Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

[Sid Belzberg]

So, let’s conclude. They cannot rule out that the chemical could be toxic to DNA. They know that it is very toxic to the male reproductive system. Female rats on a high dose didn’t get pregnant. It is a corrosive substance. Farmers should consider wearing masks when handling it. Rats given higher doses had the potential to develop benign tumors.

It decreased the ovary size in cows at high enough doses. Yet they plan on feeding this chemical to ALL cows in Norway within just a few years, all in the name of stopping climate change. This is UDDER madness!

Sure, they say it’s SAFE and EFFECTIVE. But they said the same thing about the mRNA shots, and we now know that they are not safe and they are not effective. Are we seeing a repeat of what happened with the mRNA shots but now with milk instead?

One last thing… Guess who has helped fund the company behind this toxic chemical? Turns out that none other than Bill Gates has given quite a lot of money to DSM-Firmenich. In fact, a whopping $5,346,859 The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation also gave a whopping $6,344,590 to Firmenich in 2013, the company now part of DSM-Firmenich after an acquisition.

What is being done now is that they are introducing new chemicals into the food supply in the name of stopping climate change.

This toxic chemical is not needed. It is designed to stop a natural process of methane forming in the cow's stomach.

There is plenty of evidence showing that this chemical could be very harmful, especially worrying when it comes to fertility. But they are so intent on reaching the “Global Goals” set out in the UN Agenda 2030 that they are willing to risk public health if it means reducing “climate emissions”.

Sure, they say it is safe for humans at the calculated doses. But what happens if humans ingest this over a long period of time? This will happen because people eat and drink dairy products every day. What will the effect be after 10 years of consumption of milk from cows being fed this toxic chemical? Nobody knows.

We are subject to another experiment, just like they did with the mRNA shots. Nobody knew about possible long term side effects, and we cannot know that for certain here either. So maybe it would be wise to be more concerned about human health rather than listening to the insane demands of climate fanatics?

[Sid Belzberg]

The chemical used in this product is called 3-Nitrooxypropanol, also known as 3-NOP. Naturally, everyone is trying to reassure us that this chemical is perfectly fine and completely harmless to feed cows. It is approved by the EFSA , the European Food Safety Authority and the Norwegian food authority.

But some alarm bells started ringing for me, making me wonder if this chemical really is as safe as they are trying to tell us. How is 3-Nitrooxypropanol made? They make it by combining two ingredients. The highly corrosive chemical nitric acid with propanediol (a form of alcohol).

This chemical, when ingested by the cows, works to suppress the natural methane production in the stomach of the cow. So we are giving cows a chemical made from the highly corrosive chemical nitric acid. Great! According to the UK government, ingestion of nitric acid can be fatal if it is in a high enough dose. I did some more digging and found more details about 3-Nitrooxypropanol from the NIH PubChem website. It is very worrying indeed. It is listed as: Flammable. Corrosive. Irritant. Health Hazard. But it gets worse.

It is listed as having acute toxicity if swallowed. It causes serious eye damage. But it is also listed as suspected of damaging fertility or the unborn child. In other words, a warning regarding reproductive toxicity. And the plan is to give all cows this chemical. It will be unavoidable that at least traces of this chemical get into the system of the cow and possibly into the milk as well. Could it then hurt the fertility of humans? Of course not the experts will say. The EU Food Authority has approved this chemical.

Everyone is telling us that this is perfectly SAFE and EFFECTIVE, just like the mRNA shots are perfectly SAFE and EFFECTIVE! The primary metabolite of the 3-nitrooxypropanol chemical is 3-nitrooxypropinoic acid (NOPA). Research has found that NOPA was DETECTED in the milk of 3 out of 4 cows given this chemical. So it does indeed go out into the milk. At a 200mg dose of the chemical, researchers identified DECREASED ovary size in the cows. This is worrying. Could it affect humans, too?





Despite this find, researchers considered that it should not be considered an adverse effect and concluded that the additive would be safe at the dosage of 200mg/kg. But it gets worse - Again. Studies have found that in rats given higher doses of the chemical, the additive has the potential to cause mesenchymal cell hyperplasia and benign tumors.

Researchers found that masks may need to be considered when handling the additive because of the risk of acute inhalation toxicity. So when farmers feed cows with this stuff, they should probably wear face masks. But sure, it’s safe to eat! Researchers found that the daily acceptable intake of this stuff for humans is at 0.3mg/kg. bw/d. Genotoxicity.

Researchers have also looked at whether 3-Nitrooxypropanol is toxic (damaging) to DNA, and here we find even more worrying stuff. In this study, they say that “the genotoxicity potential of 3-NOP cannot be ruled out”.

A 2 year study in rats reported an increase in rare mesenchymal intestinal tumors “which cannot be considered as a chance finding”. In other words, they say that the chemicals they will feed cows could be toxic to DNA. Not great.

Fertility problems! Another worrying finding was that 3-Nitrooxypropanol was found to be very toxic to sperm production in rats. When rats received 500mg/kg of this chemical, it caused adverse effects in the testes and caused “severe reduction of spermatogenesis”.

In other words, it caused a severe reduction in sperm production in the male rats. Also, female rats on the same dose showed evidence of mating, but none of the females became pregnant. Remember the chart earlier that showed that this chemical was suspected of damaging fertility? Looks like it checks out.

[Sid Belzberg]

I have something very worrying to tell you. They are planning on poisoning our milk supply in the name of stopping climate change. Of course you will not be hearing anything about this on the mainstream media, so that is why I have to write this article and warn you of what is happening. For some reason, it has been decided that cows are the enemy. The Netherlands plan on seizing thousands of farms and reduce the number of livestock. In New Zealand, the left wing government was just defeated after farmers united to oppose them and their new ”fart tax” to reduce emissions from cows.

But now countries are beginning to feed TOXIC chemicals to cows in order to get them to have less burps and farts. Yes, you read that correctly! Why is that you may ask? To reduce climate emissions and meet the 2030 climate goals of course! By the year 2030, the agriculture industry has to reduce climate emissions by 5 million tons CO2. In other words, this of course goes back to the UN Agenda 2030 ”global goals” which none other than Bill Gates himself is funding.

The goal is that all ruminant livestock used for diary and meat shall be fed methane suppressing chemicals in just a few years. What are they calling this new milk? One diary producer is calling it ”Future milk” while another milk is called ”Climate milk”. It’s not some crazy future conspiracy theory. I went to the grocery store in Norway and the new “Climate milk” is ALREADY on the shelves! I decided to do some research on this chemical that they are feeding the cows and I was SHOCKED. The chemical that they are giving the cows is classified as CORROSIVE, FLAMMABLE, IRRITANT and a HEALTH HAZARD!

But it get’s worse… This chemical they are feeding the cows is suspected of DAMAGING FERTILITY or the unborn child. It has a warning label for reproductive toxicity. It has been found to very harmful to the male reproductive system in rats. In other words, is our milk supply being poisoned in the name of climate change? The worst part is, it seems like nobody in the mainstream media is talking about this. People have no clue about what is happening to their milk!

So I have to write this article to raise awareness. I have done some in-depth research of this chemical they are feeding cows to find out how toxic it actually is...and what I found was SHOCKING! Oh, and you could never guess who has been giving millions of dollars to the company producing this toxic chemical

Let’s take a deep dive to find out the truth about this new “Future milk”. Two of Norway’s largest diary producers have simultaneously launched their new ”climate friendly” milks. One from the company Tine is called ”Future Milk” while the other from the company Q Melk is called ”Climate Milk”. T

his new project is getting support from the Norwegian government which has granted $900 000. ”Methane emissions from livestock is the dominating emission source from agriculture, and it is important that we put in an effort to reduce these emissions while keeping up production of food” said Agriculture and Food Minister Sandra Borch.

By the year 2030 (of course, we see that year over and over again, I wonder why…?) all ruminant livestock in Norway shall be fed with the new feed containing this toxic chemical. According to Q Melk, their new ”Climate Milk” produces 25-30% less methane than regular milk, and they aim to have all of their 14 000 cows eating this chemical within 3 years.

When I went to the grocery store, I found this new “Climate Milk” on the shelves already. Here are some photos that I took. The toxic chemical. So what exactly is this chemical that they are feeding cows to get them to fart and burp less? They use a product that is branded as Boaver and is developed by a company called DSM-Firmenich. What is Boaver?

[Sid Belzberg]

"CAN'T MAKE THIS UP! Britain is talking about FORCING farmers to feed cows methane blockers to reduce cow farts. Guess who has recently invested MILLIONS in companies making methane blockers? None other than Bill Gates... To reduce climate emissions and meet the 2030 climate goals they are want to reduce cow farts and burps -

No, this isn't a joke. They are serious. By 2030, the agriculture industry has to reduce climate emissions by 5 million tons of CO2. In other words, this goes back to the UN Agenda 2030 ”global goals,” which none other than Bill Gates himself is funding, of course. It’s not some crazy future conspiracy theory. I went to the grocery store in Norway, and there is already a new “Climate milk” on the shelves! I decided to do some research on the chemical that they are feeding the cows making this new "Climate milk" -

And I was SHOCKED. The chemical they are giving the cows is classified as corrosive, irritant, flammable, and a health hazard. This chemical they are feeding cows is suspected of DAMAGING FERTILITY/unborn child. It actually has a warning label for reproductive toxicity.

Is our milk supply being poisoned in the name of climate change? The worst part is it seems like nobody in the mainstream media is talking about this. People have no clue about what is happening to their milk! So I have to write this article to raise awareness.

I have done some in-depth research of this chemical they are feeding cows to find out how toxic it actually is...and what I found was SHOCKING! And it's no wonder when you see what ingredients they use to make this compound.

Guess what else Bill Gates is funding? He has given $319 million to the mainstream media. Now you know why the media isn't talking about this. They are bought and paid for."

https://twitter.com/PeterSweden7/status/1739655431222374844

[Sid Belzberg]

The Echoes of History: Control Through Scarcity, from Ancient Rome to the Modern Era

In the annals of history, the manipulation of food supplies has been a tactic employed by rulers and governments to consolidate power and control populations. This method, deeply interwoven into the fabric of societal governance, reveals a recurring theme of exploitation and control that resonates through the ages, from the times of Ancient Rome to the autocratic regimes of the 20th century, and, as some argue, into the contemporary global stage.

Ancient Rome: Tiberius Julius Alexander’s Control Through THe Food Supply
The narrative begins with Tiberius Julius Alexander, an influential figure in the Roman Empire, who, according to some historical accounts, conspired with Roman councilmen to manipulate food supplies from Egypt. Egypt, known as the breadbasket of the Roman Empire, was critical to Rome's food security. By controlling the grain flow, Tiberius and his co-conspirators could potentially wield enormous power over the populace, leveraging scarcity as a means to manipulate political power structures and maintain control over the Roman population.

Stalin’s Soviet Union: The Iron Grip of Collectivization

Fast forward to the early 20th century, Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union undertook a drastic policy of agricultural collectivization. Framed as a move towards a more equitable society, collectivization forced peasants into collective farms with the promise of modernizing agriculture and boosting productivity. However, the reality was far grimmer. The policy led to widespread famine, notably the Holodomor in Ukraine, where millions perished. Here, control over food was not just about power; it became a weapon of political repression, aiming to quell dissent and eliminate perceived opposition.

The Modern Parallel: Climate Policy and Agricultural Livelihoods

In today's context, we can draw parallels between historical instances of food control and current global policies related to climate change and agriculture. Under the guise of combating a climate emergency, globalist and elite factions are enacting policies that detrimentally affect farmers, echoing the manipulations of the past. These policies risk putting farmers out of business, potentially leading to widespread famine, all in pursuit of broader depopulation goals.

The Climate Naturalist Perspective: Insights from the CETUS Dataset

Adding a layer to this complex narrative, the CETUS dataset offers a unique perspective, challenging the prevailing climate change discourse. This dataset, rooted in the heart of the Industrial Revolution, presents a consistent average temperature increase of 0.5 degrees Celsius per century, a trend that has remained unchanged despite the massive industrial CO2 emissions from 1850 onwards. This data suggests that factors beyond human-induced CO2 emissions are at play, with solar activity serving as a significant driver of climate variations.

The persistent role of solar activity, despite the dramatic rise in industrial emissions, underscores the need for a nuanced understanding of climate dynamics. This perspective aligns with the climate naturalist viewpoint, which advocates for a broader consideration of natural and anthropogenic factors influencing climate change.

A Historical Reflection

The comparison of past and present raises essential questions about the role of governance, the impact of policy on fundamental human needs, and the lessons history can offer. While the contexts may differ vastly, the underlying theme of leveraging control over essential resources remains a potent reminder of the power dynamics that shape societies. The insights from the CETUS dataset, coupled with historical instances of food control, highlight the importance of a balanced, informed approach to environmental policy—one that takes into account the myriad factors influencing our climate and the critical need to safeguard food security and societal stability.

[Sid Belzberg]

View in browser Angry Italian Farmers Join Their European Counterparts in Protest Against Climate Tyranny THE VIGILANT FOX FEB 2 Angry Italian farmers have joined their European counterparts in protest against climate tyranny, which has spread across the country for several days. Take a listen to the beautiful sound of honking. Earlier today, Belgian and Dutch farmers teamed up against crippling globalist policies in the name of curbing climate change. Three highways on the border between the two countries are effectively BLOCKED by tractors and other large vehicles. According to reports, they plan to stay there at least all weekend. In total, farmer protests have been erupting in France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Belgium, Romania, Spain, Portugal, and more. The globalists have f*cked with the wrong people.

[Sid Belzberg]

Farming & the Green Agenda

Farmers have a somewhat legitimate beef with governments.

But it is not about the government declaring that the current way of farming is contributing to negative climate change. The allegation is correct. And modern farming must change its ways to minimize its carbon footprint.

And this is so, even if it is negatively affecting the bottom line of the small private, and large conglomerate, private businesses of farming. We can only effectively combat increasing negative climate change by steps that are going to cost dollars.

So......how is their beef correct?

It has to do with equality of application.

Farmers legitimately ask: "Why only us?"

But what farmers should be demanding, is that governments apply the same green agenda to all other sectors of economic activity. If they would demand this, and get the governments to take on the heavyweights of economic activity, we'd soon make good progress combatting negative climate change.

And if the farmers would make this new demand, they would deserve the support of the public, and the thanks of the public for forcing governments to do what they are reluctant to do........fight with the big guys....instead they pretend to make progress by fighting with the little guys.

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

The current crisis unfolding in countries like Germany and France, where farmer protests have brought crucial agricultural activities to a standstill, is not just alarming—it's a harbinger of a potential global catastrophe. This situation could trigger a domino effect, leading to supply chain disruptions, economic turmoil, and most critically, a severe threat to global food security. The response to this crisis requires urgent attention and action, not adherence to environmental policies that are, at this point, contributing to a potentially disastrous outcome.

Organizations like CLINTEL and the CO2 Coalition have raised valid concerns about the prevailing narrative on climate change, challenging the assertion that we are facing an immediate climate crisis. The current agricultural policies, based on debatable assumptions about climate change, are now threatening to precipitate a real and undeniable crisis—a famine that could affect billions of people worldwide.

To continue pushing these policies in the face of such stark evidence of their detrimental impact is not just irresponsible; it borders on recklessness. We are flirting with a disaster of unprecedented scale, all for a climate crisis that is itself a subject of intense scientific debate. This is not the time for unyielding adherence to environmental dogma; it's a time for pragmatic, balanced, and immediate action to avert a global food security disaster.

[Bob Armstrong]

Farming & the Green Agenda

Farmers have a somewhat legitimate beef with governments.

But it is not about the government declaring that the current way of farming is contributing to negative climate change. The allegation is correct. And modern farming must change its ways to minimize its carbon footprint.

And this is so, even if it is negatively affecting the bottom line of the small private, and large conglomerate, private businesses of farming. We can only effectively combat increasing negative climate change by steps that are going to cost dollars.

So......how is their beef correct?

It has to do with equality of application.

Farmers legitimately ask: "Why only us?"

But what farmers should be demanding, is that governments apply the same green agenda to all other sectors of economic activity. If they would demand this, and get the governments to take on the heavyweights of economic activity, we'd soon make good progress combatting negative climate change.

And if the farmers would make this new demand, they would deserve the support of the public, and the thanks of the public for forcing governments to do what they are reluctant to do........fight with the big guys....instead they pretend to make progress by fighting with the little guys.

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

[Sid Belzberg]

[Bob Armstrong]

Negative Climate Change - Step # 1



Solar activity on the sun IS the source of heat in the Earth's atmosphere/soil. It always has been thus. Temperature is one of the component parts of Earth's "Climate".

The issue is why is this solar activity/heat generation on and around Earth RECENTLY/NOW causing a rise in the temperature of Earth's atmosphere and soil and seas?

The first issue of common agreement is on the following 6 Statements; without common agreement on facts, discussion is really only "debate about facts".

Statements

#1. It is a scientific "fact" that the Earth's temperature was stable for some long length of time. There were periods of both cold and hot in the distant past, but they were generally quite long periods. The last one has been a very, very slow warming phase and has lasted a long time to the time of the "Change".

#2. At some point, for some reason/cause, the temperature began to rise more, and the slow stable warming was lost.

#3. At the beginning of the "Change", the temperature rose slowly and incrementally (Though faster than at the start of the most recent warming phase).

#4. The temperature continued to rise generally, though there may have been some short fall-back periods..

#5. Then at some point, for some reason/cause, the rate of increase in temperature rose, and warming occurred more quickly than before.Each year was record-breaking in terms of temperature rise.

#6. With a rising rate of change during the more recent period, Earth is coming into "high temperatures" - called "high" because the climate is now turning hostile to man's current way of living.

1st Step in "Dialogue"

So let's see which CT'ers agree with which Statements - In your comment just list the Statement # and "agree", "partly agree", "disagree".

The goal is to see whether any of the Statements are "generally accepted" by the CT viewers of this thread (Get a majority).

Step # 2 will then be a discussion on each statement

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

[Sid Belzberg]

Negative Climate Change

A Consequence - Weather Extremes

Drought



Americas - Texas, USA.


"Texas Is Already Running Out of Water

Parts of the state are starting the year with low reserves. With light winter rains failing to replenish supply, and a scorching summer predicted, key areas may be pushed to the brink."


https://www.wired.com/story/texas-wa...nl&utm_term=P3

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

And next, you will tell us that solar activity on the sun did not cause that.

[Bob Armstrong]

Negative Climate Change

A Consequence - Weather Extremes

Drought



Americas - Texas, USA.


"Texas Is Already Running Out of Water

Parts of the state are starting the year with low reserves. With light winter rains failing to replenish supply, and a scorching summer predicted, key areas may be pushed to the brink."


https://www.wired.com/story/texas-wa...nl&utm_term=P3

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

[Sid Belzberg]

The Echoes of History: From Buffalo Decimation to Modern Food Control



As we step into January 2024, a disturbing trend continues. Amish farmers face ongoing raids, while Bill Gates expands his farmland holdings, raising questions about the intent behind these actions. The Tenpenny Report has been vocal for nearly a year about what seems to be a Deep State agenda to control the food supply, citing incidents like food plant fires and avian flu as tools in this scheme.

This strategy isn't new. Recall the 1800s, when the US government indirectly decimated buffalo herds to control Native Americans by cutting off their primary food source. From an estimated 30-60 million, the buffalo population plummeted to about 300 by 1899, a staggering loss that facilitated the forced relocation of Native Americans to reservations.

This historical precedent mirrors today's concerns about controlling food sources. The current push for 15-minute cities and global elites' hypocritical stance on climate change and meat consumption are contemporary parallels. While preaching sustainability and reduced meat consumption, these leaders indulge in the very practices they condemn.

The Native American experience under the US government - marked by unfulfilled promises and oppressive control - serves as a grim reminder. The Bureau of Indian Affairs' claims of promoting prosperity starkly contrast with the reality of poverty, lack of basic amenities, and high rates of alcoholism and violence on reservations.

Our history of exploiting and controlling indigenous populations through food supply control is uncomfortably close to today's attempts to dictate dietary choices and lifestyles. Just as the US government allowed the buffalo slaughter while standing aside, modern policies and double standards by the global elite on climate and consumption reflect a similar pattern of covert control and hypocrisy.

The echoes of history are loud and clear. The buffalo killers of the past find their counterparts in today's world, where control over food and lifestyle choices seems to be an ever-present theme. As we consider these parallels, let's remain vigilant about the narratives we're fed and the historical lessons they bear.

[Sid Belzberg]

Climate Change’ is nothing but a Psychological Operation meant to hijack us emotionally…so Private-Jet Flying Politicians can launder your Tax Dollars under the guise of ‘Saving the Planet’. ‘Climate Change’ will be one of the Greatest Scams ever known to Mankind.

[Bob Armstrong]

Reducing Rate of Negative Climate Change

Cars as spewers of Greenhouse Gases

EV's

"preventing their [EV] car purchase: ‘I think we are very far behind’


“They argue that I will want to put an outlet at my place.”"


https://www.thecooldown.com/green-ho...-rules-reddit/

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)