headlines after a rainy summer: “Rain is no help against drought.” December headlines after still more rain: “There is no more drought.”
June headlines: “Germany is facing permanent drought.” August headlines after a rainy summer: “Rain is no help against drought.” December headlines after still more rain: “There is no more drought.”
In the past year, Germans have had to read a great deal about how carbon dioxide-induced drought is on the verge of changing life forever in the Federal Republic.
Drought, forest fires, dry soil – for those of us in Central Europe, this was unheard of for a long time. How can we get by with the challenges of climate change in the future?
Dry fields, soil and meadows – not good news for farmers, and not for animals either. Spring is out of balance, explains Thomas Behrends, nature conservation officer at NABU Schleswig-Holstein. It was still very cold at night for a long time and the insect world has not yet been able to fully develop. Birds feed themselves and especially their young with insects and worms. When the ground becomes drier, these retreat into deeper layers of soil and no longer serve as food for the birds.
After a wet spring, things looked good for the soil in Germany. But since May, there has been no rain, especially in the northeast. Researchers suspect a connection with climate change.
June remained relatively dry, but in July it started to rain, a phenomenon to which our highly observant and conscientious journalists remained initially oblivious, even though it was happening directly outside their windows. Thus the drought drumbeat continued, and regional news service hessenschau could still write on 13 July 2023 about “How Hessen is preparing for even more heat and drought”:
Water shortages, uncertain harvests – and extreme heat stress in some cities: The effects of climate change are causing people problems and forcing politicians to take action.
Heavy rainfall and heatwaves – most districts and cities in northern Germany fear an increase in these two weather events. This is the result of joint research by NDR, BR, WDR and CORRECTIV, in which all 400 districts and independent cities in Germany were asked what consequences of climate change they fear for their region and how they are preparing for them.
The extremely inconvenient rain continued through August, and slowly these paint-by-numbers articles after the manner of “X bad thing, Y bad thing, Z bad thing – why these bad things are bad” began, well, to dry up. What was worse, obnoxious internet people began to ask whether we were really in any kind of drought at all. They noted that the statistics compiled by the German Weather Service showed nothing but an increase in annual precipitation since the start of record-keeping in 1881:
Not to worry! The fact-checkers soon arrived to save the establishment drought mythology with some very curious arguments. Foremost among them was a counterintuitive piece by the Deutsche Presse-Agentur which literally explained “Why the ground is getting drier despite more rain.” It appeared in major outlets like Tagesspiegel and Welt to refute those “opponents of climate protection” who had begun deriving awkward conclusions from publicly available data. The problem, our deboonkers explained, is not with total precipitation, but rather with a trend of decreasing summer precipitation specifically. This is bad because plants do a lot of their growing in summer, and summers have gotten about 5% drier. Of course plants also do a lot of their growing in spring, and springs have gotten even wetter …
“Precipitation anomaly” for spring in Germany since 1881. The dotted line marks the linear trend, showing that spring precipitation has increased an average of 12.4mm since the late 19th century, while summer precipitation has decreased 10mm over the same time period.
… but they let this fact pass in silence. Even if more rain is falling, that’s no good, because it’s getting warmer, and warmer equals drier:
Additionally, the amount of precipitation alone does not indicate soil moisture or drought, says [German Weather Service meteorologist Andreas] Brömser. He cites the rise in average temperatures since 1881 as one reason for this: “The higher the temperatures, the more the rain quickly evaporates.” The increase of 1.7 degrees Celsius recorded in Germany means around 12% more evaporation.
This is an odd argument. Evaporation does not cause moisture to disappear, because evaporated water soon returns to earth in the form of rain and snow. To the extent Germany has gotten slightly warmer, the wet periods have simply moved around, while total precipitation has increased because warm air carries more moisture.
The western elites in all their stupidity preach the danger of climate change and ignore the danger of depleted uranium.
In conclusion, we can say that the elites of Europe and the West currently in power in all their stupidity preach the danger of climate change and ignore the danger of depleted uranium, dismissing it as not dangerous to public health, while scientists prove that it can be.
In March 2023 the UK and in September 2023, the US, delivered shells filled with depleted uranium to Ukraine, or maybe they delivered it before already, we don’t know, usually when they announce something it already happened!
Depleted uranium can be used to reinforce armour-plating on tanks but is favoured for weapons because of its extreme density and ability to pierce conventional tank armour. These types of shells sharpen on impact, which further increases their ability to bore through armour, and they ignite after contact.
In September 2023 after the delivery of these shells filled with depleted uranium, the Russian Ministry of Defence stated that it carried out strikes on warehouses where Ukrainian troops stored these depleted uranium shells and UK-made long-range Storm-shadow missiles.
“Last night, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation launched a group strike with high-precision long-range air-based weapons and unmanned aerial vehicles at the storage sites of Storm-shadow cruise missiles and depleted uranium ammunition,” the ministry said in a statement back in September 2023.
Although the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency Rafael Grossi, said that there is no danger to public health in using depleted uranium, the Washington Post and other so-called quality newspapers however, said that there is a real danger to public health. The UK was the first to start deliveries of depleted uranium shells and long-range Storm-shadow missiles to Ukraine in March 2023, also ammunition with depleted uranium for the British tank Challenger 2. The US announced on 6 September 2023, that it would send depleted uranium ammunition and cluster bombs to Ukraine.
In May 2023, information emerged about a powerful explosion in one of the warehouses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces near the city of Khmelnitsky in western Ukraine. Most likely due to a rocket attack by the Russian forces, a warehouse for British uranium-filled grenades was hit. According to some reports, another warehouse containing depleted uranium ammunition was also hit by Russia in the Ternopil region.
This caused panic among the residents of Western Ukraine, but also in the borderlands of Ukraine like Poland. In the Ukrainian media information emerged about an increase in the level of gamma radiation after the destruction of both storage sites. Scientists said a fairly small dose of gamma radiation came from the depleted uranium in the ammunition; a large increase indicates the destruction of a very large number of munitions with depleted uranium, thereby increasing the level of radioactive material in the air.
In recent days, British scientist Dr. Christopher Busby, scientific secretary of the European Radiation Risk Committee, came up with more revelations, studies and reported an increase in the concentration of uranium particles in the air in the south-east of the UK. But he previously published an abstract/paper called: “Uraniumweapons being employed in Ukraine have significantly increased Uranium levels in the air in the UK”.
Apart from the obvious (the US for all intents and purposes has no strategic oil reserve), there is a hell of a lot of buying that has to occur to build those reserves up. In other words, we aren’t going to see any selling pressure hereon in from the strategic reserve but rather a whole lot of buying. We suspect that Vlad Putin is well aware of this.
Let’s cut to the chase: the next 10 years will see a repeat of 2000-2010. The outperformance may well last for a lot longer than this. The essence is that we don’t have to be concerned at all about energy related stocks underperforming the general stock market for a very long time.
We noticed lately an uptick in analysis and commentary that is questioning the climate change narrative. Pieces like this one:
Clearly this climate change narrative/ideology too shall pass like every fad, but it will take time. This is ok. It just means that we will see the fossil fuel sector (oil, gas, coal, and related services) continually outperform the S&P 500 over the next 10+ years.
Take China… It Doesn’t Care…
I assure you, China doesn’t care about the ESG nonsense. What’s interesting is China’s dependency on coal – some 64% of their electricity comes from coal.
China produces (from domestic sources) about 85% of the coal it consumes (granted, this includes both coking and thermal coal).
With respect to coal, China has two big problems, and few appreciate the magnitude of the problems.
Firstly, China only has 35 years of coal reserves at today’s consumption levels, and secondly, the grade of those reserves is deteriorating. In other words, it is taking more coal to produce the same amount of heat.
Not only this but China wants to increase coal-fired power stations by 20-30% over the next 10 years or so. Where is all this coal going to come from if the volume and quality of China’s reserves are deteriorating?
This Bloomberg article highlights the deterioration in China’s coal grades.
From the article:
China’s coal imports, including low-grade lignite, climbed to an all-time high of 44 million tons in August, while domestic production of 382 million tons was also a record for the time of year. Imports over the first eight months have nearly doubled to 306 million tons, more than the country usually takes in a whole year.
The increases in supply come as the government seeks to avoid the power shortages that have crippled the economy in recent years. China’s rush to extract more coal has also degraded the quality of its domestic output so that more fuel is needed to generate the same amount of heat.
When energy security is discussed, few pay second thought to coal (particularly in light of today’s climate change ideology). China is going to have to source an increasing amount of coal from other countries, and there is only a few they can source it from (unlike oil).
How about the US? Only 17 days left ?!
While US government shutdowns make the headlines, quietly in the background the US only has 17 days of supply left in its strategic reserve.
Apart from the obvious (the US for all intents and purposes has no strategic oil reserve), there is a hell of a lot of buying that has to occur to build those reserves up. In other words, we aren’t going to see any selling pressure hereon in from the strategic reserve but rather a whole lot of buying. We suspect that Vlad Putin is well aware of this.
Would this be an opportune time to hit back at the US? Rockets, bombs, tanks — that is the way old fashioned wars were played. Yeah, it is still how regional conflicts are played, but wars on a global scale are likely to be fought using energy as the weapon of choice.
Any thinking person (a sub-species of Homo sapiens that’s in decline but not yet endangered) would agree that the notion that an animal that’s existed in harmony with nature for over two million years could destroy the earth within fourteen years if they’re not exterminated is truly absurd.
The issues are absurdly extreme for a reason. The objective is not the achievement of the issues themselves. It is the alteration of the psyche of the populace.
We’ve all heard nonsense about cows presenting a danger to the continuance of life on earth – that methane gas from cow flatulence will bring on climate change faster than John Kerry’s jet.
Any thinking person (a sub-species of Homo sapiens that’s in decline but not yet endangered) would agree that the notion that an animal that’s existed in harmony with nature for over two million years could destroy the earth within fourteen years if they’re not exterminated is truly absurd.
And yet those whose ability to reason is on the decline are inclined to believe the claim. Presumably, these individuals are the same ones beginning to believe that men can have babies and that an individual can become something he or she is not simply by “identifying” as such.
But those of us who see the absurdity in such clearly nonsensical beliefs are disinclined to laugh as we observe that these concepts are being disseminated by globalist governments through a compliant media… and, worse, are being accepted by more than a few people.
As a case in point, recently, a publication – Natural News – did a piece entitled, “13 Nations agree to engineer global FAMINE by destroying agriculture, saying that producing food is BAD for the planet.”
In that article, they describe a conference led by US Climate Czar John Kerry, in which representatives from thirteen countries are stated to have committed to a diminished cow population worldwide to combat climate change.
Well, that conference did take place, and a topic of discussion was methane produced by cows, and thirteen attendees did agree that measures of some sort were needed.
But it is not the case that thirteen countries have enacted legislation to eliminate cows.
We might take a step back here and examine what actually occurred. In so doing, we may not only learn whether or not red meat will soon be eliminated globally; we might also gain some insight into how globalist governments seek to achieve their ends.
In most countries, the role of Minister for the Environment is a lowly ministerial position, given to a loyal party member as a token. Most Ministers of the Environment pontificate a fair bit but rarely implement significant change. So, let’s follow the thread of what has taken place.
John Kerry contacts the Environmental Ministers in a host of “lesser” countries around the world on the vague premise of “making a difference.” They’re pleased to take part, as Kerry gives them higher visibility and legitimizes their otherwise rather pointless jobs.
A conference is held at a four-star hotel somewhere for a few days. Everybody listens to the speakers wringing their hands over the dangers of climate change, and each minister tries to get their photos taken with John Kerry.
There’s very little in the text of the keynote presentation by Kerry – mostly vague comments about the dangers of methane and the need for each country to commit to making a difference.
At the end of the conference, the attendees are proud to sign a document that’s devoid of detail but says that they’re all in agreement in hoping to make a difference.
A press release is issued, showing all the ministers together, stating that methane is dangerous and that all the countries are in agreement regarding the concept of a worldwide methane control policy.
The message received by the public is that all the experts agree on whatever they’re saying, although what they’re saying is still quite unclear.
A publication such as Natural News publishes an article with a suitably alarming title.
The perceived overstatement by Natural News is regarded as a provocation by controlled information sources such as Wikipedia to alert the public. Interestingly, whenever a publication, group, or individual is discredited by Wikipedia, they always do so in the very first line of their description, i.e.,
Natural News is a far-right, anti-vaccination conspiracy theory and fake news website known for promoting alternative medicine, pseudoscience, disinformation, and far-right extremism.
That’s essentially the process that’s now consistently being utilized by globalists.
The media tells them: Claim it on “climate change” and help reduce your carbon foot print, do not eat meat, do not drive cars, do not fly, stay home, adapt to a modern lockdown. The new 15-minute cities are ideal for you, the commons.
Such an arrogant statement – humans making the weather with their sheer lifestyles – should already ring a strong bell in a clear-thinking mind of normal humans, but it doesn’t
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
About a week ago, the UN Human Rights Czar in Geneva issued a stern warning – “Up to 80 million people will be plunged into hunger if climate targets are not met”.
These are the words of Volker Turk, the head of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland. He spoke at a Human Rights event, and highlighted as principal cause for this coming calamity – what else – “climate change”. He said,
“extreme weather events were having a significant negative impact on crops, herds and ecosystems, prompting further concerns about global food availability.”
This is immediately proven by never-before-in-history extreme floods in Vermont, USA, by extreme droughts in Europe and Central – Western USA and by enormous, never-before experienced – forest fires in Canada. More is already announced – extreme Monsoon rains in India, and possibly Bangladesh. What a coincidence. Except, there are no coincidences. Droughts and gigantic flashfloods, in calculated interchange. No coincidences.
Most people of this globe just simply cannot believe how evil some non-people are. The Covid crime and the vaccination genocide was not enough to open their eyes, that their governments cannot be trusted, that they are sold, either by money or by threats, to an extreme evil power, a Depopulation, a Eugenics Cult which is behind it all.
Mr. Turk went on claiming,
“More than 828 million people faced hunger in 2021, and climate change is projected to place up to 80 million more people at risk of hunger by the middle of this century.”
Further contributing to the drama, he added, “Our environment is burning. It’s melting. It’s depleting. It’s drying. It’s dying”; and that these factors will combine to lead humanity towards a “dystopian future” unless urgent and immediate action is taken by environmental policymakers.
And then came the MUST reference to the 2015 (COP) Paris Agreement often referred to as the Paris Climate Accords, which were adopted by 196 parties at the time. COP means “Conference of the Parties”. Adding to the confusion of UN jargons, it refers to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), whose signatories agreed to cap global warming below 2 degrees celsius above the 1850-1900 levels – or to 1.5 degrees celsius if possible. Does anyone understand the language to carry out this easy task?
Such an arrogant statement – humans making the weather with their sheer lifestyles – should already ring a strong bell in a clear-thinking mind of normal humans, but it doesn’t, because our pineal gland for logical thinking and perception of emotions has been gradually dumbed, reduced, even killed in some people with chemicals we eat regularly und imperceptibly in our daily food, chemicals sprayed from the air via chemtrails, “disinfectant” chemicals in the water, the uncountable PCR tests, with absolutely scientifically proven unnecessary sticks up the nose, to the thin separation between nose and brain – and pineal gland — and more.
To dull our sentiments and perception is a long-term goal that “our Masters” have been working on for the last at least hundred years – or longer.
Dulled minds are easier to manipulate. Add to this DARPA’s MK-Ultra and Monarch mind-manipulation program and we know why we are where we are.
MCViewPoint 