Transcript:

Hello and welcome to episode number 83 of Elmar´s Tooth Talk: The missing link to total health. 

In today’s episode we explore some predictions of the Global Warming alarmists. How much substance do they carry? Are they more than just fairy tales to make us believe and buy into another bogey story to extract even more money and freedom from us? 

So, What’s in it for you in this episode:

  • WHY is the sun ignored in most scenarios?
  • WHAT happens when the level CO2 goes up?
  • HOW much CO2 do termites produce compared to humans?
  • HOW the IPCC guaranteed that climate change is human-induced.
  • HOW we own nothing and still be happy 
  • WAS Al Gore’s documentary flawed from start to finish?
  • MORE Global warming predictions gone wrong

The other day I received the latest edition of “The Light”, a monthly newspaper committed to uncensored truth.

I’m always looking forward to their publication to learn more about topics I’m interested in. This time I found one especially captivating which I thought would be a great episode to share with you.

In this article the author dives deep into the hypothesis of man-made global warming.

This editorial by Daniel Thompson-Mills offers a well-researched look beyond what we get fed by the media, politicians and so-called Charities. 

His research rests on six pillars which we are now going to explore.

PILLAR 1

We, the realists, who have left some common sense and the true scientists who still deserve this title know that the driver of climate change on Earth is the Sun. This happens through sunspot cycles and solar wind.

As a result of this varying solar activity, there have always been periods in human history when the Earth has been much warmer than today, such as the Medieval Warm Period and times when it was much colder than today such as the Maunder Minimum in the 1600s. During all these times life on Earth, including human life, has thrived. 

With an impact of that importance, one would assume that the sun is playing a major role in all predictions and forecasts.

However, in the eyes of global warming activists such as Al Gore, Greta Thunberg, and their allies as well as organisations such as Greenpeace, Extinction Rebellion, Fridays for Future and many others no one is talking about the sun and what she is doing. 

Their climate change theory and the consequent models do not take account of the Sun’s activity. 

This can be seen as blatant blunder which already in the first pillar renders their theory and models fundamentally flawed. 

Will it therefore not be likely that we can expect many more waves of lies, disguised as science?

On to pillar #2

PILLAR 2

In the man-made climate change world, we are told that world temperature changes follow the level of CO2 in the atmosphere. 

If CO2 goes up, temperature goes up and vice versa. Nothing wrong with this.

However, there is just a tiny challenge with that. Because there is a considerable time lag between temperature changes and those changes being mirrored by CO2. 

The temperature goes up, and it takes several hundred years for the CO2 to go up. This is because the relationship is the opposite to what we’re told. 

The majority of CO2 in the atmosphere comes from the oceans. 

When the temperature increases as a result of sunspot activity, it takes a long time for the oceans to heat up, and subsequently release more CO2. 

Equally, when temperatures fall as a result of a decrease in the Sun’s activity, the oceans slowly cool down and absorb more CO2. 

We can therefore conclude that even if mankind would be responsible for an increase in temperature, it would take a long time for the CO2 to follow. 

PILLAR 3

The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (short the IPCC), set up by Rockefeller oil man Maurice Strong, is a political body cloaked as a scientific one.

Furthermore, from the outset the IPCC controlled the debate by limiting its charter to studying ‘human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation’. 

In other words, before any of the science had been done, the IPCC’s assumption was that man’s activity was responsible, while the role of the Sun and other natural processes were excluded from consideration, thus obstructing free inquiry based on reason and evidence.

PILLAR 4

Carbon dioxide is a natural gas which comprises 0.04% of the Earth’s atmosphere, and we humans produce 4% of that. Which equates to 0.0016% 

Termites produce ten times more CO2 than humans, so why is there no war on termites? 

CO2 is not a pollutant. 

Daniel Thompson-Mills says the effect that CO2 has on climate is totally insignificant. Rather than being the villain, CO2 is the gas of life. 

Plants need CO2 to grow, and life is based on carbon and water. 

He continues that we are actually in a CO2 famine right now – levels have been much higher in the past and life has flourished. 

Any increase in the amount of CO2, even many times over, would be beneficial, enabling plants to grow faster, and grow more easily in arid areas.

PILLAR 5

Pillar 5 brings us to the Agenda 21/Agenda 2030. 

This is an all-encompassing programme under the banner of the United Nations, the aims of which sound laudable – to bring about sustainability. 

But in fact, when examined in detail, along with the history of how it came about, it becomes clear the agenda is to bring about total control of the world’s natural resources, including you and me. 

This plan involves moving the world’s population out of the countryside into smart cities, where people will adhere to World Economic Forum head Klaus Schwab’s postulate of ‘own nothing and be happy’ under total surveillance and control. 

Agenda 21/2030 dovetails with the Great Reset agenda of the World Economic Forum, which includes the push to merge humans with computers also known as transhumanism.

Is this the future you are looking forward to?

PILLAR 6

In 2009, a whistle-blower released emails showing how climate academia was manipulating and destroying data, along with blocking publication of articles which didn’t support their anthropogenic global warming agenda. 

This became known as Climategate. 

By delving into the details, we can see that the notion of man-made climate change, although it sounds plausible, is not actually supported by the data and observations. 

The IPCC’s remit and operation, and the allocation of funds to conduct research along with other factors, support an agenda to control of the world’s resources. 

Global alarmists’ predictions

Let us investigate some of the global alarmists’ predictions.

The first one that springs to mind is Al Gores “An Inconvenient Truth”.

Despite the fact Al Gore’s 2006 Oscar winning movie “An Inconvenient Truth” had a box office grossing of almost 50million Dollars pretty much everything he predicted turned out to be flawed.

Many more of the global warming predictions failed terribly.

For example, in the early 1970’s when climate change became a movement, their concern was global cooling, not global warming. 

Here are some other predictions gone wrong

  • If global warming isn’t reversed by the year 2000, it will be too late to avert catastrophe
  • Back in 2000, climate scientist David Viner had a very dire prediction for England: Snow was going to become almost extinct here. 

Almost 20 years later we read: London has been hit by a wall of snow in a huge blizzard as the UK is rocked by bone-chilling temperatures, ice and wintry weather from the ‘Beast from the East’.

  • TIME magazine’s January 31, 1977, edition had the cover story featuring “The Big Freeze.” They reported that scientists were predicting that Earth’s average temperature could drop by 20 degrees Fahrenheit. Their cited cause was, of course, that humans created global cooling. 
  • It just seems that humans are so powerful we can alter the universe but cannot manage to create corrupt-free governments.
  • The difference this time is they have been able to get governments interested on the basis that they can stop it by raising taxes. Canada imposed a $1,000 tax per home to stop global warming. Perhaps the theory is if the politicians get more money they will speak less and reduce the hot air they spout out by yelling the end is near.
  • The smart man who infamously sold most of Britain’s gold at the lowest price possible was also a clever one in his foresight regarding climate when in 2009 he predicted that “We only have 50 days to save the world from global warming “. 
  • Or this one: Most species on Earth will perish by 1995
  • Another interesting alarmist assertion was the 100.000 bats that dropped from the sky due to a heat wave in Australia.
  • However, Global warming alarmists’ preferred electricity source – wind power – kills nearly 1 million bats every year, to say nothing of the more than 500,000 birds killed every year, in the United States alone. 
  • This appalling death toll occurs every year even while wind power produces just 3% of U.S. electricity. 
  • Ramping up wind power to 10, 20, or 30% of U.S. electricity production would likely increase annual bat kills to 10-to-30 million every year. 
  • Killing 30 million bats every year in response to dubious claims that global warming might once in a great while kill 100,000 bats makes no sense.
  • Last but not at all least, in 2008 Prince Charles warned that he calculated that we only have 96 months to save the world. Obviously, he didn’t reveal how he came about this staggering calculation.

And the list goes on and on.

What is really happening with our climate?

Looking at proper data, the climate has ALWAYS moved cyclically. Anyone who dares to argue that climate change is NOT caused by humans is ridiculed because this is a political issue being used to raise taxes and to regulate human activity by removing ever-greater proportions of our human rights and freedom. 

We are currently moving into a mini–Ice Age also called a Grand Solar Minimum, which will bottom out in the early 2030s, resulting in colder and wetter weather in Europe, worsening food shortages, economic contraction, and population migration.

Can we therefore conclude that those who attack anyone who denies human-induced climate change are either brainwashed or have a self-interest in the entire scam?

If you are interested in Daniel Thompson-Mills 100-page booklet revealing the findings of his research in more detail for only £7.50, including postage and packaging, email [email protected].  

If you couldn’t write it down that fast, check out the transcript on my website.

Provided with this information, have a look for yourself and fact check what is really going on. What is fact and what is fiction.

Enjoy your research and let me know what you came up with.

That’s it for today.

Thanks for tuning in and Bye for now.

3 replies
  1. Colin Wood
    Colin Wood says:

    Hello Elmar it’s great to see you branch out to earth sciences.
    I see Face book have given you a banner already.
    I compare the C02 from humans to a pint of Lager, I don’t drink but bear with me on this.
    One pint contains about 10,000 drips, if this represents the Earth’s atmosphere CO2 at .04% is
    4 drips, of which we have contributed 4% of that, well less than one drip.
    How can this one drip heat up all the other 9,999 ?
    Be careful the bubbles in your pint are CO2 !
    I think I will subscribe to The Light.
    By the way as I write this the recording in not playing but I read the transcript.

    All the best, Colin Wood, Dover.

    Reply
  2. lifesaving angel
    lifesaving angel says:

    I too had to read the transcript.
    Thank goodness we have some common sense out there. Your talks are always a joy to listen to.
    Michael Crighton the author, warned us that climate change was a hoax all those years ago! xxx Kate xxx
    Lifesaving Angel xxx

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.