Most discussions will revolve around how to keep the human cattle in a state of enslavement, and further it so they can be fully controlled, Historically, fear has worked rather well. “Horrendous heat is having horrendous effects. Distraught farmers watching crops carried away by floods. Sweltering temperatures spawning disease,” he said in a speech to open the Climate Ambition Summit, happening alongside the UN General Assembly in New York.

“Climate action is dwarfed by the scale of the challenge,” he added. Guterres also warned that if nothing changes we are heading “towards a dangerous and unstable world.” But we know they won’t change. The ones they expect to follow their commands are orders are the slave class. The rulers won’t ever restrict themselves.

The one-day conference is intended to build global momentum toward slashing planet-heating pollution ahead of the UN’s COP28 climate summit in Dubai in December.

”Wednesday’s summit is unusual due to Guterres’ decision to restrict the speaker list to countries he deemed to have clear and effective climate plans, and those prepared to send a high-level leader to speak.

Of the nearly 200 countries present in New York for the General Assembly, only 34 nations and seven non-governmental bodies secured speaking slots at the UN chief’s summit.

Notably absent from the speaker list were some of the world’s biggest polluters, including China, India and the United States, though US climate envoy John Kerry is attending.

Also missing from the list was UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who is facing a backlash at home over plans to weaken the country’s climate commitments. -CNN

“The countries that committed to net-zero by 2050, and to the 1.5-degree goal of the Paris Agreement, they’re expanding fossil fuel licensing at a time when science tells us this is totally incompatible with this 1.5-degree goal,” he told CNN in a Tuesday interview.

Guterres called on developed countries to reach net-zero emissions removing from the atmosphere at least as much planet-warming pollution as they produce by 2040, at least ten years earlier than most current commitments. He also asked countries to commit to timelines to phase out fossil fuel emissions, as well as to significantly increase finance to help low- and middle-income countries quickly move to clean energy and invest in climate resilience measures to better cope with increasingly severe extreme weather events.

And of course, all globalists. Al Gore, at a recent World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, preached a fire-and-brimstone sermon, assuring the faithful that climate change is indeed decimating planet earth. “That’s what’s boiling the oceans,” he railed, his voice rising to a fever pitch, “creating these atmospheric rivers, and the rain bombs, and sucking the moisture out of the land, and creating the droughts, and melting the ice and raising the sea level, and causing these waves of climate refugees!”

Although Gore and other global-warming prophets have amassed a spectacular record of making dramatic, time-specific predictions that have utterly failed to materialize, nevertheless, so-called “climate change deniers” are increasingly likened to “Holocaust deniers.” Psychological organizations now pathologize “climate change denialism” as virtually some sort of mental illness. And Democrat politicians – including of course Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who publicly predicted “the world will end” by 2032 – have nothing but contempt and disgust for the unconverted. Even Joe Biden recently attacked skeptics of catastrophic climate change as “lying, dog-faced pony soldiers.”

Yet ironically, today’s high priests of climate-change apocalypse are actually correct in predicting that in just a few short years, the earth may well become miserable, wretched and almost uninhabitable by human beings.

But such a grim future will not come about because of “catastrophic climate change,” as global-warming zealots claim. Rather, the earth will rapidly degenerate into the pitiful and desolate habitat for mankind they predict, with massive suffering and death – if their genuinely catastrophic agenda is actually implemented.

Dr. Patrick Moore, co-founder of the environmental group Greenpeace, recently weighed in on the elites’ insistence on cutting greenhouse gases to “Net Zero,” saying: “If they actually achieve Net Zero, at least 50% of the population would die of hunger and disease.” Citing just one of many factors – the dependence by over half the world’s population on nitrogen-based fertilizer, which many climate-change activists want to ban, including in the Netherlands and Sri Lanka which have already done so – Moore adds: “So it is truly a death wish in disguise. And the disguise is to save the earth.”

Likewise, energy expert Alex Epstein, in his critically acclaimed book, “Fossil Future: Why Global Human Flourishing Requires More Oil, Coal, and Natural Gas – Not Less,” writes:

“Today’s proposed policies to rapidly eliminate fossil fuel use would, if fully implemented, have truly apocalyptic consequences – making the world an impoverished, dangerous, and miserable place for most people. And even if fossil fuel elimination policies aren’t fully implemented,” adds Epstein, “– which they won’t be, given the expressed intent of China, Russia, and India to increase their fossil fuel use – even widespread restrictions on fossil fuel use that fall far short of elimination will shorten and inflict misery on billions of lives, especially in the poorest parts of the world.”

Epstein, founder of the Center for Industrial Progress, doesn’t claim fossil fuels and CO2 emissions don’t impact climate in any way. “I totally acknowledge,” he writes, “that they have contributed to the 1-degree Celsius warming we’ve experienced over the last one-hundred-plus years.”

Question: When the scientific case for catastrophic global warming and its resulting worldwide apocalypse consists largely of a 1-degree Celsius rise in temperature over more than a century, why are all the governments of the Western world obsessed with imminent climate-change apocalypse as their unifying principle of governing, public policy, international relations and virtually everything else?

Before addressing the astonishing truth underlying what has become, in reality, a full-fledged religion created and exploited by global elites obsessed with ruling the world, let’s first consider those segments of society most captivated by this apocalyptic cult.

Ironically, while claiming to follow “the science,” global warming cult followers tend to comprise the very population demonstrating the least regard for actual science in other areas of life and public policy:

* Many believe a baby inside its mother’s womb is not a human being – at least, not until the very moment he or she is born, when that child instantaneously morphs into a person of great value, with all the natural, constitutional and God-given rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. One minute earlier, the child was just a glob of worthless tissue, equivalent to a tumor that could be ripped into pieces, extracted and disposed of as medical waste. This is an entirely accurate, if graphic, representation of the prevailing belief of today’s Democratic Party, with 46 Senate Democrats having voted just last year in favor of legalizing abortion up until the very moment of birth.

* This same cult population segment tends to believe mentally ill men who claim they are women actually are women – and vice versa. Worse, they defend, or at least acquiesce to, the practice of grooming mentally fragile teenagers into undergoing horrendous amputations and other harmful, irreversible “treatments” in pursuit of “gender transitions” that are not only scientifically impossible, but insane.

* What about the news media’s obsession with climate apocalypse? Starting well over a century ago, way back in 1895 – when Grover Cleveland was president, “America the Beautiful” was first published and volleyball had just been invented – the New York Times scared its readers to death with warnings of a coming “new ice age.” This media-driven hysteria lasted into the late 1920s, when the Times suddenly switched gears and warned “the earth is steadily growing warmer.” That lasted until 1954, when Fortune magazine led the way with a warning that another ice age was coming. Although the New York Times stoked “global warming” fears into the late 1950s, by 1975 it was back to “new ice age” hysteria. A few years later, the Times reverted back to panicking its readers over global warming of an “almost unprecedented magnitude.”

“In all,” reveal R. Warren Anderson and Dan Gainor in their in-depth report titled “Fire and Ice,” “the print news media have warned of four separate climate changes in slightly more than 100 years – global cooling, warming, cooling again, and, perhaps not so finally, warming.” No wonder the priests of climate doom switched their label, over the last couple decades, from “global warming” to the omnidirectional phrase “climate change.”

* And what about all the scientists who have joined the cult of the climate apocalypse? Why would they go along with an overblown, politically driven hoax? The answer, sadly, became clear during the COVID era, when many scientists, doctors and hospitals took their lead from, and adopted the questionable views and medical practices of, highly politicized (and therefore dishonest) federal agencies like the FDA and the CDC. Rather than “following the science” themselves – as a few very principled doctors did, who often were seriously persecuted for their integrity – most doctors lacked the requisite courage to take a stand and risk losing their positions or even their careers. After all, the saying goes, “I have a family to support.”

* Finally, there are the millions of young people indoctrinated and traumatized continually in today’s government (“public”) school system about near-term, human-caused catastrophic climate change. Brainwashing a child into fearing the future and loathing the adults supposedly responsible for destroying their planet is egregious child abuse. Case in point: When a very troubled 16-year-old Swedish girl named Greta Thunberg, burdened with autism, OCD and eating disorders, somehow was presented to the world as the voice of the younger generation and an expert on climate science, she scolded the entire adult population in her celebrated and very angry U.N. speech: “We are in the beginning of a mass extinction, and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. HOW DARE YOU? You have stolen my dreams and my childhood!” she thundered. Multiply Greta Thunberg by millions, and one gets a glimpse of the trauma government education and the news media have inflicted on the next generation.

‘Some kind of god’

But what about the real villains, the people who know the global warming religion is just a means to a greater end that has nothing whatsoever to do with the weather?

The global elites – the super-wealthy climate-change high priests like Al Gore who fly into Davos in their mega-gas-guzzling-and-polluting private jets while scolding everyone else for driving cars, and who dine on steak and lobster while admonishing the rest of the world to eat insects – these are the high priests of the global apocalyptic climate cult.

To understand them, it’s first essential to dispense with the old paradigms of “liberal,” “progressive,” “democratic” and other feelgood but meaningless ideological labels. The true leaders of this movement are people whose only ideology and value system is personal wealth, power, privilege, honor and glory for themselves, and who are completely obsessed with ruling planet earth. They want to be gods. So far, only billionaire leftist George Soros has had the nerve to actually describe himself, to the news media, as “some kind of god.”

Unfortunately, these sociopaths benefit from a de facto camouflage, rooted in the innate decency of normal people who simply do not comprehend what it is to be a sociopath. After all, moral people with an intact conscience, which probably still includes most Americans, readily understand the normal flaws that beset normal people – like becoming upset, angry, envious, double-minded, anxious, depressed, perhaps even enraged. They do not, however, readily recognize nor comprehend the desire to control the world, the willingness to let massive numbers of people suffer and die, the ability to look directly into a television camera – which is to say, to look right into the eyes of millions of people – and lie without any inner conflict. Sociopaths comprise a breed of people animated by feelings, desires and ambitions totally foreign to regular folks who are thus blind to this elite community that includes some of the top climate-change global high priests.

‘The climate change agenda is a hoax’

Is there any hope? America’s future direction, and by extension much of the world’s future, rides heavily on the outcome of the November 2024 election, and this is especially true with regard to climate change.

Whereas Biden has publicly promised to completely eliminate fossil fuels from America, a statement that is not only entirely insane, but catastrophically destructive to the nation, the GOP presidential candidates tend to be far more reality-based. Vivek Ramaswamy, on-stage at the first GOP presidential debate in August, said: “The climate change agenda is a hoax. … And so the reality is, more people are dying of bad climate change policies than they are of actual climate change.”

For his part, Donald Trump, far and away the top GOP contender for the presidency next year, has a clear record of boldly and sensibly dealing with climate hysteria. During his presidency, he withdrew from Obama’s job-destroying and obviously unfair Paris Climate Accords, rolled back destructive and perverse regulations, and made America energy independent and a net oil exporter. Recently, Trump called for an end to the “madness” of Joe Biden’s big push for electric vehicles in the U.S., adding that this would send all auto manufacturing jobs to China and effectively destroy America’s automobile industry.

How about blocking the sun?

Finally, consider that a slew of multi-billionaire leftists, including George Soros and Bill Gates, are enthusiastically pushing for “solar geoengineering,” a nice scientific-sounding phrase for blocking sunlight from reaching the earth.

In fact, reports Forbes, Gates “is financially backing the development of sun-dimming technology that would potentially reflect sunlight out of Earth’s atmosphere, triggering a global cooling effect. The Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPEx), launched by Harvard University scientists, aims to examine this solution by spraying non-toxic calcium carbonate (CaCO3) dust into the atmosphere – a sun-reflecting aerosol that may offset the effects of global warming.”

Blocking the sun has become something of an obsession with leftist billionaires bent on ruling the planet. As Time magazine reported earlier this year, “Among the world’s ultra-rich, plans to swat back the sun’s rays like they’re capital gains taxes … have seemingly been all the rage.”

For example, Time revealed, “Jeff Bezos put Amazon’s supercomputer capabilities to work modeling the effects of plans to inject huge amounts of sulfur dioxide (SO2) into the atmosphere.” Likewise, “Dustin Moskovitz, a billionaire Facebook cofounder, plowed $900,000 into funding for scientists in Mali, Brazil, Thailand, and other countries to study the potential effects of solar geoengineering.”

Blocking the sun’s rays from reaching the earth. What could possibly go wrong?

“Such proposals to essentially hack the atmosphere,” Time adds, belatedly, “have long been controversial in the climate science world due to potential side effects on global weather.”

It’s always those pesky “side effects” that cause all the problems.

Predictably, in June the Biden White House announced it is now studying congressional proposals to block sunlight to reduce global warming.

According to the White House’s official report on the project: “A program of research into the scientific and societal implications of solar radiation modification (SRM) would enable better-informed decisions about the potential risks and benefits of SRM as a component of climate policy, alongside the foundational elements of greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and adaptation. Such a research program would also help to prepare the United States for possible deployment of SRM by other public or private actors.”

All of this because of a 1-degree rise in temperature over the course of more than 140 years.

But then, it never was about a minuscule rise in global temperature. It’s all about creating and sustaining the ultimate “emergency” – the most perfect “manufactured crisis” imaginable since it affects every person on earth. And since the entire existence of life on earth hangs in the balance, it’s necessary, under cover of this new global “climate” religion, to suspend the rule of law, trash the Constitution, crush free speech, terrify all the children, destroy entire industries, prosecute dissenters, impoverish billions, and establish a total global dictatorship.

But all for the public’s good, of course.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The preceding is adapted from David Kupelian’s introductory story to the September 2023 issue of WND’s critically acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine, an issue titled “CULT OF THE CLIMATE APOCALYPSE: The elites’ breathtaking strategy for ruling the world.”

The heart and soul of today’s bizarre, pagan climate-change religion, and the global elites’ strategies for using it to rule all of mankind, is powerfully exposed and illuminated in this issue. WHISTLEBLOWER is available in both the popular print edition and a state-of-the-art digital version, either single issues or discounted annual subscriptions.

In a new climate change advertisement – if you can stomach it, the video is below – Apple employees of mostly the non-white variety can be seen sitting around a large conference room table talking to “Mother Nature,” who is depicted as, you guessed it: a black woman.

Since Western media now depicts the general population as being mostly black, even though black people make up just 12 percent of the United States population, it only makes sense that Apple would choose to feature a black woman as the face of the planet and the environment.

In the ad, Mother Nature enters the room and starts lib-splaining all about global warming and climate change, and how Apple can solve the “crisis” by “permanently” removing all carbon from the atmosphere – watch below, if you dare:

Apple says in this video "our aim is to permanently remove all carbon from the atmosphere"

That would quite literally destroy the planet. https://t.co/OSuEOKSPWQ pic.twitter.com/O6jQF7oyiu

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) September 13, 2023

Apple CEO Tim Cook tweeted the video as well, along with a message to Apple customers and X (formerly Twitter) users that his company believes that “one of the world’s most urgent priorities” involves fixing the alleged problem of climate change.

“Today we had a special guest – a real force of nature – stop by to check on our progress,” he tweeted, trying to make a joke.

(Related: In 2021 while everyone was distracted by COVID, Cook signed a secret $275 billion deal with the Chinese Communist Party [CCP].)

Apple’s obsession with black people and global warming is about as cringeworthy as it gets

The video opens with Cook and his employees rushing into the conference room nervously while waiting for Mother Nature to arrive. When she shows up, all sassy and ready to wag her finger, Cook and the rest eagerly hang on her every word about how to deal with climate change.

The table starts to rumble like an earthquake – the black woman playing the role of Mother Nature is quite large, so it only makes sense – before she sashays into the room and sarcastically apologizes, sort of, for keeping everyone waiting.

“Mother Nature: welcome to Apple,” Cook then states in dweebish form. “How was the weather getting in?”

Before Mother Nature can respond to Cook’s question, a thunderstorm rolls in outside to demonstrate the sheer force of her power.

“The weather is however I wanted it to be,” Mother Nature responds in arrogance. “Let’s cut to the chase: In 2020, you promised to bring Apple’s entire carbon footprint to zero by 2030.”

Mother Nature then makes a joke about Cook’s appearance, likening him to Henry David Thoreau, while mocking past promises he has made about climate change – the suggestion being that Apple has somehow not done enough to embrace the “green” agenda.

The unfunny bit proceeds with another nerdy looking plus-size nervously telling Mother Nature that Apple is on track to remove all plastic packaging from its products by the end of 2024, as well as using recycled aluminum and phasing out all leather from iPhone cases – because cows equal bad to leftists.

When it gets to the part about removing all carbon from the atmosphere, Cook proceeds to explain to Mother Nature that by the year 2030 – they really like 2030 for some reason – all Apple devices will have a “net-zero climate impact,” to which Mother Nature proceeds to engage Cook in a creepy stare-off contest.

“After watching that, it should be painfully and alarmingly clear to everyone that climate change is a religious cult that lacks sanity, and is not based in facts or science,” commented Revolver.news about the ad.

“And if we don’t deprogram these whackos quickly, this entire country will turn into one big GREEN kool-aid party, where, if Apple has their way, nobody survives.”

The latest news about Apple can be found at Evil.news.

Sources for this article include:

• Revolver.news
• NaturalNews.com

(Article cross-posted from Daily Signal)

Already home to crazy ice cream rules that prohibit folks from enjoying the summertime treat while waiting at a bus stop or that make carrying your ice cream cone in your pocket on Sundays illegal, now some city politicians want to essentially take away ice cream trucks.

Specifically, City Council Member Lincoln Restler and eight of his colleagues recently introduced a bill to ban the use of gasoline or diesel generators on ice cream trucks. According to Restler, the move would “severely reduce air pollution and noise and address the climate crisis.”

This is absolute nonsense.

Let’s take a look why. We will start with noise.

Ice cream trucks require generators to keep the ice cream cold, and generators can, admittedly, be noisy. However, modern gas and diesel generators exist on a spectrum of noise, and many fall well within what any reasonable person would conclude is acceptable. Some inverter generators already can be as quiet as a private office. Further, generators can be combined with dampeners to reduce noise even further.

If this were really the issue, then the City Council could simply put reasonable noise restrictions in place rather than total bans. This is precisely what they’ve done with ice cream truck bells by restricting their use to trucks in motion.

That leaves the environmental question. For this, we need to separate out traditional air pollutants and alleged global warming effects.

Critics of ice cream truck generators make the same mistake as critics of coal and other hydrocarbons by conflating the pollution from old and new technology. It may well have been the case that old generators, especially in densely populated areas such as New York City, emitted unacceptable levels of pollution. However, advances in fuel efficiency and emissions treatment technology significantly reduce emissions, and the technology is only getting cleaner.

So, that leaves climate change.

Putting aside the real debate over the human effect on climate, and accepting for the purposes of this discussion Washington’s underlying climate policy assumptions, banning generators from New York City ice cream trucks would make no measurable difference to the climate. In fact, eliminating all carbon dioxide emissions in the United States would have virtually no environmental benefit.

The Heritage Foundation’s chief statistician, Kevin Dayaratna, has investigated exactly this using the same models used by government agencies. He found that eliminating all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions would reduce temperatures by less than 0.2 degrees Celsius by 2100. (The Daily Signal is the news and commentary outlet of The Heritage Foundation.)

The facts, of course, don’t matter to environmental extremists who dislike ice cream trucks. They are more than happy to push their agenda on us no matter the cost or lack of efficacy. Instead, they make empty promises about seamless, low-cost alternatives and how everyone will be better off if we just comply.

Obviously, compliance has real costs. While some estimates come in below $10,000 per truck to comply, real world costs could be much higher. According to one ice cream truck company CEO, upgrading a single truck can cost upwards of $65,000. So, does Mr. Restler expect every mom and pop ice cream vendor and small ice cream truck business to just lay down more money per truck than what a decent used ice cream truck costs to keep operating in New York City?

With average annual incomes of around $30,000 for mom and pop ice cream trucks in the United States, even the expense of the lower $10,000 estimate could be enough put them out of business.

This is out of the question and is why everyone should understand this legislation as a virtual ban on ice cream trucks.

At a minimum, there will be far fewer ice cream trucks serving New York citizens, and those trucks will be owned by a small number of large companies that can afford the compliance costs. That assumes that larger companies think they can even make such a substantial investment back in sales. Finally, the fewer trucks and higher operation costs will mean much more expensive ice cream.

Like nearly every other mandate, this one will hurt the poor the most, drive companies out of business and take away the jobs of those who work for them, and serve only the egos of wealthy do-gooders and busy-body politicians.

But if that’s what New York City wants, why should we care?

Because like the canary in the mine shaft, seemingly crazy policies that take hold in local jurisdictions often portend what’s coming for the rest of us. Revealingly, Restler tells us as much when he says that he’s “excited to see how they can serve as a model for electrifying mobile food truck vendors.”

In other words, environmentalists won’t stop at ice cream trucks in New York this Labor Day. Rest assured, environmental extremism will be coming for your ice cream trucks in your neighborhood next Labor Day, and that’s why this proposal needs to be stopped now.

The people who work the hardest to makes ends meet will be forced to suffer needlessly as the global elite pretend to save all our lives from “climate change.”

AC rationing and cooling centers are coming to a city near you

Now, the elite’s climate change propaganda machine is calling for climate-inspired blackouts, AC rationing, and the consolidation of the poor into “cooling centers.” The LA Times published interviews with climate experts who suggested that home air conditioners be shut down during heatwaves.

According to these experts, governments should be “investing in a wider network of cooling centers, with transportation to help people get there.” The author of the article asks: “What’s more important: Keeping the lights on 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, or solving the climate crisis?” Planned climate blackouts are coming soon to the cities.

Approximately 500,000 California homes and businesses lost power in August 2020, as the state fell short on electricity during a summer heat wave. The first time, residents lost power for 15 minutes; then, they lost power for 2 and half hours on a Friday evening.

The solar farms that they depend on could not keep up with the demand for air conditioning and electric vehicles, as the sun went down and power production was curtailed. By that weekend, another 321,000 California residents lost power for upwards of 90 minutes. The rolling blackouts sparked wider debate about the need to plan for future blackouts, as the state succumbed to an energy crisis of its own making.

To stave off a revolt in 2020, the recalled Gavin Newsom-led government suspended air quality rules so residents could use gas-powered generators to power their homes. These orders continued into the next year to prepare for more electric grid emergencies.

Ironically, in the quest to shut down fossil fuels, gas plants have become even more important in California. Gas plants now supply 42% of the state’s energy. As a consequence, Californians are being told to turn up their AC in the summer, to drive less, to eat less meat, and accept the fact that blackouts will be a necessary sacrifice for the “greater good.”

Climate experts want you to submit to rolling blackouts and “flexible demand” programs

As fossil fuels are curtailed, the climate experts are now talking about “flexible demand” programs that force consumers to use less electricity during the highest demand times. The wealthy will inevitably be able to buy their way out of the problem, leaving the poor in a desperate situation where they have no autonomy or say in the matter.

The idea of accepting a less dependable electric grid “is uncomfortable for a lot of people, because they correctly point out you may end up in situations where the wealthier you are, the more you’re able to buy your way out of that reliability problem,” said Emily Grubert, a civil engineer and environmental sociologist at the University of Notre Dame.

Grubert’s solution is simple: When society’s most vulnerable are forced to turn off their AC, the government should have a wider network of cooling centers available, with public transportation to help the vulnerable get to safety. Planned blackouts and energy rationing is the future in California.

This sad dystopian nightmare will continue to get worse, and spread, if the hysterical climate change narrative is  allowed to dictate national energy policy into the future.

Sources include:

• ClimateDepot.com
• LATimes.com
• LATimes.com
• NATURAL NEWS