The Big Lie Agenda 21 Sustainability Part I

by Doc Vega | August 7, 2012 at 05:10 pm

239 views | 4 Recommendations | 0 comments

The world public has been deceived by UN propaganda to support climate legislation that is shockingly different then they could possibly know!

Every where you are hearing the praises of sustainability, green industry, and climate change, but few people are aware of where this all originates from and that they would regret having to live with the consequences of having this hype enacted. The United Nations began a climate change initiative as far back as 1991. The Kyoto Protocol soon morphed from that propaganda and soon an international effort begin to press all nations into a climate accord in order to supposedly adopt beneficial practices that would cap pollutonous emissions for the good of all mankind. At least that was the way it was presented.

The true motives emerge

Soon, as with all botched UN proposals, the real agendas began emerging. Even though Russia and China refused to sign the Climate Control agreement, they both demanded that the US become a member, but wisely the federal government refused. As the true nature of the Kyoto Protocol began to surface, the scam revealed itself.

Faulty science

By establishing that the average global temperature had changed a little more than 1 degree Fahrenheit since the 1880’s, a call came out by the UN to begin penalizing the industrialized nations of the world for their part in creating carbon emissions that had caused the dreaded green house effect, consequently caused the melting of the polar caps, which in turn had made sea levels rise, and was now infringing upon the shorelines of island nations in the Pacific. This, they rationalized, made the United States and Great Britain liable for the damages which would be incurred in the billions for just compensation to these coastal challenged island nations.

Why the America refused to participate

With many contradictory actions and out right deceptions being fabricated over global warming, the United States understandably refused to join into the UN madness, a money making scheme out of climate change that was becoming ever more apparent as the topic became more and more discussed. As the hacked emails and documents at East Anglia were quickly broadcast across the internet it became clear that a conspiracy to falsify climate date had been undertaken by the researchers in order to establish a consistent consensus on their findings, but planet earth, they conceded had been in a cooling phase for the last 15 years.

When money talks reality walks

The UN had been busy granting money to any universities or study groups who would prove that climate change existed. Using scientific funding as the carrot on the stick they quickly received cooperation from any number of departments that needed money, and would most enthusiastically contribute biased or pro global warming data in exchange for the generous sums pouring out of the UN for corroborating findings. It was quickly hushed up that the first UN financed expedition to Antarctica for core drilling samples that would analyze and date atmospheric composition from thousands of years to the present could not arrive at any conclusions. That prompted UN officials to hastily send out another team of researchers with an agenda. That agenda was to establish findings that would be consistent with the preconceptions of the UN climate change bias.

Now a multibillion dollar industry has been spawned from the controversial findings that many scientists are lining up against as they accuse global warming proponents of forcing the issue and not using objective test data in order to advance their agenda. Such political leaders as Al Gore have unashamedly used their positions to obtain insider information that they have used to make millions with. The Obama administration has lost millions of taxpayer dollars in crony financed green industry companies like Solyndra that have declared bankruptcy which has now spawned criminal investigations.

The myth that green products are better

General Electric has been given a go ahead as well as an unfair political advantage that has allowed the corporate giant to manufacture green products such as fluorescent light bulbs under government sanction as America competitors are shut down unable to fairly compete. The overpriced GE product not only contains Mercury, a deadly poison, costs many times more than incandescent light bulbs, and does not necessarily last much longer as many consumers have found out. Once again we find another myth perpetrated by climate change proponents that their green products are superior and less pollutonous, when in truth their products are more expensive and actually toxic!

Demonizing an essential elemental gas

Findings from Antarctic ice cores have generated mixed opinions that do not point to undeniable support for carbon emission driven global warming. One particular finding showed that earth was at its coldest recorded temperatures 500,000 years ago with 20 times the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Findings also indicate that even though the green house effect does exist, it has been in evidence for the last 30,000 years. Through out history planet earth has undergone warming and cooling cycles with greater amounts of CO2 then are now present in today’s atmosphere. This leads many to doubt that neither human activity or carbon dioxide itself are a driving force in global warming.

However, when you mix science and politics together you will produce not only controversy but agendas that are composed of ulterior motives. When global warming enthusiasts went to the Supreme Court to have carbon dioxide to be labeled as a toxic substance I was aghast at the blatant pseudoscience that had emerged over the climate change controversy.

Carbon dioxide is exhaled by every living being on the face of this planet, it is produced by rotting vegetation, it is a product of volcanic activity, and without it there would not be life on earth as it is essential to photosynthesis. Without photosynthesis there would be no plant life and no animal life as a result . Yet, as with most progressive initiatives, true science has no bearing in an argument, you are only stupid and intellectually inferior for not agreeing with their skewed beliefs.

In Part II I will discuss the alarming implications of Agenda 21 it is essential for anyone trying to make sense of the climate change controversy to find out about Agenda 21.