Climat Ocracy en

COLIN RIVAS

COLIN RIVAS

COLIN RIVAS

COLIN RIVAS

COLIN RIVAS
THE GREAT
GLOBAL WARMING
CON:
CLIMATOCRACY &
WARMOLOGY
BY
COLIN RIVAS
COLLABORATORS:
A. BJORKMAN
J. MAXWELL
R. DELGADO

COLIN RIVAS

COLIN RIVAS
CONTENTS
Intro 11
Thanx 17
Cap. 1 WARMOLOGY CHRONICLES 23
Cap. 2 THE CHURCH OF WARMOLOGY 31
Cap. 3 ¡CLIMATOCRACY! 41
Cap. 4 GLACIAL HEAT 53
Cap. 5 THE SUN CHANGES THE WEATHER 73
Cap. 6 THE CO2 SCAM 85
Cap. 7 THE OZONE LAYER SCAM 91
Cap. 8 THE HAARP FEAR MONGERING 107
Cap. 9 LOCAL OR GLOBAL CHEMTRAILS 113
Cap. 10 OIL & GAS FOREVER 125
Cap. 11 THE EV SCAM 141
Cap. 12 THE FAKE NUCLEAR BOMBS 149

COLIN RIVAS

COLIN RIVAS
©Colin Rivas 2023 First Edition
Printed by Amazon
Published by www.colinrivas.com.
All Rights Reserved
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any
means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording
or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the
publisher.
ISBN

COLIN RIVAS

COLIN RIVAS
«... The crime of those who deceive us is not in

deceit, but in that they no longer let us dream
that they will never deceive us again...»
- Ancient Saying

COLIN RIVAS

THE GREAT GLOBAL WARMING CON
INTRO
«... The mass media and readers of my books are
warned that viruses, bacteria and pathogens do not
exist and have never been isolated nor do they cause
any disease and, therefore, vaccines are useless
pseudoscience, except for the government using the
as a tool to control people; that nuclear bombs of
1945, quantum physics are a scam, the trips to the
moon since 1969 are also fake; the twin towers of 911
including the WCT7 destroyed by Arab terrorists in
2001, and global warming are basically “fake news.”
And for this reason you probably will suffer from
cognitive dissonance and cannot handle my
information. You will most likely get extremely upset
and will have a serious mental meltdown.
My conclusions and those of my colleagues and

sources are proven facts. They are impeccable,
simple, right and also good news for humans and
earthlings in general.
Viruses, pathogen bacteria or similar have never been

isolated or proven to cause any epidemic or pandemic
in live cultures in or outside a lab except for the
chemicals added to the mixed tissue.
Manmade global warming and/or Cooling are basically

fear mongering and a lot of BS.
Atomic bombs don't work.
Humans cannot travel to the Moon.
13

Skyscrapers don't collapse from the top down when

planes hit a building.
Any information to the contrary is pseudoscience,

propaganda lies or fantasies promoted by the media
and taught in universities. And if you don't agree with
the official lies, you won't be allowed to participate in
the college regatta* and other scam events etc. Your
position in society is at risk.
Suffering from cognitive dissonance is a commonality

among western population, you will undoubtedly find
this information disturbing and will become angry,
upset, anxious, or worried.
What should you believe?
The old lies or the truth?
To the intoxicating mass media and if there are any

honest journalists left, they are kindly asked to go to
therapy to get rid of their cognitive dissonance. Why
not listen for once in all? And publish this exclusive
goo news and information.
My friend Anders asked me once if I heard of Trofim

Lyssenko. I didn’t know about him. But Anders told me
that he was the creator of pseudoscience around
1930s! Stalin loved him. Pseudoscience is used to
present a lie as truth in a scientific way. It's just silly
propaganda! Fake News!
14

No climatologist believes that man can change the

climate deliberately or unintentionally.
Those to the contrary, I have coined the term

warmologist working for the climatocracy elite or
climatocrats.
CO2 was never evil or even poisonous and global

warming is not caused by any gas or fossil fuel. It's
just a clever US/Hollywood State capitalist fear
mongering show put on by the modern-day
Lyssenkos. The ecolefties and ecolibtards! Green
organizations willingly play the role of activist clowns
and saviors of humanity. A pure product of
Lyssenko’s school of thought.
We will have nothing. Bill Gates and his biz

partners, everything.
The vegan movement wants all of humanity to learn

new eating habits that end the differences in personal
identity typical of gastronomy!
Yes! And they'll make you eat bugs! It was and is just
a show to entertain us.
Since the beginning of 2021, a video entitled Eight

Predictions for the World in 2030 has been making the
rounds on social media and web pages, in which you
can see the forecasts that the World Economic Forum
has for the end of this decade. «In 2030 you will have
nothing and you will be happy. Anything you want to
get will be delivered to your home by a drone” and
“you will eat less meat”.
15

"It will not be basic food for the good of the

environment and your health", are the two statements
that, at least, should raise a red flag. And it is that,
contrary to popular belief, we are not facing a
"conspiracy theory", but rather an agenda that has
already been put into operation in several countries.
For a long time, in various parts of the world,

simultaneously, the vegan movement has begun to
generate chaos. Restaurants, supermarkets and farms
-especially cows, pigs, lambs and poultry- are the
targets of the furious activists. The slogans are "end
animal slavery", "all lives matter", "it's not food, it's a
living being" and, believe it or not, "end specist
heteropatriarchy".
They are going to con us via the eco-animalist

supremacy and eco-lefties: humans are seen as a
plague that must be exterminated, and they have
already approved animal rights laws (like in Spain and
most of Europe) and that is you can kill all the babies
you want because those are a disease and they are
serial killers (no pun intended haha).
The funny thing is that most are paid by oil

corporations, subsidized by the state (tyranny) or by
groups of rich elite people like Gates, Zuckerbergs,
Soros or the Gettys. While these hollow phrases have
little resonance with adults, the real goal is to
indoctrinate and brainwash future generations. Since
veganism, taken from Mao Tse Tung's communistic
manual, intends to impose a cultural revolution from
your stomach.
16

For humans, food is more than the simple intake of

nutrients. It is a tradition. Around food there are
memories of the ancestors or of our roots in case of
having migrated or of the culture of a country or
region. Gastronomy is part of our personal identity.
For example, the Spaniards and Bolivians together on
Saturdays and Sundays eat churrasco, the Valencian
paella, or the Celtic stew in Ireland, in England the
Sunday roast in order to get together with friends and
family. For their part, the Italians have pasta, the
Japanese have sushi, the Mexicans have tacos and the
Peruvians have ceviche. In short, cooking is culture.
Therefore, the globalists will not achieve their goals.
In his book, How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The

Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need,
Bill Gates assures that the average person is going to
have to forget ―whether they want to or not― to eat a
T-bone steak, seafood, hamburgers, BB chicken, or
burritos and you will also walk to your home or you
will ride an electric bike or drive an EV mini car, no
gasoline or planes or long distances. You will live in a
smart-15-minute-city-grid and ask for permission to
exit or move relying upon your social credit.
On the other hand, thinking that fossil fuels are

dinosaur juice is another scam by oil magnates and
states, which want to charge a lot of money or taxes
for a liquid mineral that is ubiquitous like oil or gas. Oil
has a non-fossil chemical origin, since it is extracted
at a depth of more than 5 km where no fossils are to
be found, oil wells, in fact, have appeared at full
capacity again after a short time.
17

It was magnates like Rockefeller who changed the

definition by having carbon as its component and
hence, that’s the main point.
That’s why, oil is a clean fuel, renewable and not like

electricity or cobalt batteries, lithium or whatever,
which are extracted from rare soils, ravaging cities,
towns and entire populations and polluting them.
In addition to this method, which uses children as

slave labor from African, South American and Asian
countries. Huge extensions of land become polluted,
major populations displaced and back to the Stone
Age since they don’t let them use gas, charcoal or
wood as traditional methods of fuel to power their
homes, devices or vehicles. with the result that in 8-10
years those batteries are useless not even for
recycling.
Is it possible that we do not realize that we are being

deceived?
Yes, because the controllers or architects of control

have achieved the technological capacity to enter our
lives and minds through TV, the internet or cell or
mobile phones. George Orwell's extreme call for
freedom in 1984 becomes anachronistic: “They can
make you say anything, but there's no way they'll
make you believe it. They can't get inside you" No!:
now they can.
18

Surveillance technologies and the immense neural

programming apparatus, subcutaneous chips,
vaccines, imposed drugs, medicines and even food to
achieve it.
Work will no longer exist either, replaced by “time to

think, create and develop”. Think about what, if not
material and trivial consumption. So, create. For what
purpose, since nothing will be "ours" and we will not
be able to enjoy its fruits and pass them on to our
children? Regarding the development of the
personality, we rather think of an infinite number of
neuroses, which can only be remedied with a further
medicalization of life, the massive administration of
psychotropic substances such as the well-known
fentanyl or some type of neuro-modulation or
connected local antennas to homemade devices or
even vaccines capable of making humans endure a life
in captivity, of farm animals without complaining and
loving it.
There will be no need to go shopping, "the algorithm

will do it for us". The huge experiment in social
engineering that underlies the ConVirus can be
explained very well: everyone at home, "socially"
spaced, lonely and distrustful atoms that receive grass
from the controller or farmer. In Roman feudal times or
the Middle Ages: in the, the peasants or commoners
their families had the obligation to remain for life in the
feud of the vassal of the feudal Lord or vassalage and
work for them.
19

In exchange, they received protection and the

guarantee of a modus vivendi. Everything except
weapons, some tools and some furniture belonged to
the feudal lord.
We will talk and deal with controversial issues. you

will lose your fear. All of the fake news and the false
security that the state gives you will be terminated.
Keep on reading…
20

THANKS TO:
... I want to thank all of the friends we have lost and
those who still remain along the way; to my late friend
Jordan Maxwell, a person as mysterious as he was
intelligent; and lastly, my sincerest thanks to the late
Anthony Hilder of Los Angeles who made that first
fascinating documentary about the Illuminati back in
the 90's and from there was born my passion to further
investigate the phenomenon of why and how powerful
secret societies control our planet. Thanks to Anders
Bjorkman from Heiwaco, Ricardo Delgado from Quinta
Columna, Alan Watts, and my wife Martha.
21

22

CHAPTER I: WARMOLOGY
CHRONICLES
« My mother-in-law burns the omelette and blames it on
climate change.» - Colin Rivas.
The heat, like all of the summers I have spent in

Portugal, has warmingly run my vacations as always. But
this year with a particularity; Once I left the Porto airport
behind so as to go to my summer residence in Vila Do
Conde, I called for my mother-in-law to tell her to cook me
some food. My mother-in-law told me that she left a
Spanish omelette on the top counter. I am a happy man
with a simple Spanish omellette.
«Omelletes make me happy»
I was shockingly upset when, just arriving at my pad, I
proceeded to sink my teeth into such a delicious Spanish
delicacy and observed that the tortilla was drier than the
Sahara desert sand and overly more burned than a
hippie's motorcycle.
23

At that moment, my mother-in-law made an appearance

and with a whistling voice told me that her omellette got
burned because of the extreme climate change.
«Blame it on climate change not on the boogie»
After a long day of business travelling, I considered the

option of going to the nearest restaurant for a good bite of
any Portuguese food including an exquisite “frango”
(Portuguese roasted chicken) with fries and a chocolate
mousse for dessert. While I was having dinner in the
establishment I began to think about writing an article for
my blog about all this madness of "global warming" which I
have been debunking since the 90s.
A word like "global warming" is taboo in my house

along with others invented by subsidized trolls and
architects of control that include bugologists, quacks,
journalistic whores, and politicians who use catastrophes
and the coming apocalypse daily to scare, make promises
and win votes from clueless and gullible citizens with any
strategy and narrative that instills fear or uncertainty in
their voters. We have seen this practice especially in
tyrannical regimes in the last 200 years of history. All this
added to the mass media that loves scary, catastrophic or
apocalyptic news: be it killer cockroaches, giant meteorites
or invisible flying bugs that go around like an endless
immortal inert gas killing the irresponsible and state
fearless people, always according to the mass media and
official science.
« The greatest conspiracy theory is that the state

protects you, big pharma takes care of you and the
mass media inform you»
24

Given the exorbitant and hasty implementation of new

technology in our society, this obviously has its
advantages and disadvantages. One of them is the
tendency to become sedentary and lazy. Technologies
such as electricity, sewage, water purification,
industrialization of resources such as food, oil, nuclear and
coal have helped us not only to lead an easier life but also
to avoid certain endemic diseases due to lack of nutrition,
exercise, and poisoning. This has led us to splendid
globalization (global exchange of ideas and consumer
goods) but at the same time to an exaggerated globalism
(control of an oligarchy over the resources and people of
the planet through coercion) dispensed by the elites who
want to control all facets of our lives digitally and
physically.
Technology is always a double-edged sword. It applies

both to empirical reality as well as to the digital universe.
The elite of certain Anglo-Saxon countries tend to control
and use the internet and the digital to obtain information
about users and citizens. We are at the dawn of the end of
privacy. Television, radio, and in this case Big Tech
(multinational internet platforms) are controlled and
directed by the same actors who control the narrative of
bichologists, warmologist, and statesman political
scientists. Traditional and most modern technologies are
used daily to control people's will and opinions. This favors
social changes, multinationals and social engineering
practiced by the establishment and sponsored by the state.
25

One of those businesses that uses as a tool of fear,

telling porky pies and stripping taxpayers of their private
property while displacing the last farmers from rural areas
with the purpose of owning and exploiting them to take
them to the new "smart cities". (15 minute smart cities or
prison towns) is the religion of warmology. This
dangerous and intrusive new doctrine that is gaining
religious and eco-friendly adherents to their ranks has
already added Hollywood influencers, pushy politicians,
and businessmen of a certain trend including bankers and
large corporations such as BlackRock, Vanguard, and
Capital, to name a few.
«The biggest fallacy is that CO2 causes climate

change during the Jurassic era the CO2 was 2,000ppm
and between 1500 and 2020 the percentage of CO2 is
1.5%, reaching only 300ppm»
The religious climatocracy and their priests have set up

an important state business, which brings huge billion-
dollar benefits to their followers and multinationals,
punishing the average person and stripping them of part of
their salary for an apocalypse that will never come in a
non-existent future. In addition, this growing religion, like
those of yesteryear, tends to stigmatize skeptics and
heretics who do not want to swallow the story or the
narrative. These dissidents and dissenters who provide
data and facts are called "denialists" a very fashionable
catchword in the last two years and with a connotation that
borders on criminal.
26

There is no such word in the dictionary except for those

who denied certain historical narratives of Germany WWII
in 1939. With very bad intent and hatred this term is
applied lightly to anyone who denies the lies of a system
corrupt to the core.
«My rights do not end where your fears begin»
This has a purpose and is to confront one group against

another and encourage violence, which the state already
has a monopoly on, a state without checks and balances
that censors freedom of expression and is also selective
when it comes to safeguarding individual rights.
Just as the majority of the world population swallowed

the milonga of the ozone layer at the time, they also
swallow the fantasies of the covid, calentóloga and state
religion that have been curdling since the post-war era with
an insistent, unstoppable and bold social engineering
spilling over from the mainstream disinformation media
and congressional seats of Western civilization.
The empirical data is overwhelming. NASA itself on its

website had to delete a recent article where it mentions
that the sun and its cycles influence changes in
temperature, currents and even the production of
volcanoes, earthquakes and other events. In 2011 it
pointed out that CO2 cools the biosphere, not warming it,
and that CO2 is not the most common gas, in fact water
vapor is the most common gas in the Earth's atmosphere.
Mars and Jupiter are warming up and we don't know if
there are little Martian factories up there.
27

The CO2 in the Jurassic was 2000ppm, and the

dinosaurs lived in a kind of garden of Eden on a constant
21-24C temperature for millions of years. In a school
classroom with 40 students and a teacher with everything
closed in winter, more than 3,000ppm of CO2 is produced
in the room and no one dies. When you go to the bathroom
to poop, more than 20,000 ppm of CO2 is released when
you flush in the toilet and you don’t die either. CO2 is part
of the life cycle and photosynthesis for plants. The forest
has increased by 30% in the last decade.
Therefore, CO2 is a global business, with banks and

stock companies gambling on the stock market with CO2
credits. Countries pass and lend and sell CO2 to each
other. The very billionaires who promote the atrocity of
getting rid of cows, cattle, and carbon footprints are the
very same ones who are buying millions of acres from the
government and farmers at ridiculously low prices to
control resources and do business.
These same billionaires who at the Davos forum parked

1,600 private jets in Davos and who have private armies
but want the laws to be eliminated so that citizens can’t
bear arms or defend themselves. These billionaires are the
same ones who want to abolish freedom of expression on
the internet but later they boast about the culling the
population and call the rest of mortals ¨useless eaters¨
¨denialists¨ ¨bleachdrinkers¨ ¨domestic terrorists ¨etc etc.
I have only written this article for those who still hold
more than a few braincells and may have some curiosity of
thought to ask questions.
28

The architects of control are here to stay and have

started removing cattle from their farms because we
actually live on farms with multiple farmers; For them we
are cattle that must be provided with electricity, healthcare
and food the same as a cow or a sheep and they see us
as expendable. The farm becomes overcrowded and this
threatens their authority and their way of life. Just as they
perceive cattle as carbon units. The CO2 they want to
eliminate is you. And if they don't get it you will have
nothing and you will be happy. The bullshit of warmology
and the climatocracy are one of the many steps for this.
«97% of the scientific community receives grants and

money from the state and questionable donors to
promote non-existent climate change»
--John Coleman (Meteorologist and founder of the
Weather Channel)
29

30

CHAPTER II:
THE CHURCH OF WARMOLOGY
« All warfare is based on deception.»
-Sun Tzu
While the media talk about the new saint of

environmentalism, Greta Thumberg, alias Saint Greta, the
common people have fallen for all the narrative and
paraphernalia defecated from the pulpits of political
science, the temples of Warmology and even the
Bugologists, new Unicornologists join this designer
eugenics party served à la carte by Klaus Schawb, Bill
Gates and in bygone times Al Gore's elitist ape.
31

In the absence of new religions that transcend the

human soul and the loss of interest in already established
sects and religions that no longer attract sheeple or
millennials due to their eternal boredom and lack of
immediate satisfaction. Nevertheless, what can you expect
from people who think that you will be like digital gods but
asshole gods?
«Our comfortable lifestyles and the decline

of religion in the West have created a spiritual
vacuum.» (Madeline Grant)
People, nowadays, absorbed by the prefects of the

governments that want to lighten the population and their
lackeys, the mass intoxicating media, gullible and ignorant
to the core, are unaware of the basic functioning of nature
and its environment because they have abandoned life.
Aside from the countryside and the rural giving way of life
giving pace to their miserable life of unhappiness, sadism
and necrophilia prolonged by the smart 15 minute cities of
electric scooters, processed supermarket frankenfood and
microwave TV dinners.
The globalists have been able to take advantage of this

populace’s supine ignorance, credulity and dependence on
government and have turned their religious archetypes of
yesteryear into their new weapon of mass destruction.
Thunberg, with her doomsday warnings and long-tight
Pippi long stocking braids, has become a global icon in a
matter of months.
32

However, more than the ubiquitous crowds that

accompany her, are her quasi-religious bows. She is
portrayed as a prophet child, a modern-day Joan of Arc in
her ability to inspire a movement. This is a technique used
by big pharma with vaccines and drugs in what has come
to be called "technological solutionism" in other words,
selling you something that does not work for a non-existent
need by using science, which has become another sect or
religion, too.
Another interesting thing that caught my attention before

the coronavirus plandemic was the meeting between
Trump and Greta. Does anyone remember Trump's
mockery of Thunberg? I doubt they have forgotten. It has
only been a few years. Fanatic crazy eco-warriors hailed
her cold-hearted encounter with Trump as a symbolic
meeting of good and evil; the vain and materialistic against
the transcendent and quasi-spiritual embodied by Greta.
In a speech worthy of a religious leader, Great uttered

the victimizing words: "You have stolen my dreams and my
youth with your empty words," sounds like the cheesiest
thing anyone has ever said before the United Nations.
Which is the right answer? A) Go to your room. Or is it B)
Forgive me for doing this to you, your daddy and I are
going to set the entire course of humanity on a new
globalist indoctrinating track. Get on all fours and look
towards Mecca.
33

Lacking prophets and new religious and mystical thrills,

the globalists want to fill that void with people like Greta in
various disciplines of the elitist and eugenics new science.
Ergo, in our purposeless culture the false prophet
(Thunberg) takes over because she represents the faith
they have lost. This is why the cult of Saint Greta attracts
converts from the affluent classes of Western Europe and
North America. American pollution and carbon emissions
have been falling for decades, (in fact, this last one we had
to raise to further increase CO2 locally and power it for
plant food) and most of the world's pollution and carbon
emissions come from countries like India, China and
Africa, and third world countries but their headquarters and
martyrdoms take place in Stockholm, Madrid, Paris, Tokyo,
London and New York.
It must be noted that in the West there is a need for

collective belief that, at this moment, is not manifested in
India or China; green millenarianism is a theology for rich
countries and for the most privileged of those countries.
Lollipop socialism epitomized in eco-communism,
scientism and progressive libtardism statism.
What is not so common is that millions of eco-friendly

Taliban fanatics take it seriously and flock to listen to her
millenarian sermons about the end of times, which is
imminent, because the older generations do not respect
the climate, so the next generations of kids are bound to
relay Greta.
34

But as we have seen during the 2020 plandemic, the

common people are so sheepish and lobotomized by
television, the government and the media that they are
willing to believe in flying pigs if a politician or television
told them so. Feminists, statists and ecolefties of today will
be the submissive woke karens of tomorrow.
Just like YouTube, Twitter and Instagram have filled the

void left by the negligent and showy deluxe televisions of
reality shows and endless fake news that they vomit daily
against the common people and their submissive sheep
along with their filthy lackeys and journalistic whores of the
nazi checkers. New channels like mine
www.colinrivas.show and www.colinrivas.tv will fill the
void of rigour, entertainment and free flow of uncensored
information that, thanks to digital censorship, is missing
from these Pentagon platforms led by ratty brainwashed
kids and left-libtards and right-wing scumbags, staunch
technocrats control, stability and security of the new
globalist regime called the new genital disorder (NOW)
(transhumanism).
"God is dead", Nietzsche said metaphorically that with

this the foundations of knowledge and morality of the
history of humanity were broken. And now we are at that
stage where knowledge and morality will be transferred to
those soldiers of light, who are apparently like the others,
but heroes of the digital age, they look like anyone at first
glance, they act like average men, but they are not. They
will be the new prometheans of humanity.
35

Years ago I coined the term of warmology among

others in an esoteric conference that called the attention of
locals and pseudoskeptic strangers. Warmology is as
religious as any experience we suffer on this planeof
existence, it has its gods, its priests, the warmologists
and its parishioners and fans, the warmtards, just as the
religion of Saint Covid has their covids and their covidians.
Like any other religion, it has its narrative and its bible,
its sins and its philosophy – as we will see throughout this
volume. It has its apocalypse and its financing. But what
distinguishes it from other exoteric religions is that it will be
mandatory just like the government is a destructive sect.
The warmologists tithe will be obligatory. As much or
more than veganism, feminism, speciesism, electricism,
digitalism and other paranoias that globalists will try to
push through submissive and internationalist governments
to perpetuate themselves and expand their power of
coercion.
Warmology is a capitalist, statist mega-turbo religious

political elite whereby you have to buy into all the media
and political rosary that tells you to believe that everything
that is being said about climate change is rigorously true
and obviously your fault.
Climate change, ergo, the warmology blames all sins

and original sin on man for being irresponsible, but at the
same time no one is, it is a state and mandatory action so
as not to be branded as conspiracy theorist, flat earther,
denialist
36

(term historical coined to the revisionists of the Second

World War and Holohoax, not applicable to other areas,
and with a very malicious intent, obviously.) anti-scientific,
fascist, Nazi, anti-vaccines, unsupportive or "ultra far right
wing" etc. etc What does all this sound like? Back to the
time of the plandemic, yes.
For the class of political hangers-on and the parasitic,

aristocratic financial elite based at colleges and
universities in England and the Eastern United States, it is
mega-useful, as it serves as an excuse to not act on things
that are within their reach on a local or regional scale and
to justify any type of decision, apart from keeping the
sheep, the little smart, the uninformed or misinformed, the
partisan, the stooge, the subsidized trolls and the scared
and hypochondriac constantly submissive and dependent
on a handful of multinationals and governments associated
with this religion.
We undoubtedly produce pollution and contamination at

a local or regional level, but from that to affect a
supermassive planet like ours of which we basically
occupy not even 5% of it and which depends on the sun
and other stellar events to change its climate, as though
we were a colony of ants were trying to change the climate
of the entire Amazon jungle, it is at the least stupid. And if
it were so, in the worst case scenario, it would have to be
proven and demonstrated, something that has never been,
in fact, demonstrated.
37

We already know that not everything is black or white

and there are many of us who consider other possibilities,
but the fanatic warmologists want to create two camps
because they know that this works well within the core of a
religion, in politics and in sports entertainment, two
opposing sides, like good and evil, “warmologists” vs
“deniers.” The same as between the right and the left and
creating polarization in these ideas makes them grow and
gives them more coverage and media time, more money
and more ground where to test these ideas and which
ones they really work.
The warmologists, just as the quacks remained, they

are also here to stay. Since we are surrounded by
submissive people, sheep and cowards waiting for
influencers and disinformation agents they trust the same
as politicians, and they know this well and the data is held
by the globalists. It doesn't matter if three trains explode in
Ohio or in Kansas City, boycotted by the globalists.
Greta is only going to say that it's Russia's fault, Putin's

fault, Trump's fault, or yours. Because, those who control
the tempos and the means are the mega warmologists.
And they rule. The 2030 agenda is a very well laid-out
plan. They have prepared it as a religion of millenials
ashamed and little self-conscious about their ancestors
and their origins. Spoiled children of the enjoyment and
pleasure of the here and now, a technocratic and
idiocratic carpe diem of the politics of the climatocracy
of power.
38

As it happens to the unsuspecting Brian in the

magnificent Monty Python film The life of Brian when the
sheepish mobs begin to chase him demanding that he
explain the secret of eternal life, with which the cult of the
Lost Shoe begins in tight competition with that of the
Sacred Gourd of Jerusalem, which leads to a series of
incidents and very funny gags until his crucifixion in the
complicit presence of the Popular Front of Judea, a suicide
squad.
This has a simple and practical reading of our cruel

world and hateful illusory reality, which is that human
beings will always be the same submissive sheep in need
of the herd, the same feverish and weak yearning for
certainties, the same religious zealot ready to be attacked
by an ideal designed by those who want to deceive you.
The essence is always the same; only the nuances, the
details and the words change. The meaning and semantics
are always the same.
39

40

CHAPTER III: ¡CLIMATOCRACY!

«When you hear a lie often enough, you start
to believe it.»
-Michael Jackson
Global Warming or The Next Ice Age? Who

Should We Believe?
There has not been no other topic apart from Saint
Covid in recent years in today's much-defeated science
that has captured so much people's attention, and that has
caused so much fear and anguish, as the statement that
the Earth is warming, and that this would have catastrophic
consequences. Some scientists agree with the "Global
Warming" theory and some don't. Who should we
believed? To be fair, even if the prophesied warming were
to occur, no one can expect it to happen overnight, or
without occurrences of extreme cold and extreme heat
from time to time.
41

Since climatology is handled with what is called

"geological scale" (that is, time periods of hundreds of
thousands - or millions - of years), measurements made in
short periods of about 2, 5 or 10 years, do not mark any
trend in any way. Variations that occur within such short
periods are considered "natural variations," or
"statistical noise."
The Earth's gas canopy consists of its natural

greenhouse. If this canopy did not exist, temperatures
during the day would rise above 98 C and those at night
would drop below -172 C. The average temperature would
be -25 C. Since the average temperature of the Earth is
15C, it is calculated that the greenhouse effect provided by
the atmosphere is equivalent to 34o C. The famous
researcher Sherwood Idso, from the US Department of
Agriculture Research Service and professor in the
Department of Botany and Geography at the University of
Arizona, has a very reasonable theory based on these 34C
of the Earth's natural greenhouse, elaborated after many
and fruitful years of research.
“The Earth's gas canopy constitutes its natural greenhouse. CO2

is not a poison or bad for you, they even have it in soda bottles
and we don't die”
Dr. Idso investigated a property of the atmosphere

called "emissivity," which is a measure of how close its
properties as an absorber and radiator of energy are
compared to those of the most efficient possible radiator,
the so-called blackbody. A perfect black body, N
ECOLOGY: Myths and Frauds, absorbs all the radiant
energy it receives.
42

Therefore, the Earth is acting almost with the efficiency

of a "black body" since it absorbs 90% of the energy
received from the Sun. In any of the conceivable cases,
the Earth's atmosphere could never be as efficient as a
black body and, now acting with an efficiency of 90% of the
black body in the infrared, it has produced a global
greenhouse effect of 34C. That missing 10%, says Idso,
could not produce more than an extra 10% of effect
greenhouse, that is, no more than a further increase in
global average temperature of 3.4C. However, it is
impossible for the Earth to act as a perfect black body for
the simple reason that this black body cannot exist. It is
just an intellectual exercise of scientists.
On the other hand, Idso's long studies lead him to affirm

that a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere would only
cause a temperature increase of just 0.34o C. Thousands
of scientists agree on the CO2, of course. Let's briefly look
at an aspect of the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere that
is too often ignored: its impact on the biosphere.
CO2 plays an essential role since, unlike the other

gases emitted by the supposed burning of fossil fuels (we
will see later this is also a hoax), it is not a polluting gas
with potentially harmful effects on the biosphere, but rather
It is an essential and highly beneficial gas for the
development of animal and plant life on our planet Earth.
Consequently, when man emits CO2 into the atmosphere,
he is not harming it, but rather benefiting it. There are
numerous studies that have evaluated the possible impact
that an increase in carbon dioxide would have on a wide
variety of plants, both wild and cultivated.
43

The generalized conclusions are overwhelmingly

positive and can be summarized as follows: «Higher levels
of CO2 cause an increase in photosynthesis, plant weight,
number of branches, leaves and fruits, size of the latter,
tolerance of plants to atmospheric pollution and a marked
increase in the efficiency of water use. Finally, the studies
by Maier-Reimer and Hasselmann (Climate Dynamics,
1987) show that the higher the temperature, the greater
the growth of plants - within the temperature ranges
observed on our planet. This is entirely true for tropical
temperatures, and partly reflects the fact that the variety of
species in the biosphere increases as temperature and
humidity increase.
Computer Models and other

mental straws of the climatocracy
If we go deeper into the subject, someone with two brain
cells realizes that all of the alarm and fear that has been
infused in the average layman are based on the
"prophecies" that come out of powerful computers as well
as the models and sequences of viruses and bacteria and
that run software programs called GCMs (or General
Circulation Models). To set the record straight, no matter
how perfect these programs are, they are still only
"models," that is, an incomplete approximation of the
multitude of physical, chemical, and even biological
processes that occur on Earth, and they are a long way off.
Even to include all the processes that are important for the
climate.
44

In the first place, there is an infinity of natural processes

still unknown to scientists and that are not incorporated
into these computational models, so their results lack any
scientific value and we must also add the chemtrails of
airplanes and other devices used by governments that
modify its climate locally and regionally, not globally, since
it is a technological impossibility even if internet
conspiracists say so (Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait use
this method of silver iodide and aluminum nanoparticles to
seed clouds and create zones cultivation and orchards).
Scientists have been searching since the late 19th

century to understand the complex behavior of fluids
known as turbulence. It is a chaotic process that cannot be
simulated by any computer program for the simple reason
that scientists do not know how it works and do not know
what data to enter into the software they have. When a
fluid is turbulent (almost all are), you can't theoretically
predict how it will behave, and you can't experimentally
measure the conditions in the fluid so you know what's
happening.
Experiments are made difficult by the fact that a

turbulent fluid is active on scales smaller than the size of
the smallest measuring instruments. Consequently, the
measurements themselves are not of the actual variables
but of some kind of unspecified, instrument-dependent
average of only some small parts of the analyzed fluid.
“CO2 has an essential role since, unlike other gases, it is not a

polluting gas with potentially harmful effects on the biosphere,
but rather an essential and highly beneficial gas for the
development of animal and plant life in our Earth planet.”
45

It is of the utmost importance to be able to

understand the seriousness of all the statements that are
poured here from the subsidized stooges of the ruling party
on the subject of climate change, to realize that the climate
cannot be modeled in such a perfect way that it allows us
to predict the weather that will be next week – not to
mention 100 years in the future! The results that
computer models produce are really prophecies. The
basic reason is that we don't know enough about how the
weather works. The models created to simulate the
functioning of the atmosphere are of the type of three-
dimensional model or GCM. So that you have a minimal
idea of the precision and reliability that these computerized
models can have, let's see how they are designed.
These models divide the world into two hemispheres

and take into account only the Northern Hemisphere – the
South does not exist for climatologists. They then divide
the world into a grid whose squares are 450 km on each
side. Each of these squares has an air column 50
kilometers high above it where thousands of chemical and
physical reactions should take place, all of them turbulent.
Each of these reactions must be represented by an
equation containing constants and variables, which no one
knows how to accurately measure or determine.
The difficult part is determining the value of these

variables and constants. Since they cannot be measured
because they are turbulent, scientists dodge the problem
and start with a value by eye and then modify it according
to the results.
46

If the results obtained do not seem to confirm the

hypothesis that the temperature will increase, the variables
continue to be modified until the result is obtained that
confirms the a priori hypothesis that the warming will be
serious. However, the 450 km square grid is too large and
the values within each grid are different from those of the
neighboring grids. According to this, while in one of the
squares it rains torrentially, in the neighboring square there
is a frightful drought; in another they melt from the heat
and in the next they freeze to death.
The precision or "fineness" of this analysis and

simulation of the Earth is too gross to be considered
seriously. GCMs, even the most sophisticated and
expensive to “run”, are very, very far from being adequate
representations of reality: solar radiation is entered as a
fixed value, corresponding to either summer or winter.
GCMs cannot calculate the effects of seasonal variations,
and scientists have disagreed about the effect of
cloudiness on climate: Does it help warm the atmosphere
by preventing radiation from escaping into space, or does
it actually cool the atmosphere? to the planet by preventing
the sun's rays from reaching the surface of the planet?
Imagine the result of an equation with a variable that can
have a negative value for some, or a positive value for
others. Who to believe? But worst of all, none of the
models used so far adequately considers the oceans and
their influence.
47

And something else: neither El Niño nor La Niña

currents are considered something worth entering as data.
When you think that the oceans cover 73% of the planet's
surface, and this 73% is missing from the calculations,
there is something wrong with the GCMs. However, Mr.
James Hansen, when he spoke before the United States
Congress to claim that Global Warming had started, was
doing so based solely on the results of his computer
models. In a virtual reality. Sci Fi not Sci Fact.
The Hockey Stick

The "experts" Essex and McKitrick indicate that perhaps
a Fairy Godmother touches something with her magic
wand and turns it into The Magic Computer, which will be
able to solve all the uncertainties and ignorance that exist
about the weather, regardless of whether the variables and
constants that are used are the true ones. In fact, what the
IPCC warmologists have been doing at our tax expense
for many years is exactly that: they have used a Magic
Computer that has produced Magical Results. Starting
from ignorance, uncertainty and erroneous and
controversial data, they have reproduced what they call the
average global temperatures, and have determined the
behavior that the climate will have in the next 20, 50 and
100 years.
“Turbulence ... a chaotic process that cannot be simulated by

computer since scientists do not know how it works and do not
know what data to enter into the software they have”
48

But despite everything, meteorologists continue to miss

the weather forecast when they go beyond three days.
They say that Bert Bolin, then head of the IPCC, danced
for joy the day he was presented with the issue of the
journal Nature where the article by Mann, Bradley and
Hughes appeared on the reconstruction of the
temperatures of the last millennium, "proving" that the 20th
century temperatures were the highest in the last thousand
years, and that levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
had increased astonishingly since the start of the so-called
Industrial Revolution.
Bolin's joy was not for less. The Mann et al article,

brought up a color graph showing a temperature "curve"
from the year 1000, falling smoothly and gradually until
around 1860, and then making a very steep jump
throughout the 20th century, taking the shape that
resembled an ice hockey stick. That graph has since been
known as The Hockey Stick, and together with Mann et al's
claim about historically low CO2 levels before the runaway
start of man's industrial activities, it became the
cornerstone of the global warming theory blamed on the
activities of man. To "reconstruct" temperatures, Mann had
used what are known as "proxies," or studies of tree ring
thickness, coral growth, and other things, that would allow
comparisons with current measurements and infer
temperatures from hundred, five hundred, thousand years
ago or more.
49

Analysis of ice cylinders extracted from core drilling

made in the ice caps of glaciers in Greenland, Antarctica,
Europe, the Himalayas, etc., were also used to determine
the concentration of carbon dioxide in the bubbles. air
trapped in ice thousands of years ago. Are these
measurements reliable? Having seen some results and
after much discussion, the analysis of ice cylinders is being
highly questioned.
“The IPCC have used a Magic Computer which has produced

Magical Results”
50

CHAPTER IV: GLACIAL HEAT

« The ice is melting. The sea is rising.
Hurricanes are blowing. And it's all YOUR
FAULT…»
-Ibid
The CO2 Level in the Atmosphere

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) has published several reports of the state of the
weather, predictions and recommendations for
governments and policy makers who determine whether
one will be richer, poorer, healthier or sicker, happier or
more miserable. Several thousand scientists from all over
the world have taken part in preparing their technical
reports, who have contributed with their observations and
studies that provide data that will be used by computerized
climate models to find out where we come from and where
we are going.
51

But the matter is not so simple. Things get complicated

when you remember that temperature averages are not
reality but a statistic, and statistical averages can be
obtained in many different ways, and depending on which
averaging method is used, the result can be negative. o
positive – using exactly the same data. Hard to believe? It
is when the details are unknown. Let's look at a simple
example of obtaining temperatures, as shown by Chris
Essex and Ross McKitrick, in their 2002 book Taken by
Storm. (Scientists at NASA and their GISS (Goddard
Institute of Space Studies) fill us with graphs of
temperature averages, daily, weekly, monthly, yearly,
secular and, of course, all “global”.
What is remarkable is the precision with which these

NASA gentlemen are able to measure something that
doesn't exist. Graphic or non-graphic, there is no such
thing as "a global temperature." This is a global
temperature statistic, but it is not “a temperature”. The
world is not in thermodynamic equilibrium, so there is
no single temperature to discuss.
What we measure is tied to places through local

thermodynamic equilibria. It doesn't make any global
sense, and a statistic certainly doesn't say whether the
world is warmer or colder than it was 10, 100, or 1,000
years ago. There is no scientific way to show such a thing.
What is the difference between temperature and statistics?
With anything that is measured numerically we can, if we
want to, take a sample of the observations, add them up,
and calculate any kind of average.
52

That is just making statistics. But sometimes the thing

being measured only means something locally and loses
its meaning when added up or averaged. If we take the
phone number of all our friends at the golf club, for
example, we add them up and compute their average.
Now, if we dial this number, will the average friend
answer? Of course not.
Phone numbers only mean something individually, when

they're tied to a single line. Add them all up and they
instantly lose their meaning. The “average” phone number
is nonsense. In the same way, “average temperature” is
also meaningless. Numerically, you can add up a bunch of
temperatures and get some average, but it doesn't have
any physical interpretation.
Temperature only means something locally, because

thermodynamic conditions vary from point to point. Essex
and McKitrick describe how a physics teacher shows his
students how to get classroom temperature averages, and
how they will vary come spring. He has taken four
temperatures from various places in the classroom, near
the door, by the window, on his desk, and in the back of
the room. The measured temperatures were: 17º, 19,9º
20,3º, y 22,6º C, respectively.
Now suppose we leave the thermometers where they

are until next spring. So we open the window and a nice
warm breeze enters the room, mixing with the air. All four
thermometers read 20ºC. Has the room warmed up? Half
of the students calculate the average of the temperatures
using the linear sum divided by four.
53

The others do the same, but use the kinetic energy rule:
add the squares of the temperatures, divide by four, then
take the square root.
What did they get? Half of the students who used the
linear addition method obtained +0.05º C, so the room has
warmed up during the spring. But those who used the
mean of the squares, got a value of –0.05º C for the
calculation, so the room is colder in the spring. If you don't
have a physical reason for choosing one average over the
other, then you are making simple assumptions.
“Heating” or “cooling” of the room depends on the

formula to obtain the average and not on the actual
measurements. But the averages are not physically
meaningful. Those are just two different statistics, and the
same is true for Earth's temperatures, whether local or
global.
CO2 in Deep Ice Bubbles
Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski is a multidisciplinary

scientist – physician, biologist, physicist and chemist –who
serves as Chairman of the Scientific Council of the Central
Laboratory for Radiological Protection (LCPR) in Warsaw,
Poland, a government institution concerned with
environmental studies. The LCPR has a "Special Bond"
relationship with the US National Council on Radiation
Protection (NCRP). For ten years, LCPR closely
cooperated with the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) in research on the influence of industry and nuclear
explosions on the pollution of the global environment and
the population.
54

Jaworowski has published about 280 articles of

scientific studies, including about 20 on climate problems.
He is also the representative of Poland in the Scientific
Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation
(UNSCEAR), and between 1980–1982 he was the
chairman of this committee. For the past 40 years he has
been working on studies of glaciers, using snow and ice as
a matrix for reconstructing the history of human-caused
pollution in the global atmosphere. A part of those studies
was related to climate issues. CO2 records have been
widely used as proof that, due to human activities, the
current atmospheric CO2 level is 25% higher than in the
pre-industrial period.
These records became the basic parameters of

models of the global carbon cycle and a cornerstone
of the human-caused global warming hypothesis.
In March 2004, Zbigniew Jaworowski submitted a

statement to the United States Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation on the subject of
pre- and post-industrial atmospheric CO2 levels, in a
report titled: Climate Change: Information Incorrect in the
pre-industrial CO2, where he asserts that these records,
however, do not represent the reality of the atmosphere.
Since it is a public document, I will reproduce its content
here because it is of fundamental importance to prove that
the Hockey Stick -reviewed in the previous chapter- the
claim that the 20th century was the hottest of the
millennium, and that global warming global climate will be
catastrophic, they lack any scientific basis and have to be
discarded in any discussion related to the Earth's climate.
55

“To study the history of industrial pollution of the global atmosphere,

between 1972 and 1980, I organized 11 expeditions to glaciers, which
measured natural and man-made pollutants, in contemporary and
ancient precipitation, preserved in 17 glaciers in the Arctic, Antarctic,
Alaska, Norway, the Alps, the Himalayas, the Ruwenzori Mountains of
Uganda, the Peruvian Andes, and the Tatra Mountains of Poland.
I also measured long-term changes in dust in the troposphere and

stratosphere, and lead content in humans living in Europe and elsewhere
over the past 5,000 years. In 1968 I published the first study on lead
content in glacier ice. I later showed that in the pre-industrial period the
total flux of lead into the global atmosphere was higher than in the 20th
century, that atmospheric lead content is dominated by natural sources,
and that the level of lead in humans during epochs Medieval times it was
10 to 100 times higher than in the 20th century. In the 1990s I was
working at the Norwegian Institute for Polar Research in Oslo, and at
Japan's National Institute for Polar Research in Tokyo. During this period
I studied the effects of climate change in the polar regions, and the
reliability of studies in glaciers for estimating the concentration of CO2
in the atmosphere in the ancient past.”
“In the 1970s, the average age of the ice was

arbitrarily decreed to be exactly 83 years
younger than the ice in which it was trapped.”
False Low Pre-Industrial CO2 Level in the

Atmosphere
CO2 determinations in polar ice cylinders are
commonly used to estimate CO2 levels from pre-industrial
times. The in-depth study of these measurements
convinced me that glaciological studies are not capable of
providing a reliable reconstruction of the CO2
concentrations of the ancient atmosphere.
This is because the ice cylinders do not fully meet the

essential criteria for closed systems. One of those criteria
calls for the absence of liquid water in the ice, which can
dramatically change the chemical composition of air
bubbles trapped between ice crystals.
56

This criterion is not met, since even the coldest ice in

Antarctica (down to -73ºC) contains liquid water [2]. More
than 20 physicochemical processes, mostly related to the
presence of liquid water, contribute to the alteration of the
original chemical composition of air inclusions in polar ice.
One of these processes is the formation of gas hydrates,
or "clathrates."
In strongly compressed deep ice all air bubbles

disappear, since under the influence of pressure gases are
transformed into solid clathrates, which are small crystals
formed by the interaction of gas with water molecules.
Drilling decompresses ice cores extracted from deep ice,
and contaminates the cores with drilling fluid that is filled
into the drilled hole.
Decompression leads to dense horizontal fractures in

the cylinders, by a well-known sheeting process. Upon
decompression of the ice cylinders, the solid clathrates
break down into a gaseous form, exploding in the process
like microscopic grenades. In bubble-free ice, explosions
form new gas cavities and new fractures.
Through these ice fractures, and in cracks formed

during sheeting, a part of the gas escapes first into the
drilling fluid that fills the hole, and once at the surface into
atmospheric air. Particular gases, CO2, O2, and N2,
trapped in the deep frozen ice, begin to form clathrates,
leaving air bubbles at different pressures and depths. At
ice temperatures of -15º C the dissociation pressure of N2
is about 100 bars, for O2 it is 75 bars, and for CO2 it is 5
bars.
57

The problem with the Siple data (and with other shallow
ice) is that the CO2 concentration found in pre-industrial
ice at a depth of 68 meters (above the depth of clathrate
formation) was "too high". . This ice was deposited in 1890
and CO2 levels were 328 ppmv, not 290 ppmv as needed
to prove the human-caused global warming hypothesis.
Levels of 328 ppmv were measured at Mauna Loa, Hawaii
in 1973, that is, 83 years after the ice had been deposited
on Siple.
An ad hoc assumption, not supported by any factual

evidence, solved the problem: the average age of the ice
was arbitrarily decreed to be exactly 83 years younger
than the ice in which it was trapped. The "corrected" ice
data was then aligned with the Mauna Loa record and
reproduced in countless publications as the famous "Siple
curve." Only 13 years later, in 1993, glaciologists
attempted to test the "ice assumption" experimentally, but
failed.
The notion of low pre-industrial CO2 levels, based on

such poor knowledge, became a widely accepted Holy
Cup for models of climate warming. The modelers ignored
evidence from direct measurements of CO2 in air
indicating that in the 19th century the average
concentration was 335 ppmv.
The circled values show a biased selection of

information, used to demonstrate that in the 19th century
the average CO2 concentration was 292 ppmv (they are
downloadable from the internet from various sites.)
58

A study of stomatal frequency in fossil leaves deposited

on the bottom of lakes in Denmark during the Holocene,
shows that 9,400 years ago the atmospheric CO2 level
was 333 ppm, and 9,600 years ago it was 348 ppm,
undermines the concept that CO2 concentrations were low
and stable until the advent of the industrial revolution.
Crude manipulation of data, and arbitrary rejection of

readings that do not fit the preconceived idea of human-
induced warming, is common in many glaciological studies
of greenhouse gases. In peer reviewed publications I
exposed this misuse of science. Unfortunately, such
misuse is not limited to individual publications, but also
appears in documents from national and international
organizations.
For example, the IPCC not only based its reports on a

falsified "Siple Curve", but in its 2001 Report used the
temperature "hockey stick" as its flagship, trying to show
that there was no Medieval Warming, nor was there a
Little Ice Age, and that the 20th century was exceptionally
warm. The curve was credulously accepted from the article
by Mann et al., published in Nature in 1998.
The premise for most of the IPCC conclusions and the

pufo on anthropogenic (man-made) causes and climate
change projections is the assumption of low CO2 in the
pre-industrial atmosphere. This assumption, based on
glaciological studies, is false. Therefore, the IPCC
projections should not be used for national or international
planning of economies.
59

The climate inefficient and economically disastrous

Kyoto Protocol, based on IPCC projections, was correctly
defined by President G. W. Bush as "fatally flawed." This
criticism was recently followed up by President Vladimir
Putin. I hope that his rational views can save the world
from the immense damage that could be induced by the
implementation of recommendations based on distorted
science.
“A permanent drop of only 1.6 to 2% in the energy reaching Earth

would lead to an unstable condition in the snow cover of the
continents, which would advance to the equator, and the oceans
would eventually freeze over.”
Quotes like these were all over the press in the 1960s
and 1970s… or this
“Right now, climatologists around the world agree on only two

things: that we don't have the comfortable distance of thousands
upon thousands of years to prepare for the next ice age, and that
how carefully we monitor our air pollution it will have a direct
effect on the arrival and nature of this climate crisis. The sooner
man confronts these facts, scientists say, the safer we will be.
Once he starts to freeze, it will be too late.”
If you are surprised that these quotes are about

cooling and not warming, it is because they are from the
1970s – only “a split second” ago, in geological terms –
and at that time the emergency that “threatened” humanity.
It was not the heat, but the cold.
60

Instead of letting the facts confirm their predictions, the

cold scientists of the past were forced to change "cooling"
to "warming"; and, shortly after, to heal in health, "global
warming" due to "climate change", from there they are now
warmers but with a mutant character, because, really, who
can deny that the climate changes...? Spring, summer, fall,
winter and so on…everyone knows it.
Apocalypse . . . When?
After a series of short-term oscillations beginning about
12,000 years BC, a rise in temperatures occurred around
8,300BC, leading to a sustained high temperature in
northern Europe, previously completely covered in ice. .
The highest summer temperatures experienced in Europe
in the last 10,000 years occurred around 6,000BC. For its
part, this heat reached North America only around
4,000BC. This period is known as the Post-glacial
Climatic Optimum where temperatures were 2 degrees
Celsius higher than now.
What do scientists mean when they talk about Climate

Optimum? Simply that these temperatures are considered
the best – the optimum – for the development and
maintenance of any type of life, be it animal or vegetable.
However, a sharp reversal known as the Piora oscillation
occurred around 3,500BC, marked by a strong advance of
glaciers in Europe and large migrations of agricultural
peoples. From 3000BC to 1000BC, the climate recovered
some of its former warmth. From the year 1,000BC to
500BC the glaciers advanced again.
61

Around AD 400, a period of warmer weather and higher

sea levels set in over Europe, but this was again followed
by a return to cooler, wetter climates. This lasted until the
Middle Ages. Around 680 AD to 800 AD many people from
the Middle East and growing fertile migrated to the
southern countries, especially Spain.
You can see the, sometimes abrupt way, that the

Earth's climate has to vary its temperatures, going from
cold to hot and then back to cold again. And all these
changes occurred without the slightest intervention of man,
nor can the blame be attributed to his manufacturing or
agricultural activities, minimal and crude. And once again
the weather changed and a really hot climate prevailed in
Europe (and the rest of the world, of course) culminating in
Greenland around the years 900 to 1100 and in Europe
around 1100 to 1300.
This period is known as the Small Climatic Optimum

(also as the Medieval Climatic Optimum). The
temperatures of this period became, for a short period, as
high as those of the Postglacial Climatic Optimum (6000 to
4000 BC). As seen, changeable weather is the norm;
stable weather the exception. History tells us that the
weather was never the same for long.
62

Cold Again!
This grand period allowed for the colonization of
Greenland and the extension of arable fields far north into
Asia and Europe. However, this booming period would
today be labeled by global warming proponents as
Apocalypse Now. But good things come to an end and so,
starting around 1350, a time of severe cold and
memorable winters settled in Europe, lasting about 500
years, and which is known as the Little Ice Age. , or as the
Germans call it, the Klima Verschlechterung, or the
Worsening of the Climate.
The lowest point of coldness occurred between 1550

and 1750. For example, the colony in Greenland
disappeared not much later than the year 1340. And in
England, tent cities were erected to celebrate the Frost
Fairs on the frozen bed of the River Thames, still until the
years 1813-14. The rest is pretty well known, some
climatologists claim that the temperature has risen since
1850 by about 0.6C, others say that the waters of the
North Sea have cooled by 0.5C since the beginning of the
century.
Whatever man does, his claimed immense power

cannot compete with the tremendous astronomical and
cosmic forces that govern the rise and fall of temperatures
on planet Earth.
63

Do the Poles Melt?

Few things scare people more in the Global Warming
debate than the topic of "melting polar ice caps," with its
prophesied consequence of rising ocean levels and
flooding of coastal areas. The Río de la Plata invading the
Teatro Colón and other nonsense like that. Why is it a
myth or a gigantic falsehood? Let's see: It is necessary to
differentiate between the two polar caps, the Arctic and the
Antarctic. The Arctic ice cap is a frozen ocean surrounded
by the American and Asian landmasses.
It is an "ice cube" that floats in the sea. The imperfect

GCM models predict a partial melting of the sea ice and a
poleward retreat of about 300 kilometers, but never a
substantial melting, let alone a total one. What would be
the consequences of such melting for ocean levels?
Exactly: none.
Simply because, as the floating ice in the seas melts, it

returns the same volume of water that it caught when it
froze. Do not you believe it? Do the following test: place
two or three ice cubes in a tall glass and then fill it with
warm water up to the exact rim of the glass. You will see
that the tops of the cubes are sticking out over the edge.
Wait for the ice to melt completely and you will be able
to verify that not a single drop of water has been spilled.
The level of the water in your glass – just like the level of
the oceans – does not rise when the floating ice melts. The
situation would be different in Antarctica, where most of
the ice lies on land.
64

If the ice that surrounds the Antarctic mainland melts,

we already know what will not happen. What did not
happen in his glass. You may ask now why isn't there
more melting?
Quite simply, because the warming prophesied by the

MCGs is not enough to melt any more. Suppose that the
warming of the atmosphere raises the temperature at the
pole by the 3º C that is prophesied. Antarctica's average
temperature is about -15º C, so if it gets warmer (down to
about -12º C), that temperature is still 12º C below freezing
(or melting, if you prefer).
The mainland ice will remain frozen. Antarctica is, as I

said before, a block of ice resting on a continent. Over
90% of Earth's ice is there, while Greenland only has 5%.
The rest is in the different glaciers that exist in the world.
Scientists have calculated that there will not be a
significant melting of the ice cover of Antarctica, but rather
a minimal melting of the ice that surrounds the
continent, with a null effect on sea level.
Scientists who have analyzed the response of Antarctic

ice cover to warming caused by the so-called doubling of
CO2 levels in the atmosphere have discovered, to the
dismay of catastrophists, that the ice is actually going to
increase, in instead of diminishing! Because? First,
Antarctica is an extremely cold place, so even great
warming will not cause significant melting.
65

But second, and far more important, since the air over
and around the continent will (supposedly) get so hot, it will
be able to hold much more water vapor than it can now.
Physics tells us that the capacity of air to hold water vapor
doubles with approximately every 10C increase. Some of
this new amount of moisture will condense and fall as
snow. This snow will not melt, and its accumulation will
cause the ice cover of Antarctica to gradually grow.
Now, this is essentially a net transfer of water from the

seas to the land, where it will remain for thousands of
years. This negative balance of water in the oceans will
actually cause the level of the oceans to drop by about 30
centimeters. So I advise you to buy a house if you can
near the coast, as Obama, Bush and Al Gore have done.
Although this comes as a surprise to most people, this fact
has been known to climatologists for many years. As a
result of many studies, it was determined that during
geological periods of millions of years ago, sea levels were
much lower during hot periods than during cold periods.
Surprising, isn't it? Finally, scientists seem to have

considered more carefully the real impact of higher
temperatures on the polar caps and have consequently
lowered their estimates of sea level rise to 30 centimeters.
Indeed, the observations made indicate that the thickness
of the ice in Greenland and Antarctica has increased in
recent years. The most recent GCM models have further
slowed future ocean level rise to a negligible 2.5
centimeters over the next 50 years. The topic becomes
less and less Apocalyptic.
66

A bit of climate history perspective

Believe it or not, severe droughts are extremely
common, not just in the great plains of the United States or
the Sahel, but all over the world. This is very easy to verify:
it is only necessary to take a look at the temperature and
rainfall tables for any part of the world. In the United
States, the very serious droughts of the 1930s and 1950s,
to be more precise, 1934-1936, and 1952-1954, are still
remembered.
For example, in the 50s in Paris it reached 40-50

degrees on average in summer for a month and in Spain
just before the civil war almost a month was recorded in
Aragon of more than 50 degrees where the military
barracks were there. 1932. And in fact there are many
newspaper clippings from that time as well as throughout
Europe and the US that have been blocked from the
internet.
It has been determined that the collapse of the Mayan

Civilization was produced by a period of severe droughts
between the years 700 and 900 of our era, caused by an
anomalous position of the intertropical convergence zone
(ITCZ) that regulates the arrival of loaded winds. of
humidity and rain from the Caribbean Sea in Central
America and northern South America.
The periods following 1954 were devoid of noteworthy

droughts, and the 1970s-1980s were characterized by
cool, rainy summers, interrupted only in 1980 and 1983 by
a drought on the southern plains. But, when 1988 rolled
around – the first major drought in 34 years – Global
Warming was to blame.
67

Furthermore, long-term trends in US summer

temperatures show no indication of the warming that
models are predicting. On the contrary, there appears to
have been a cooling over the last six decades, which quite
clearly contradicts the predictions of the computer models.
Now, what is the best – if not the only way to check if

the Earth's atmosphere has had any warming? It is
certainly not by observing "increased hurricane frequency
and intensity," or "increased flooding," or "return of tropical
diseases," as each of these things has a explanation
unrelated to heating.
In the United States, there has actually been very slight

cooling over the past 60 years, with 16 of the 48 states
experiencing noticeable cooling, according to records from
the US Historical Climatology Network. I have seen various
analyzes of the 1,525 historical records in that database
and have obtained temperature trends for the United
States from the year 1900 to 2000.
68

CHAPTER V: THE SUN

CHANGES THE WEATHER
“World famine, ice age, total chaos, probably a
world war, and all of this could happen within
a year. . . in 2000”
-Ibid
The IPCC (or Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change) warmologists "observe a discernible
anthropogenic effect on the warming of the atmosphere",
and therefore it was imperative to impose the Kyoto
Treaty, which demands the reduction of greenhouse gases
to 7% below the levels of 1990. Today it is already
demanding that it be 60%.
The consequences that this would bring are

catastrophic. According to the report that the US
Department of Energy presented to President Clinton,
given the current level of production and the trend of
energy consumption, in order to comply with the Kyoto
Protocol, the US would have to disappear from the face of
the Earth.
69

What Heats the Earth?

The Sun, what else? And this factor is one of the most
important and least known of all those involved in the issue
of the greenhouse effect. It has been known for many
years that the Sun has regular and important variations in
the number of spots on its surface – the so-called
“sunspots” – which have an average period of 11 years.
In addition, large variations in the amplitude and number of
these spots have been recorded during peak years.
Relatively recently, a possible relationship was discovered
between the 11-year solar cycle and the Quasi-Biannual
Oscillation (or QBO), a stratospheric phenomenon that
influences the climate and also the magnitude of the
famous invention of the Ozone Hole.
Another psyop to keep people distracted is the

flatearthers or the notorious pizzaearthers as we call
them. A group of mentally deranged people who have not
been to even elementary school, they only watch internet
videos to give their religious leaders a lot of dough, led by
priests of a sect with the conventional ways of mind control
led by intelligence companies to delay and oust the climate
change skeptics and its debaters.
In fact, the curvature of the Earth causes the Sun's rays

to travel greater distances through the atmosphere before
reaching the surface. The sun's rays travel a shorter
distance when they fall on the Equator (50 km), and must
travel many more kilometers (between 800 and 1000 km)
to reach the Poles.
70

This causes UV radiation to vary by 5000% between the

Poles and the Equator. Hence, when a Norwegian from
Tromso goes on holiday in the Caribbean, he receives
500% more UV radiation than he is used to. For this
reason, UV radiation increases by 10% for every 160 km
that one travels in the direction of the Equator.
Solar Cycles, Not CO2, Determine Climate

The most important of these greenhouse gases is water
vapor, which is responsible for almost 96 to 99% of the
greenhouse effect. Among the other greenhouse gases
(CO2, CH4, CFCs, N2O, and O2), the most important is
CO2, which contributes only 3% of the total greenhouse
effect.
Human CO2 contributions to this effect could be between

0.05 to 0.25%.[11] We are currently halfway through the
Sun's life, some 5 billion years from its formation, and
some 7 billion years before its contraction into a hot white
dwarf[14], whose heat will scorch the Earth, killing all life
about her. At the beginning of the Sun's career, its
irradiation was 30% lower than now. This is in all
probability one of the reasons for the cold Precambrian
periods. In 1989, Joseph Kirschvink found 700-million-
year-old rocks near Adelaide, Australia, that held traces of
past glaciers. However, the magnetic signature of these
rocks indicates that at that time, the glaciers were located
on the equator.
71

The most important of these greenhouse gases is water

vapor, which is responsible for almost 96 to 99% of the
greenhouse effect. Among the other greenhouse gases
(CO2, CH4, CFCs, N2O, and O2), the most important is
CO2, which contributes only 3% of the total greenhouse
effect.
This means that the entire Earth was then covered in

ice. In 1992, Kirschvink called this stage of the planet
"Snowball Earth", finding that this phenomenon occurred
many times in the Precambrian period. One such period
"Snowball Earth" appeared 2.4 billion years ago.
NASA hides a page that says: The Sun is the Main

Climate Factor And that clouds and particles are more
important than greenhouse gases
The NASA website used to have a page titled What are the
main forcings of the Earth system?. In 2010, this page said that
the Sun is the main driver of Earth's weather, that it controls all
major aspects, and that we may be on the cusp of an ice age. In
addition, NASA Science said that things like cloud behavior,
albedo, and aerosol can have more powerful cooling effects that
outweigh the warming effect of CO2. Today that page says:
"Share the science and stay connected", and "Access Denied"
72

below the page that I keep as a screenshot when it existed
Here is the text of the original page:
73

NASA 2010: What are the main forcings of the Earth

system? The Sun is the main force of the Earth's
climate system. Sunlight warms our world. Sunlight drives
atmospheric and ocean circulation patterns. Sunlight
powers the photosynthesis process that plants need to
grow. Sunlight causes convection that carries heat and
water vapor up into the sky where clouds form and bring
rain. In short, the Sun powers nearly every aspect of our
world's climate system and makes life as we know it
possible.
The orbit around the Earth and the orientation towards

the Sun change over many thousands of years. In turn,
these changing "orbital mechanisms" force the climate to
change because they change where and how much
sunlight reaches Earth. (See for details.) Therefore,
changing the Earth's exposure to sunlight forces the
climate to change. According to scientists, models of
Earth's orbit and orientation towards the Sun indicate
that our world should be starting to enter a new
cooling period, perhaps the next ice age. However, a
new force for change has emerged: humans. After the
industrial revolution, humans introduced increasing
amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere,
changing the surface area of the landscape large enough
to influence climate on a local and global scale.
By increasing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere

(by around 30 percent), humans have increased their
ability to trap heat near the surface.
74

Other important forces of Earth's climate system

include "variables" such as clouds, airborne particles, and
surface brightness. Each of these variable features of
Earth's environment has the ability to overcome the
warming influence of greenhouse gases and cause our
world to cool.
For example, more cloudiness would cast more shadow

on the surface while reflecting more sunlight back into
space. Increased airborne particles (or "aerosols") would
scatter and reflect more sunlight back into space, thus
cooling the surface.
Large volcanic eruptions (such as the one at Mount

Pinatubo in 1992) can inject so much aerosol into the
atmosphere that, spreading across the globe, it reduces
sunlight and causes the Earth to cool. Similarly, increasing
the surface area of highly reflective types of surfaces, such
as ice sheets, reflects more sunlight back into space and
causes the Earth to cool down.
Scientists are using NASA satellites to monitor all of the

aforementioned forces of Earth's climate system to better
understand how they are changing over time and how
changes in them affect climate.
According to the Wayback Machine, the text disappeared

in early 2011 under Obama. Some people say that Trump
hides climate science, but Trump removes the
propaganda, while Obama or Biden deny the Sun.
75

The Sun drives the weather on Earth

There are many mechanisms by which the Sun can
change the Earth's temperature (and not just through solar
radiation). As we have discussed here many times, not
only is there Henrik Svensmark's theory of solar magnetic
effect on clouds via cosmic radiation, there are also
potential effects (supported by observations) that magnetic
fluxes, the flux of solar particles ( solar wind) and changes
in the spectrum of UV and infrared rays can affect all types
of weather markers on Earth.
That includes atmospheric pressure, jets of water

(Rossby waves), clouds, flooding in Europe, rain in Asia,
groundwater recharge in China, lightning over Japan, and
wind and rain over Chile. The Sun's pervasive effect even
correlates surrealistically with human fertility, lifespan, and
jellyfish infestations.
Professor Valentina Zharkova confirms the

"Super" Grand Solar Minimum
Professor Valentina Zharkova gave a presentation of

her Climate and Solar Magnetic Field hypothesis at the
Global Warming Policy Foundation in October 2018. The
information she revealed should shock/wake you up.
Zharkova was one of the few scientists who correctly
predicted that Solar Cycle 24 would be weaker than Cycle
23; only 2 of the 150 models predicted it. Her models have
run to 93% accuracy and her findings suggest that a Super
Grand Solar Minimum is in the wings starting in 2020 and
will run for 350-400 years. [Not the Grand Minimum but the
complete cycle].
76

The last time we had a little ice age, only two of the
Sun's magnetic fields were out of phase. This time, the
four magnetic fields are getting out of phase. Here is the
full presentation by Professor Zharkova:
https://youtu.be/M_yqIj38UmY
Swiss glaciers mostly melted before

industrialization began
There are hundreds of articles showing that the
"anthropogenic climate change" paradigm is incorrect, at
least in its strong forms. But I think the following article is
pretty nice because it's very careful and looks at one of the
most obvious symptoms of "global warming": melting
glaciers. 4 years ago, Michael Sigl and 5 co-authors finally
published the article.
The 19th century glacial withdrawal in the Alps preceded the rise
of industrial carbon deposition in high alpine glaciers.
It was published in The Cryosphere, a peer-reviewed

journal about frozen things on Earth. The document was
originally submitted as a "discussion paper" in February. It
went through a peer review with 3 referees who looked at
the paper quite carefully, wrote detailed reviews, and
caught some missing commas, among other things. You
can view the history of the document by clicking on the title
above. As summarized in Swiss Info (thanks to Benny
Peiser's GWPF for the tip), Sigl et al. examined the ice
core of the Fiescherhorn glacier between Bern and Valais
and analyzed the age of soot particles (technically
refractory black carbon, RBC). They were able to analyze
how much of the glacier melted at various points.
77

Now, the prediction of "anthropogenic climate

change" would be that melting alpine glaciers are due to
industrial activity. But that activity exploded sometime in
the 19th century and only began to rise detectably above
the natural background around 1875.
However, these authors found that by 1875, 75% of the 19th

century, 80% of the 19th century glacial melt had already
disappeared and was completed.
This means that the average rate of amalgamation was

actually higher between 1800-1875, in the era before the
greatest industrialization, than between 1875-1900. The
authors have analyzed the amounts as far back as 1741,
and some fusion may have been there from the beginning.
Now, 1875 is clearly a reasonable start to mainstream

industrialization. The Škoda factory was founded in my
hometown of Pilsen in 1859 and became the largest
factory in the Austrian Empire that would become Austria-
Hungary within a decade.
You may remember that three years ago in 1893-1894,

Bohemia produced more than 2% of the world's CO2
emissions - a higher fraction than the United States had
until 1825. The relative importance of Bohemian industry in
the world has declined by almost an order of magnitude
since the late 19th century. (Clearly, most of the new
competition grew outside of Europe.) So Škoda and
Bohemia were pioneers, others followed later, and it
makes sense to assume that the effect of industrialization
on the climate was almost negligible before 1875.
78

Clearly, the results indicate that the melting of alpine

glaciers has a natural origin, something related to the end
of the Little Ice Age. The authors do not forget to add the
disclaimer that this finding does not exclude the possibility
that anthropogenic influence has grown sometimes well
after 1875: they cannot say when, and no obvious hint of
an obvious trace can be found in their graphs. qualitative
change in the recent era.
But some of the more obvious signs used as

"indications of human-caused climate change" simply have
to be of natural origin. By analogy, when it is true of alpine
glaciers, it may be true of many or most other "signs of
warming."
It's great that some people still take ice cores and write
studies carefully, or catch errors in other people's studies.
Needless to say, this result and many similar results
contradict something that has become a kind of left-wing
atheist religion. They decided that any recent manifestation
of climate change is (or "should be") the effect of
humanity's industrial activities. They want to believe in
such an extraordinary claim, even though they are
unaware of any tangible evidence.
Well, when you actually look at the data, this favorite

proposition of theirs is simply not true. There was never
any rational reason to believe that "should be" true.
79

80

CHAPTER VI: THE CO2 SCAM

«Co2 is the food for plants and it cools it never
warms.»
-Ibid
Scientific credibility does not seem to matter to them,

nor to politicians, nor to the leftist intellectuals who support
them. Based on this pseudo-science, the world's
collectivist governments continue to be determined to use
force to impose global standards that will slow or paralyze
modern industrial progress.
Any normal person, the “man in the street”, neither

understands much nor pays much attention to all those
discussions about the weather. He vaguely accepts that
politicians should know what they're doing (and of course
scientists even more so), and he just does what he thinks
is his part, carefully sorting plastic bottles for recycling. If
that's your attitude, wake up, because you're allowing evil
like you can't imagine.
The temperature of the planet is constantly changing, that

there is nothing abnormal about current temperatures, and that
the scientific evidence does not show at all that the climate is
affected by CO2 emissions. (From that video you can access
many others that explain in more detail "the big lie".)
81

The anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming

hoax has been exposed for what it is, and the fraudsters
are being framed as criminals as they deserve. A few
years ago, thirty thousand scientists came together to
denounce the "leader" of this scam, former American Vice
President Al Gore (in a video that explains how this false
theory became popular until it became a "religion"). On
what do politicians base themselves to impose these ideas
on the world, on individuals and on productive countries?
Supposedly in science; but in fact they are taking
advantage of the excitement generated by the fashionable
“pseudo-science”: in the 1970s it was the impending Ice
Age, a few years later it was the specter of Global
Warming, now it is Climate Change.
This is with the purpose of scaring people, getting

money out of them through the theft of private property,
that is, taxes, and also creating Environmental Refugees
to bring them in and vote for the politician in power after
stuffing them with little money and having them work for
their multinationals for a shit salary, since refugees who
come from a trauma do not protest like those who are
already in the country and have seen their standard of
living lowered.
Then lock them up in their homes or in 15- or 30-minute

urban areas, called Smart Cities or prison cities. In the
current climate debate they want us to blithely forget what
conditions were like before the development of modern
industry. Intellectuals and governments ignore or evade
how hard and precarious life was before the industrial
revolution, and how it still is in non-industrialized countries.
82

Bureaucrats take the progress so far for granted, failing

to recognize how that progress has reduced our
vulnerability to the environment. And worse: they ignore
the conditions of freedom that made this industrial
development possible. They do not recognize the myriad
ways in which the policies they propose will reduce that
freedom and make us not less, but more vulnerable to the
climate.
Unfortunately, proposals are no longer mere proposals;

now they are becoming a political reality. Kyoto-1997,
Copenhagen-2009, Paris-2015, Madrid-2019..., the
objective of these meetings is always the same: to try to
impose increasingly strict rules that will curtail freedom and
impede development.
For over 100 years, the climatocracy has been looking

for a way to fool the brood with a new scam to trade in and
hide their fat multi-million dollar profits. A way to earn
money and at the same time to control them all with a ring.
This is the CO2 ring.
A gas that in all laboratory tests cools and does not heat
and that you even have in the motor of your fridge or
freezer at home or in your morning drink. Warmologists
have disagreed on the substance of shaping the thymus
and scaring their fellow humans. First they started with the
fear of the glaciation but since it didn't work they went on to
say that we were going to burn in an apocalyptic hell of
sulfur and CO2.
83

70% of the sheeple believe the climate con of the

warmologist sect. But as the war goes through the obvious
cycles observed from 1950 to 1998, the temperature in
some parts of the globe has risen as much as 16 degrees;
However, nothing has happened and they have blamed it
by measuring a CO2 that is minimally higher than in the
previous 50 years.
On the other hand, if we take a longer time as a

reference, since in geology and climate 100 or 1,000 years
are nothing. During the Jurassic era, that is, of the
dinosaurs, CO2 was more than 1,200 ppm and now we
only have 300ppm. With the dinosaurs there were no
poles and it was an orchard. In 1998, this rise in CO2 was
observed to be related to the drop in temperature on other
sides of 16 or 14 degrees from the earth. In a year we're
going to freeze like a block of ice, but a minute later they
say we're going to scorch.
Hansen, a NASA warmologists, who was bored and saw

the opportunity with warmology and its parishioners to
become famous and rich, it occurred to him to open his
NGOs and make evil CO2 reports for the NASA agency,
and they threw CO2 demonic guilt, the rest is history.
To prove this they had to prove that the poles melt and
the glaciers too. But the glaciers and the pieces of ice
increase although the trick is to show how they melt when
they get to summer, that's why you see melted ice from
blocks of ice, but this is obvious that it is in summer, not
the rest of the year, where the ice mass increases.
84

The curious thing is that these specific sites of the poles

or glaciers only receive permits to see and measure them:
yes, the UN and IPCC warmologists, not the geologists,
nor the independent climatologists.
Likewise, volcanoes and earthquakes that are formed and

activated by the increase in terrestrial and forest biomass
(vegetation increased 60% in the last 50 years). I wonder if
they are going to fine the volcanoes, earthquakes that are
the ones that chuck millions times more CO2 into the
atmosphere. The seas are the lungs of the earth, not the
Amazon or the tundra.
Water vapor is in fact the most abundant gas, Co2 is

not even the top 10 gases that abound in the atmosphere,
such as nitrogen. The hockey stick that they bring out
every month where the rises and falls of temperatures and
their relationship with Co2 are combined are simply
mathematical and mental straws without any rigor. The sun
is therefore the one that modifies the climate not only on
earth but global warming is seen on Mars, Jupiter and
Saturn. Obviously it has to do with the sun, not with
Martian factories.
Boucot in 2003 pointed out that every time man goes to

the toilet and produces more Co2 than what exists per day
in the atmosphere and that oxygen comes from the CO2
process, without CO2 we would not have oxygen. His
observations are that the temperature rises first and then
the CO2 rises with that temperature, not the other way
around, which is good.
85

Patrick Moore himself, former director of Greenpeace,

declared at a world conference that climate change or
global warming is a scam. And more than 30,000 scientists
have signed a statement that CO2 and anthropogenic
warming or cooling is bullshit. Man, therefore, cannot
modify the climate globally or improve or worsen it.
86

CHAPTER VII: THE OZONE

LAYER SCAM
«Regarding the Greenhouse Effect,
presumably generated by the CO2 released by
the burning of oil and its derivatives, coal and
wood, this seems to me imaginary and as
unreal as the destruction of ozone in the upper
stratosphere..»
- Haroun Tazieff, vulcanólogo
The famous ozone layer, its hole in Antarctica, and the

destructive action that some man-made substances would
have, falls under the category of total and absolute scam
of a scientific nature and driven by corporatist and political
interests, from the beginning to the end. . Towards the end
of the 1920s, the chemists of the Du Pont company
produced and launched a family of gases known as
Chlorine Fluorine Carbons, because their chemical
composition is based on Chlorine, Fluorine and Carbon
molecules.
87

The most widely used formulas since then, were

marketed under the name of Freon-11 and Freon-12, their
respective formulas being: CFCl3 and CF2Cl2, that is to
say: one molecule of Carbon, two of Fluorine and two of
Chlorine for Freon- 12, and one of Carbon, one of Fluorine
and three of Chlorine for Freon-11. The Freon family has
been considered one of the most extraordinary products
that man has ever invented. They were too wonderful for
someone not to find them low or a con. So, in 1974,
chemists F. Sherwood Rowland and Mario Molina issued
their first warning about CFCs, saying that they would not
disintegrate rapidly in the lower atmosphere and that.
"Somehow", they would reach the stratosphere, giving
birth to their famous Chlorine Catalytic Cycle Theory or
Chemical Theory of the destruction of the ozone layer.
When Natural Sciences Dilute into Social Sciences
Scientists, industrialists, and politicians often take

opposing positions on policy regarding public order bans.
Politicians believe that a simple scientific conclusion of "it's
good" or "it's bad" is enough to enact bans that will prove
costly to the industry and the general public. For their part,
scientists almost always believe that they are in a position
to provide such conclusions. However, any scientific issue
that has anything to do with the real world is often
impossible to simplify to the point of offering - beyond a
shadow of a doubt - the simple and quick, yet reliable
answers that politicians demand without a doubt. Not
knowing that, in science, nothing is totally black or totally
white.
88

Chemical Nonsense
The Sept-October 1990 edition of SCIENCE TODAY,

vol. 2, No. 9, pp. 41-48, publishes an article by Luis V.
Orce, of the Depto. of Radiobiology from the National
Atomic Energy Commission (NAEC) and from which I am
quoting:
"Towards 1974, two researchers from the University of California, Mario Molina
and Sherwood Rowland, observed that the annual production of CFCs
reached a figure close to a million tons per year and deduced that in the case
of such stable compounds there must be thousands of tons of them. In
consultation with some experts in atmospheric dynamics, they concluded that
CFCs released on Earth, like any other lighter-than-air gas, had to be
dispersed by winds throughout the atmosphere, regardless of location
from which they departed. Slowly but surely, the equatorial updrafts should
carry them up into the stratosphere, towards an inexorable photochemical
encounter with the most energetic solar ultraviolet radiation. Molina and
Rowland's laboratory studies demonstrated that the chemically unalterable
CFCs are not very stable under UV-C radiation, since a photochemical
reaction takes place that gives rise to the release of chlorine atoms (Cl').
Oversimplified, this reaction can be schematized as follows:
Cl3CF + hv (λ <230 nm) ->Cl2CF + Cl' [ I ]
"The chlorine atoms that are released are very reactive and many of them
collide with (sic) ozone atoms (should I say molecules) producing chlorine
monoxide (ClO) and molecular oxygen:
Cl' + O3 ->ClO + O2 [ II ]
"But it doesn't end there. Chlorine monoxide can react with oxygen atoms
produced in reaction [I] in the main text, thus regenerating atomic chlorine:
ClO + O' ->O2 + Cl' [ III ]
89

"The released chlorine atoms close the so-called "ozone catalytic chlorine
cycle". It is estimated that a single chlorine atom released from a CFC can
start a chain reaction that destroys 100,000 ozone molecules." "However, this
catalytic cycle can be blocked by nitrogen dioxide (NO2), one of many
atmospheric gases. NO2 can "sequester" chlorine monoxide produced by
reaction [II] through a chemical reaction in which it is forms chlorine nitrate
(ClNO3):
NO2 + ClO ->ClNO3 [ IV ]
"This combination is known as the 'interference reaction', as it blocks the

ozone degradation produced by CFC derivatives.
Observations
I have highlighted in your text the phrase: "just like any

other gas that is lighter than air...," referring to CFCs,
because this is the point on which the accusation against
CFCs is based, and their consequent request for
eradication From the market. Let's analyze the matter in
the light of scientific facts accepted by 100% of scientists.
Table 1 on the next page shows the atomic weights

of some of the gases that make up our planet's
atmosphere, and from its analysis we can draw some
conclusions. As is easy to see, if hydrogen or helium is
released into the atmosphere, it will go up into the
stratosphere because it is much lighter (has less weight or
density) than the atmosphere.
CFCs DO NOT "GO" INTO THE STRATOSPHERE: THEY

ARE TOO HEAVY!
90

It is well known that this capacity of the gases Hydrogen

and Helium is used to inflate weather balloons that go up
to the stratosphere (and balloons for children, too!). For its
part, the lightest Freon (Freon-12) weighs 4.10 times more
than air, and Freon-11 is 4.66 more dense than the
atmosphere. This makes CFCs, molecule for molecule,
between 2.16 and 2.46 times heavier than Iron, whose
molecular weight is 55.8. Therefore, CFCs behave in the
same way that iron does: when an iron object is released
from the hand, it falls towards the ground at a speed that
depends on its aerodynamic shape, its weight and the
density of the air.
MOLECULAR WEIGHTS & DENSITY OF SOME GASES OF THE

ATMOSPHERE
HYDROGEN (H2) = 2.016 HELIUM (He2) = 8.0
OXYGEN (O2) = 32.0 NITROGEN (N2) = 28.02
Average molecular weight of the Earth's atmosphere: 29.01
ATOMIC WEIGHT OF SOME MOLECULES
Oxygen (O) : 16.00 Carbon (C) : 12.01 Fluorine (F) : 19.00
Chlorine (Cl) : 35.50 Iron (Fe) : 55.8
Molecular Weight of Freon-11 (Cl3FC): 137.51
Molecular Weight of Freon-12 (Cl2F2C): 121.01
Table 1
The CFCs do the same, because being 4.66 denser

than air they descend to lower levels when they are
released. In fact, this feature of Freons made them (and
still makes them) the ideal way to build or obtain perfect
"customized lids" for photographic developer trays - highly
oxidizable - to completely isolate them from ambient
oxygen, avoiding the rapid oxidation of reagents and
consequent loss of chemical activity. It is essential that it is
understood very well and that it is not lost sight of:
91

CFC molecules have never, ever been detected in

samples taken from the stratosphere in sufficient quantities
to be of any importance, nor have they been found
anywhere near the altitudes where UV radiation has the
energy to dissociate the stratosphere. CFC molecule.
The existence of molecules of many other gases such
as hydrogen, helium, methane (CH4), Chlorine monoxide
and dioxide (ClO and ClO2), the entire family of nitrogen
oxides, generically represented by the formula NOx, and
others have been proven. families of compounds based on
Bromine, Fluorine, Iodine and also carbon dioxide (CO2)
and gases such as Argon, Krypton, Neon, Xenon, etc.
However, the Big Miss have been the CFC molecules
that, according to the Rowland and Molina Theory "rise to
the stratosphere and there are dissociated by ultraviolet
rays of the UV-C band." In order for CFCs to release their
chlorine atoms, it is first of all a SINE QUA NON condition
that they be attacked by UV radiation of less than 190 nm
in wavelength. This radiation is only found above 36 to 40
kilometers in altitude, because the atmosphere filters it out
completely as it becomes progressively denser.
For the same reason, traces of gases such as Radon
(atomic weight 222) are not found either, which due to its
high density remains attached to the ground, getting into
all cavities, trenches, basements and basements of
buildings. CFCs work in the same way.
92

How is the Ozone Layer Formed?

The creation of an ozone molecule (O3) occurs when a
high energy photon (λ <242 nm) hits an oxygen molecule
(O2), breaking the double bond of its atoms. The molecule
is divided into its two constituent atoms, in a reaction that
is represented as follows:
O2 + hv (λ <242 nm) -> O' + O' - 118.111 Kcal/mol [1]
Because both resulting atoms are highly reactive, they

quickly join another intact oxygen molecule to form ozone:
O2 + O' -> O3 [2]
Ozone is a triatomic form of oxygen that also has high

reactivity (although less than atomic oxygen), because the
third atom has only been able to saturate one of its bonds,
leaving the other free to combine with any other compound
that is "oxidizable”. It is produced industrially in the place
where it will be used, since it is impossible to package it:
its high reactivity means that when two ozone
molecules touch each other, they cancel each other
out, forming oxygen again, in a reaction like this:
O3 + O3 ->3 O2 + 64 Kcal/mol
The Encyclopædia Britannica says, in its Ready

Reference Index, Volume VII p. 659 (Micropædia) the
following:
"Ozone is a slightly bluish gas, the molecules of which consist of three
oxygen atoms. It is always present in the Earth's atmosphere, although its
highest concentration is in the ozonosphere, It is formed there mainly as a
result of solar ultraviolet radiation (wavelengths less than 2.42 x 10-8 cm)
93

When photochemical equilibrium exists, the amount of ozone present is

such that the rate of production is equal to the rate of destruction Due to the
strong absorption of solar ultraviolet radiation by molecular oxygen and ozone,
the radiation capable of producing ozone cannot reach the lower layers of the
atmosphere, and photochemical production is negligible below 20 km
altitude."
Once formed, ozone can be destroyed by UV

radiation of wavelengths less than 300 nm, radiation
found only above 30 km in altitude. Because of its high
instability, the energy required to destroy an ozone
molecule is very low. As stated above, the mere contact of
two molecules with each other is enough to cause their
destruction.
Lots of Contradictions
NASA's Ozone Trends Panel issued a press release
on March 15, 1988 announcing that the ozone layer over
the US and Europe had suffered a 3% decline between
1969 and 1986 - (the studies were rigorously kept secret
and were not published until two years later) - which was
taken advantage of by the press to publish big headlines
announcing an imminent epidemic of skin cancers due to
the predicted increase in ultraviolet radiation.
In fact, the available and published scientific information
shows that what happened is the exact opposite of what
the Trends Panel expressed. In a study published in the
journal Science on February 12, 1988, Joseph Scotto of
the Biostatistic Branch of the US National Cancer
Institute presented overwhelming scientific evidence
proving that the amount of UV-B radiation reaching the
surface of the US was not only had not increased but
instead had decreased by 7% between 1974 and 1985.
94

This study, which was ignored by the media, was based

on direct readings from a network of ground-level
monitoring stations that had been recording daily UV
radiation since 1974. Scotto says the following:
“The average annual R-B records [R-B refers to the instruments with which UV
radiation is measured, called Robertson-Berger meters] obtained during two
consecutive periods of 6 years each (1974 -1979 and 1980 -1985) show a
negative change at each station, with declines ranging from 2 to 7 percent...
show no positive trend in annual R-B readings for 1974-1985... Estimated
average annual change ranged from -1.1% in Minneapolis, Minnesota , up to -
4% in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. For all seasons the R-B readings have
decreased by 0.7% per year since 1974. . . .” (p. 762).
Scotto later reports that his instruments are confirming

what many other scientists are also recording: a decrease
in ultraviolet radiation reaching Earth. In a later issue of
Science, Scotto rejects the possibility that urban air
pollution could scatter incident UV-B rays causing a
decrease in UV-B radiation actually reaching the surface.
Scotto points to data obtained at the station at Mount
Mauna Loa, Hawaii, which is relatively free of airborne
contamination and that "preliminary analyzes of data from
this station show no increase in UV radiation between
1974 and 1985." (Fig. 2)
The results of the publication of the studies are: Scotto

was unable to continue the research after 1985 because
the funds for the operation of most UV radiation monitoring
stations were cancelled, and the stations were closed.
Although Scotto is a world-renowned cancer expert, he no
longer receives grants to travel to international
conferences to present his findings on the reduction of UV
radiation.
95

Joseph Scotto entered the famous "shadow cone" cast

by the powerful lobby of the International Ecologist. It is
good to wonder, at this point in the matter, how can it be
that a strictly technical issue – such as stratospheric
chemistry – has been able to grab the headlines of all the
newspapers in the world and has mobilized politicians to
impose a ban that will cost them to their nations more than
5 trillion dollars in the coming years?
The answer is: fear of increased deaths from skin

cancers as more ultraviolet radiation reaches Earth,
supposedly caused by ozone depletion.
SOLAR ULTRAVIOLET (UVB) TRENDS
AND ANNUAL R-B COUNTS, 1974-1985
Fig.2
Note the clear downward trend in UV radiation levels
96

If it weren't for the mass hysteria that has been

created about the alleged increase in skin cancer cases,
today there would be no ban on CFCs, halons and other
substances accused of attacking ozone, and the
newspapers would not even bother. to mention the topic.
For example, during the same four to six week period that
the famous "ozone hole" appears in Antarctica, a
"Nitrogen Oxides Hole" also appears in the same area.
Both "holes" are created by the same natural

physical phenomena, but mention of this and other
phenomena occurring in Antarctica would raise many
nagging questions about the extraordinary chemical and
physical conditions that occur at the end of the Antarctic
winter, and it would make people start questioning the
Ozone Fear issue. Therefore, the "Nitrogen Oxide hole"
is never mentioned.
Ozonologists even make up physics and make

nonsense about ozone destruction and conveniently ignore
these "least energy" paths, a fundamental law of
thermodynamics, with no exceptions whatsoever. They
state that chemical reactions occur in this way:
Cl2O2 + hv -> Cl + ClOO
Eberstein shows that the reaction actually follows one of

the two most likely paths of minimum energy:
Path 1: Cl2O2 + H becomes 2 ClO, or
Route 2: Cl2O2 + hv Æ Cl2O + O
97

According to Eberstein, “There is no mechanism that

accounts for the creation of the ozone hole. This is a
very big flaw. If one has a theory, one should be able
to provide a definitive mechanism. Otherwise it is just
pure speculation. This issue of Antarctic ozone
depletion has to be put on a more solid scientific
footing.
"Mount Erebus volcano in Antarctica has already made

more chlorine than all of humanity combined and all of
the CFCs combined.
Only Erebus contributes to the atmosphere, in a week,
the amount of chlorine that all the CFCs in the world would
contribute in a whole year. The amount of chlorine that
could come from the CFCs released annually throughout
the world amounts to 7,500 tons - the Erebus emits
360,000 tons per year. And directly to the "Ozone Hole."
Ocean biota, for example, produces about 5 million

tons of chlorine per year; the burning of forests, jungles
and stubble add their 8.4 million more; the world's
volcanoes inject some 36 million tons, and the chlorine
contributed by the oceans is 600 million tons more per
year. The amount of naturally occurring chlorine is 80,000
times greater than what CFCs are accused of releasing.
And we have to say "presumably" because according to
serious investigations, the existence of CFCs in the
stratosphere is recorded in almost zero proportions (0.1
parts per billion) - at altitudes where UV radiation does not
have the necessary energy to cause the release their
chlorine atoms.
98

Various theories for the formation of the Antarctic

Ozone Hole have been put forward here. They are not the
only ones, however, since there are others that propose
the Earth's magnetic field as the origin of the phenomenon,
or as a strong collaborator, (a theory that I personally
issued in 1989 in my first articles about the origin of the
Hole, but as complement to other dynamic theories)
proposed by Tom Valentine in 1987, affirming Faraday's
observations of the effect of magnetism on gases of
paramagnetic molecules, such as oxygen and, therefore,
ozone.
Other theories propose as a great collaborator the Sun,
the solar wind, the bombardment of relativistic neutrons
from sunspots and their interaction with the Earth's
magnetic field. As the subject is much broader than what
most people suppose, a list of references is provided at the
end of this chapter to check the veracity of what is stated
here, or to continue learning about a topic that is really
exciting, and tremendously important due to the dark
implications that a ban on CFCs have for Humanity, and
that have begun to be observed in underdeveloped
countries where the ban on the fumigant methyl bromide -
prohibited by the Montreal Protocol- causes large amounts
of grains harvested by the invasion of fungi, insects,
worms, rodents and other pests.
For this reason, it is of fundamental importance that the

truth on the matter be established and affirmed: CFC
gases have absolutely nothing to do with a past,
current or future depletion of ozone…
99

… be it in the stratosphere, or at ground level, due to the

simple reason that there is absolutely no depletion of
ozone in the stratosphere of our planet that is not due
to natural and seasonal causes.
100

CHAPTER VIII: THE HAARP

FEAR MONGERING
«Misfortunes never come alone.»
- Russian proverb
The mysterious HAARP project
In a secluded corner of the world, far from prying eyes
of the nosy mob, in Alaska, a swarm of antennas point
skyward, belonging to the US Air Force's HAARP project.
According to official sources, it is an ionosphere research
program; but skeptics denounce the HAARP project as a
powerful military weapon capable of controlling the world's
climate. And I say that they are simply spy antennas-this
latter option is the most likely use of the military.
In fact, the pro-ionospheres say that at altitudes above

80 km (50 miles), in the thermosphere, the atmosphere is
so thin that free electrons can exist for short periods of
time before they are released... you know if you have read
my book about the hoax of the atomic bombs, we made it
clear that electrons do not exist, it is another philosophical
concept, to begin with.
101

What is the true objective of this controversial venture?

The Internet is a breeding ground for blogs, just like any
bar and public square (and that’s fine with me, there
should be many places critical of the government, always)
to weave speculations and formulate conjectures that grow
and multiply until they reach excessive limits such as the
farce of the flat earth mogoloids.
In the case of HAARP, although almost all "conspiracy"

websites and even some that are not agree that it was
conceived as a climate control technology, many authors
embellish this statement with theories of their own harvest.
For example, in the Pleiades Library it is said that the

transmitter of the HAARP project “can emit powerful
electromagnetic charges towards the ionosphere (which
probably doesn't exist and nobody will see it much like the
ozone layer etc.) that cause it to heat up and a hole of no
less than 50 km in diameter is made”; Elron transcribes a
dialogue with L. Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology, who
mentioned that some scientists "are concerned because
they think they could cause large explosions of vacuums
due to poorly manipulated quantum physics." (In my book
about the atomic bombs hoax I explain that
Quantummania is another pseudoscience by Albert
Einstein and Niels Bohr among others to perpetuate the
myth of the atomic and fission explosion and other
nonsense that earn more than $100 billion dollars for a few
Western government agencies)
102

In the case of HAARP, although almost all "conspiracy"

websites and even some that do not agree with each other
that it was conceived as a climate control technology,
many authors embellish this statement with theories of
their own harvest.
For its part, Argemto, a famous paranormal youtuber

states that HAARP was responsible for the floods,
earthquakes and hurricanes in various parts of the world,
while the ineffable page Who Conspires? Became one of
his headlines in one of his sections dedicated to the
HAARP project with the bombastic phrase "War climate
with extraterrestrial technology” (if this were true, the
aliens would already have finished us in a blink of an eye
and the same is true with our “benevolent” masters).
The fact is that the isolated situation of the HAARP

facilities, the policy of not receiving visitors except once or
twice a year and the inclusion in the outdated official page
of HAARP of a resounding negative regarding the
possibilities of controlling the climate in its section
frequently asked questions, has only served to fuel
suspicions and more conspiracy theories.
Conspiracy theories surrounding the mysterious project

began to spread in 1995 with the publication of the book
"Angels don't play this HAARP" by Nick Begich and
Jeane Manning. (former agents of the deep state who
spread these hoaxes to scare people and other
governments and win the psychological warfare (PSYOP)
in the art of deception)
103

Among the properties attributed to the HAARP project,

in addition to dedicating a large number of pages to its
supposed ability to control the weather, they mention its
power to interrupt telecommunications in the event of a
war (this is plausible), its usefulness to communicate with
submarines (also fissile), its conversion into the "death ray"
devised by the physicist Nikola Tesla (insanity from an HG
Wells movie just like the impossibility of time travel) and
even its application as a tool for mental control of masses
(this could only be if you live nearby and how it affects your
health in the long term).
What is the HAARP project and what is its role?

The central idea consists of the investigation and study
of the processes that take place in the ionosphere
(doubtful, the military wants to militarize everything even if
they deceive and this is not research for the reasons that I
explained before and now), through the use of a system
high frequency wave transmitter. Although the total power
of the transmitter is about 4-6 gigawatts (lightning is 1.2
gigawatts), which at first glance seems like a considerable
value, the strength of the signal upon reaching the
ionosphere (if it exists) is in the tens of thousands of times
less than the electromagnetic radiation that reaches the
Earth from the Sun, and hundreds of times less than the
ultra-violet radiation present in the ionosphere.
Not only is HAARP's transmission power insufficient for

war purposes (much less to control the weather in any
way, but to spy on or to be able to intercept signals, for
example);
104

It so very happens that their antennas are not adjustable

or orientable, but rather maintain a fixed and immovable
position, making it impossible to “point” towards Turkey or
Africa or towards Russia in Siberia, with the aim of causing
climatic changes.
The HAARP project isn't even the only one of its kind in
the world: there are facilities for similar purposes in
Norway, China, Germany, the UK, Australia and Russia,
operating quietly and without causing a stir. IF these
benevolent nations, which are not, we already know how
the entrails of children and adults burst with bombs in Iraq,
the Ukraine, Yemen etc., would do the same many times
to annoy the economies of each other, it would be cheaper
than invading a country, bombing it or even selling
weapons to several of them. Since it would be a money-
generating machine by being able to easily coerce many
countries at the same time so as to give them lots of
money and resources without resistance.
Another interesting point is the Aurora Borealis that was

created through HAARP in February 2019, which indicates
that the nature of the antenna and its waves do not reach
very far and there is speculation that it can create
holographic images to nearby confusing aerial
phenomena, which would be a perfect distraction weapon
for the military, better than the complex strategy of
changing the weather thousands of miles away. That it
works as a rebound from the satellites and their
information when they are positioned from orbit looking at
Alaska is another possibility. Which may be a technological
impossibility as we have seen in this chapter.
105

106

CHAPTER IX: CHEMTRAILS

«I will give $15 million free of tax should yu
come up with a machine to capture CO2»
-Elon Musk
What are chemtrails?

Chemtrailing posits that the long-lasting condensation
trails left by high-altitude aircraft are actually "chemtrails"
consisting of chemical or biological agents (these are more
chemicals than biological stuff since that microbiota or
what we call bacteria are not pathogenic and do not exist)
sprayed by planes for nefarious purposes not disclosed to
the general public. This hypothesis is not wrong, it must be
said that there are also rockets, trucks and even terrestrial
vehicles that spray them just like they did with DDT in the
40s and 50s.
At least 2 types of projects could be carried out related

to chemtrails:
107

1) Projects related to the modification of the climate (dry or

rainy with seeding) at a local or regional level, not at a
global level since the territory to be covered makes it a
technological impossibility.
2) Non-biological chemical warfare experiments involving

acidic and corrosive chemicals produced in the laboratory.
(We know as examples orange gas -Popeye operation in
Vietnam-, mustard and organophosphates in addition to
graphene, ethylene oxide, silver iodide and aluminum
among others)
Normal contrails dissipate relatively quickly, contrails

that linger longer contain these additional substances.
In areas where these cases occur and aircraft, shuttles,

and vehicles have been seen doing this, the purpose of the
chemical release could be solar radiation control, weather
modification, psychological manipulation, human
population control, or biological warfare or chemical, and
that contrails cause respiratory diseases and other health
problems.
The "International Chemtrail Symposium"

conference, organized on May 29, 2010 by the "Belfort
Group, Citizens in Action" of Belgium, discussed a
document that provides scientific evidence of the existence
of "chemtrails", where they come from, who works them,
why and for what aerial spraying is used, aspects of
geoengineering and the patents that are registered.
108

Activists from the Belfort Group, who have been working

to bring toxic aerial spraying to light for 7 years, convened
scientists and chemtrail activist groups from Greece,
Germany, the Netherlands, France and the US to the
symposium. The "EnMod" program (short for
Environmental Modification, "Environmental Modification"
or "climate war") is the so-called "Cloud Seeding"
(intentional weather modification), a state-of-the-art
atmospheric geoengineering for cloud seeding, which has
gained new impetus in the face of the real threat of global
warming. Cloud seeding creates new cirrus clouds through
persistent contrails of vapor disseminated from airplanes,
which unlike the old vapor sprays -which dissolve in a few
minutes-, these new artificial contrails can last for several
hours, and even days.
“Chemtrails” in South America: Chile The filmmaker

Michael Murphy, author of the film “Environmental
Deception and who sprays”, and the aerospace engineer
Dr. Coen Vermeeren offered the most dramatic
presentations. Vermeeren presented a 300-page scientific
report titled "Case Orange: Contrail Science, Its Impact on
Climate, and Weather Manipulation Programs Conducted
by the US and its Allies."
"Every day at dawn, over the Maipo Valley and over Santiago de Chile, hidden
among the clouds, the infamous lines leave a trail of fear and bewilderment. For
some years we have been following the subject with great interest; it has been
accentuated these months, I will send you morning photos in the same address as
the photos you already have published, as these planes appear at certain specific
hours".
109

On the other hand, in 1997 the Secretary of Defense of

the United States, Willian Cohen, said at the opening of a
conference on terrorism, weapons of mass destruction and
US strategy:
"Others are even engaging in a type of eco-terrorism whereby they can

alter the climate, cause ecological disasters with weapons that alter the
environment and can damage the economy of a locality or region and a
country as well."
On the other hand, and going back to the near past, In

his 2009 book, “A Terrible Mistake,” HP Albarelli Jr.
concludes that Frank Olson, a CIA agent, was
assassinated because a crisis of personal conscience
most likely caused him to divulge state secrets about
various CIA operatives; among them the ARTICHOKE
project and a MK-DELTA project called Project SPAN.
Albarelli alleges that the SPAN Project involved the

contamination of food supplies and the aerosol spraying of
a potent mixture of LSD (a chemical that causes
hallucinations) in the town of Pont-Saint-Esprit, France, in
August 1951. Olson was involved in the development of
aerosol delivery systems; Curiously, he had been in the
Pont-Saint-Esprit area in August 1951; And several
months before resigning his post he had witnessed a
terminal interrogation carried out in Germany under the
ARTICHOKE project. Author John Grant Fuller draws
similar conclusions about the incident in his book "The
Day of the San Antonio Fire."
110

Frank Olson was an American bacteriologist, biological

warfare scientist, and CIA employee who worked at Camp
Detrick (now Fort Detrick) in Maryland. (Funny, he never in
his life used bacteria or viruses to spray someone—
because they don't really exist.) Frank Olson was secretly
dosed with LSD by his CIA supervisor, and nine days later,
he jumped out of a window. from a hotel room in New
York. Most people think it was "suicide."
Other newspapers reporters that hurried to the scene

described people jumping from rooftops, women and men
stripping down and running in the streets naked, and
children complaining that their stomachs were infested with
coils of snakes.
111

MK DELTA was actually connected to the clandestine

mind control and assassination operations of the President
(JFK) by a high level of globalist, military intelligence, most
prominently New Orleans-based Dr. Alton Ochsner at the
School of Medicine at Tulane University, and at the Tulane
DELTA Regional Primate Center. Basically, MK ULTRA
and MK DELTA were Mass Mind Control, Human Behavior
Manipulation, Chemtrailing, and Clockwork Orange-style
NAZI torture, all shot on a multi-billion dollar giant, super-
secret super-budget.
112

The CIA operated through these institutions using front

organizations or fronts, although sometimes senior officials
at these institutions were aware of CIA involvement.
MKUltra received six percent of total CIA funding, meaning
former NAZI SS assassins like Mengele received literally
millions of dollars in top secret as did Soviet KGB
infiltration in San Francisco. All these groups in common
had a globalist agenda.
Going back to chemtrails, wrongly called chemtrails, in

October 2014, the Englishman Chris Bovey filmed a video
of an airplane dislodging fuel on a flight from Buenos Aires
to London, which had to unload fuel to lighten its load for
an emergency landing in Sao Paulo. The clip went viral on
Facebook, with more than three million views and more
than 100,000 shares, being cited as evidence of
chemtrails.
This shows evidence that the chemicals are in all

commercial airplanes as an additive added to give a boost
to the climate, especially the global warming through which
they pass. Because many times the pilots lighten their fuel
load on certain routes and therefore are unaware of what
they do and carry in the tanks.
In some cases, the chemicals are described as barium

and aluminum salts, graphene, polymer fibers, thorium or
silicon carbide, as well as unspecified bacteria. (Bacteria,
like viruses, do not exist, they are simply pieces of human tissue
or inert DNA that do nothing, even the very structure of the
eukaryotic cell is agreed micrographs and its existence is
doubted, Harold Hillman et Gilbert Ling 1970)
113

Here is explained why and how graphene oxide is being

sprayed in some regions from shuttles and planes.
https://truthcomestolight.com/graphene-skies
“Saudi Arabia has a lan to make rain and seed clouds in their arid
cities and territories
Saudi Arabia needs water. The Arab country is one of

the largest oil exporters in the world, but when it comes to
rainfall and natural water resources, it is not exactly
superfluous. In fact, according to Indexmundi data, it is one
of the states on the globe that collects fewer millimeters of
rainfall. To tackle this handicap, its rulers have decided to
draw up an ambitious plan that wants to increase rainfall in
the kingdom between 10 and 20%. As? Well, to a large
extent with climate change and cloud seeding.
Cloud seeding consists of releasing particles of silver

iodide or other aerosols in certain types of clouds to
enhance precipitation or snowfall. In the case of Saudi
Arabia, a two-phase operation has been designed that will
focus on some of the most populated points in the
kingdom. The first, in the Riyadh, Qassim and Hail regions,
was launched already this week. The second will extend to
the areas of Asir, Al-Baha and Taif, points close to the Red
Sea.
It's not a conspiracy theory

https://www.xataka.com/ecologia-y-naturaleza/arabia-
saudi-tiene-plan-para-hacer-que-llueva-sembrar-nubes-
sus-ciudades
114

Chemtrails are generally evidence of a global

conspiracy; There are various objectives including
economic gain (for example, manipulating futures prices or
causing disease to people to benefit pharmaceutical
companies and states, among others), population control,
and weapons testing (using the weather as a weapon or
testing chemical weapons and control).
In the UK in 2005, Elliot Morley, Secretary of State for

the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs,
was asked "what research has [the] department
undertaken into the polluting effects of aircraft chemtrails?"
, and he responded that "the department is not
investigating aircraft chemtrails, as they are not
scientifically recognized phenomena," and that work was
underway to understand "how contrails form and what
effects they have on the atmosphere."
In fact, it is very likely that those “X”-shaped trails that

we see in the sky are marks left by pilots so that they can
be viewed from satellites to monitor the evolution of
chemtrail dispersion.
The weather and its states are nothing more than heat
exchange. The generation of heat can be artificially
induced in the atmosphere by adding magnetic iron oxide
powder to the polymer, to then heat it by means of the
energy given off by some satellite or antennas but always
oriented, not by haarp, or any other more localized source.
Chemtrails researcher Tommy Farmer, in analyzes he
carried out examining so-called “angel hair” filaments
under a powerful microscope, saw yellowish-red man-
made halos embedded in the filaments of material.
115

The good news

Farmer is convinced that it is an oxidized iron alloy used
in weather modification experiments. So the weather
modification could be taking place without the help of
HAARP antennas, systems that, according to Dr. Nick
Begich, appear to be activated only for short periods of the
year. Climate modification can be induced as we see by
pouring certain substances into the air, mixture of metals
and polymers. According to Eastlund, the inventor of
HAARP and the original patent holder said that this was
theoretically possible and that microwave absorbing
polymer additives were commercially available but as long
as you could point the antenna and use a lot of gigawatts
that you don't have at the moment.
However, chemtrails occur in the limits of 10 km height.

Unsealed Pentagon documents show that the Pentagon is
very interested in "targeted storm systems" for weather
modification and using aerosols to darken the sky.
Apart from commercial aircraft with that additive or

chemical, fumigations are generally carried out locally or
regionally by aircraft of certain types: Boeing KC-10A,
Boeing KC-135 (707) and C-130, some of the NATO for
high altitudes and the C-130 jet for low levels of fumigation
(See studies by chemtrails expert Tommy Farmer)
Exposure to these substances can cause the following

symptoms: respiratory tract problems, headaches,
sinusitis, conjunctivitis, green mucus and phlegm, swollen
lymph glands, cough, respiratory failure, generalized
respiratory failure, heart and brain damage. liver.
116

What does this sound like? To the typical AIDS

pneumonia, sars cov 1 and 2 and other flus and non-viral
toxic conditions that end in hospitalizations, especially in
the elderly.
But as I said, I always bring good news, the agencies

are many, varied and decentralized so that they all agree
at a specific moment in time and spray all 7 billion people
at the same time. It is a technological and physical
impossibility to cover so many areas and more than 24
thousand square km.
Some are made in small areas o modify or change the

weather and to screw up small economies: ranchers,
farmers and businessmen or governments, to put the
control of these sectors in the hands of a powerful few. But
they are failing and most of the people and even
climatologists are denouncing these events of regional
spraying.
Conclusion
Yes, chemtrails exist, governments through their agents
and means of poisoning inertially promote these theories
that certain governments have super technology and
control the entire globe fumigating and shooting rays to
change the climate; but as we have seen, and it is good
news, they can only do it at a regional or provincial level,
there are scares. Just as the military can attack a specific
region but not attack the entire globe at once, it is not a
type of weapon of mass destruction.
117

Yes, it is used for mind control, to manage the local

climate, and behind it are pollutants and toxins. They go
after the common people. It is easily visible and reportable.
And on the other hand, HAARP is not an apocalyptic
weapon either and cannot modify the climate at a global
level either, neither by satellites nor without satellites or the
ionosphere.
118

CHAPTER X: OIL FOREVER

«Oil is made from aquatic phytoplankton and
zooplankton, and because oil is created from
biomass, plastic is also a form of biomass.»
-Colin Rivas
Dinosaur Juice
Years ago, I learned from a geologist that oil and gas
does not come from dinosaur juice. Long before this
statement seemed strange to me since there were not
enough dinosaurs for all the oil and gas that we have
consumed up to now and not enough fossils at various
depths for this theory to be true. For this reason, I decided
to look for people who could explain it to me within their
expertise and dismantle this myth that has been going
around in textbooks and in the popular psyche for almost
more than 100 years.
119

Oil and natural gas do not come from fossilized

dinosaurs! Therefore, they are not fossil fuels. That is a
myth. According to Wikipedia, the term "fossil fuel" was
first used by the German chemist Caspar Neumann in
1759. It was later used more widely in the early 20th
century to give people the idea that oil, coal and natural
gas come from ancient living things, which makes them a
natural substance.
An article by Bob Strauss on ThoughtCo.com notes

that Sinclair Oil Corp. sponsored a dinosaur at the Chicago
World's Fair “on the premise that the world's oil reserves
were formed during the Mesozoic era, when dinosaurs
lived. The exhibit was so popular that Sinclair quickly
adopted a large green brontosaurus. . . as its official
mascot," Strauss writes.
Oil, natural gas, and coal come from biomass, primarily

from plankton and decaying marine organisms, and
supposedly the "single-celled microorganisms" that
"evolved in Earth's oceans about three billion years ago."
Over millions of years, layers of sediment accumulated,
along with plants (plankton and algae) and these
microorganisms forming the mineral. The heat and
pressure began to build. The degree of heat and the
amount of pressure, along with the type of biomass,
determine whether the material is converted to oil or
natural gas.
Over the course of millions of years, "members of

these massive colonies died" and "sank to the sea
floor and were gradually covered by accumulating
sediment," Strauss writes.
120

"Over millions of years, these layers of sediment grew

heavier and heavier until the dead microorganisms trapped
below were 'cooked' by pressure and temperature into a
stew of liquid hydrocarbons."
As for coal, Strauss notes that the world's coal deposits

"were laid down during the Carboniferous period, about
300 million years ago, which was still a good 75 million
years before the evolution of the first dinosaurs." The coal
formed when dense forests and jungles were "buried under
layers of sediment, and their unique fibrous chemical
structure caused them to 'cook' into solid carbon rather
than liquid oil," Strauss explains.
So scientifically, when we talk about plastics being

made from "biomass" as a means of going "green", we're
not really talking about anything new. Oil is made from
aquatic phytoplankton and zooplankton, and because oil is
created from biomass, plastic is a form of biomass. So it
makes sense that we could create plastic from corn,
sugarcane, grass, and other plants. Plastics are plants in
another form. On the other hand, the Russian geologist
Nikolai Alexandrovich Kudryavtsev was the first to propose
the modern abiogenetic theory of petroleum in 1951.
He analyzed the geology of the Athabasca Tar Sands in

Alberta, Canada and concluded that no rock source could
form the enormous volume of hydrocarbons (estimated
today at 1.7 trillion barrels), and that on the other hand the
most plausible explanation is that it is inorganic deep oil.
121

The ubiquity of hydrocarbons in the solar system is

taken as evidence that there may be much more oil on
Earth than previously thought, and that oil may originate
from the migration of carboniferous fluids into upper mantle
regions. In the West, it gained relevance due to the
publication in 1999 of The Deep Hot Biosphere by Thomas
Gold, who is accused of having copied part of the Russian-
Ukrainian theory, largely unknown outside Russian-
speaking areas, without citing it.
Within the mantle, carbon can exist as hydrocarbon

molecules, primarily methane and elemental carbon,
carbon dioxide, and carbonates. The abiotic hypothesis
suggests that a large amount of hydrocarbons found in
petroleum can be generated by abiogenic processes.
These hydrocarbons can migrate out of the mantle towards
the earth's crust until they escape to the surface or remain
trapped by impermeable strata, forming oil deposits.
Abiogenic theories (oil and gs is mineral) reject the
assumption that certain molecules found within oil, known
as biomarkers, are indicative of the oil's biological origin.
Instead, they argue that some of these molecules may

come from microbes that oil encounters as it migrates to
the surface through the crust, that others are found in
meteorites (which have presumably never come in contact
with living matter), and that others may be engendered by
possible reactions in inorganic petroleum. Biological
markers present in oil as hopanoids are parts of the cell
walls of bacteria. These bacteria feed on hydrocarbons
and, after their life cycle in this context, dies leaving their
imprints in the oil.
122

The evidence is the following:

1) The location of methane throughout the solar system
2) The presence of hydrocarbons in extraterrestrial bodies including
meteorites, moons and comets
3) Plausible mechanisms of chemical synthesis of hydrocarbons within
the earth's crust
4) Hydrocarbon-rich areas tend to be hydrocarbons of many different
levels
5) Oil and methane deposits are found in huge patterns related to
deep, large-scale crustal shapes rather than the model of sedimentary
deposits
6) Interpretations of the chemistry and isotopic composition of natural
petroleum
7) The presence of fuel and methane in non-sedimentary rocks on
earth.
8) The existence of methane hydrate deposits.
9) Bituminous deposits whose creation is based on deep coal wells.
10) Inability to create petroleum from organic material at the time the
theories were created.
11) The stable amount of carbon and oxygen levels on geological time
scales
12) Biogenetic theories do not explain the characteristics of some
hydrocarbon deposits.
13) The distribution of metals in crude oil reservoirs matches better in
surface mantle, primitive mantle, and chondritic patterns than in
oceanic and continental crust and shows no correlation with seawater.
14) The association of hydrocarbons with helium, which is not used in
biology.
15) Generation of hydrocarbons by microorganisms in the depths
123

Retired CIA Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty noted in a LIVE

interview from 2000 with Oliver Stone that Oil was not what
they thought it was, it is not definitely a fossil fuel. It does
not come from animals. Is solely a mineral like any other?
When they first discovered motor gasoline, petroleum, and
they needed axles for railroad trains and all that kind of
stuff. Remember that the railway began in the 19th
century. Then the oil went from being just a lubricant to
being a valuable fuel, and the rest is history.
The Rockefeller family turned out to be the smartest

bunch in this business at the time. However, they made
much of their money and fortune from transporting oil and
selling it, and they realized that putting a price on oil is like
putting a price on a liter of water. It has no upfront cost, it's
in the ground and in those days, it was almost what you
would call surface oil drilling. Almost nothing was drilled.
And in order to raise the price of oil, they came up with the
idea that they would have to make it look like oil was a rare
commodity. After extracting a few barrels, they probably
had to close the bar.
But in 1892, there was a convention in Switzerland in

Geneva of scientists to determine what organic substances
are. So the definition of organic substances with hydrogen,
oxygen, carbon so it is generally a living substance, like a
tree. If you analyze a dead tree, then you find hydrogen,
carbon and oxygen, weeds and weeds etc. Living beings,
animals, we are those three things.
Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty proceeds by saying:
124

Therefore, at this convention in Geneva, the Rockefellers

took the opportunity to send some scientists who said that
oil is those three things. Therefore, it must be derived or
come from the putrefaction or deterioration of the oldest
living matter, manipulating the audience when this
scientific convention ended, defining oil as "a residue of
ancient living matter" and from there comes the false
meaning of that oil and its derivatives are fossil fuel. But it
is actually an inorganic liquid mineral.
And it is also known that a dinosaur or an animal fossil

has never been found, for example, below 5km where
there is a lot of oil. And nowadays it is drilled to find oil at
10 and more km to extract oil and gas. So obviously it is
categorically ruled out that it is a fossil fuel and the
abiogenic theory takes more force.
It's all language and mind control: they've called it fossil

fuel so people believe it comes from living things and is an
asset that is running out or in short supply. And one
speaks as such, fictitiously of a finite resource, when it is
not. After water, it is the second most frequent liquid on
earth. And we've only just started drilling it. That's why the
people in charge of oil want to keep oil as scarce, finite,
and priced as high as they can.
In 2011, the study carried out by Swiss researchers

Estefanía Vitali, James B. Glattfelder and Stefano Battiston
was released, the most complete analysis ever carried out
on global corporate networks.
125

The findings indicate that there is a "corporatocracy"

made up of 737 companies that control 80% of the
transnational corporate network and that 147—what
researchers call a "super-entity"—control more than 40%
of this global network. The list of the first 50 companies of
the global control ranking includes Barclays, Axa, Capital
Group Companies, JP Morgan Chase, UBS, Merrill Lynch,
Deutche Bank, Gold Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of
America, ING, BNP Paribas, etc. All of them multinationals
represented at the Bilderberg Club.
And in 2012, a commercial agreement between

Rockefeller and Rothschild, associated to take advantage
of the crisis, was made public. Since then, the entity has
acted as a provider of wealth management services to
other families, foundations and institutions. The alliance
will focus its activity on establishing investment funds and
seeking joint acquisition opportunities.
In conclusion, oil does not come from living things but from
chemicals, rocks and magma and thermodynamic
reactions inside the earth. Nor is it scarce, probably
inexhaustible like water. And that the oil companies that
have a goose dough are interested in playing with the
warmology, the ecolefties and the NGOs to make it scarce,
play at speculation in the stock market and dominate the
governments.
126

The scam of the war on plastic

From the ancient city of Sumer and later Greece and
Rome, the collection and treatment of urban waste is one
of the functions of municipal governments. But statism
confers on governments “much higher and nobler
missions”, such as “health and education”; and that is why
it seems unworthy to them to go around collecting
garbage. And they resist, with the most aberrational
pretexts. As always, the most progressive utopian
communism and socialism blame the common people;
now he says that “the consumer society produces too
much garbage”.
And it bans plastic bags, driving into center of cities and

limits them to 15 minutes with local borders that must be
crossed with digital passports and social credit (this is yet
to come but it will come thanks to the sheepish citizens)
previously unthinkable alleging "ecological" reasons. This
is already very serious, but it can get worse, because they
also want to ban plastic bottles and containers, alleging a
series of popular myths, contrary to the truth.
1) “Plastic cannot be recycled”, they say.

X False: plastic materials are recycled, and way better,
nowadays. Plastic from all applications is recycled:
packaging, agriculture, construction, automobiles, etc. In
Spain : 100% of the plastic containers from the yellow
containers are recycled.
2) "Plastic is not biodegradable and cannot be

disposed of." X False: “Biodegradable” means that it can
be broken down into chemical elements by the action of
natural biological agents such as the sun, water, bacteria
127

or plants; and so it is with many plastics. And the fact that

it is biodegradable does not make a material "good",
because if it is thrown into the dumpster as waste, without
conditions for biodegradation, it is not eliminated; and it is
not "bad" either because it is not biodegradable, if it can be
recycled.
3) "Plastics are single-use and immediate." X False: for

the most part they are used in articles of multiple uses, e.g.
eg containers for trade or home. And in long-lasting
products, e.g. eg in agriculture, they last from 1 to 4 years;
in the electrical sector, from 3 to 8 years; in vehicles, from
8 to 12 years old; and under construction, more than 25. It
is true that there are single-use plastic products, p. eg in
medicine, for safety and hygiene: syringes, catheters,
sterilization items in surgery; and the same goes for
diapers, pacifiers and baby bottles.
4) "Plastic is produced with oil, which is not

renewable."
X False: some come from renewable sources: potatoes,
corn, sugar cane, etc., and second generation: they are
made from animal or vegetable waste. Most of it now
comes from oil, yes, but only between 4% and 6% of total
oil consumption is to make plastics; and they are not made
with the refining, but with a residual by-product, thus taking
advantage of resources that would otherwise have to be
eliminated in another way.
128

5) "When the plastic burns, it produces dioxins, which

are toxic."
X False: Unlike heating or vehicular traffic, plastics do not
produce dioxins when burned, because most of them lack
chlorine in their chemical structure. Should you still be
worried about dioxins in the plastic, then ask your local
government to ask manufacturers to remove them from the
process of making plastic. In fact, without the dioxin the
plastic degrades much faster.
6) "All plastics end up in the sea."

X False: This is nonsense; any waste, plastic or not, can
end up either in the sea or in the wasteland, if there is no
rational and efficient collection and treatment; but it is
easier for governments to blame and prohibit, than to fulfill
their obligations and carry out their tasks.
7) "Plastic bags kill fish."

X False: This is the sentimentalist myth. Theodore
Dalrymple defines "Political Correctness" as
"sentimentalism required by law"; and so it is. Obviously, a
fish can die if someone on the beach throws a plastic bag
into the water; but it's not the bag's fault! Just like if you
leave a bag near a baby or a knife or a sharp piece of can
can hurt you too.
8) "We will all end up buried in a mountain of

plastics."
X False: This myth alludes to the growing substitution of
paper and cardboard, tinplate and metal, leather, wood or
glass, etc., by plastic materials, in a range of applications
that is also increasing.
129

It shows the ignorance of the "eco-lefties", and their

contempt and hostility to development, by private
companies, which are always innovating, in raw materials,
and in more efficient production methods and solutions.
What does the government produce the new libtards

and the digital imperialism of left-wing thinking? Nothing!
Only complaints and lawsuits against the world of
production. Plastics have many advantages; and that is
why they are a better alternative than others, more
traditional. And the plastic industry investigates and works
on the reuse, recovery and treatment of waste.
9) "Paper or cloth bags are more 'ecological' than

plastic ones."
X False: No! Reusable plastic bags have a better
environmental behavior than any of the available options:
they are 100% recyclable, they consume much less energy
to produce, and waste management does not require
conditions as demanding as the alternatives. Some fabrics
are treated with antimony (lead) and can cause allergies,
pneumonia and even what we know as smallpox (not
fictitious virus) due to toxic contamination.
10) "They use plastic only because it is cheaper."

X False: No, because of its technical advantages, and its
benefits, preferable to those of the replaced materials, and
yes, of course, in many cases, with lower prices for the
consumer, but that's good; and typical of capitalism, hence
the anger of the "eco-libtards".
130

These last two myths reveal a "dark secret": inefficient

companies, which use materials replaced by plastics,
"lobby" against plastic. And it is that the left-handers and
the right-wing statists learned to live with the mercantilism
of the old oligarchies, or the new ones, generated by social
democratic politicians, who create their own companies
"protected" from statism in various ways.
11) Plastic packaging is the largest contributor to a

product's environmental impact.
X False: In reality, the product inside the packaging often
has a much greater environmental impact.
12) The environmental impact of plastics is greater

than that of any other packaging material.
X False: Scientist Shelie Miller says that plastic generally
has a lower global environmental impact than single-use
glass or metal in most impact categories.
13) Plastics cause cancer and disease

X False: Plastics do not cause cancer. It is an innocuous
material used for the beverage and food industries, and it
is even the preferred material for the medical industry. The
myth arose from claims that "chemicals in plastics can
leach into food or drink and cause cancer." Scam
emails have spread warnings about the release of dioxins
when reused plastic containers are heated or frozen.
These fake emails are credited to Johns Hopkins

University in the United States.
131

The reality is that the studies that have been carried out
have shown that, even though small amounts of plastic
products were released in some experiments, these
residues remain at very low levels and their chemical
compounds indicate that it would be impossible to reach
risk levels. for the human being.
Here I finish my chapter and the good news about

plastic and oil, but there are more myths.
A short brochure on the Internet, "False Myths and

Facts about Plastics in Sustainability, Recycling and
Food Safety", dismantles the 50 (fifty) most popular myths
about plastics, which the clueless always repeat on social
networks. And there is more information on the Internet.
Two valuable sources:
(1) on the catastrophic myths of "global warming" and

other imaginary apocalypses, invented by the left to
frighten the unwary, and give more power to the World
Government, the Web "Myths and Frauds", of FAEC,
Fundación Argentina de Scientific Ecology, by our friend
Eduardo Ferreyra.
(2) On the "environmentalism of free market and private

property", with all the non-statist or left-handed solutions,
for the real (not invented) problems of the environment, on
the Web "Red de Amigos de la Naturaleza" (RANA) Do not
act like the clueless: do not be misinformed, scared,
scammed or deceived.
132

CHAPTER XI: THE EV SCAM

«The electrical VEHICLES are not free of
pollution; they have to get their energy from
somewhere.»
- Alexandra Paul
The Ponzi Scheme

When we had a specialist in electricity and another in
cars, we had a very interesting discussion on my channel.
Some of the subscribers left very explanatory comments
and with clear knowledge and their own experience that
electric cars are not what the media and globalist
companies say they are. are; here some of them:
SUS1: The electric car is the scam of the century, it is more

expensive than gasoline and electricity also pollutes, here is a
mafia fund to benefit a few with fat benefits, you have to discover
the scam of the stampede.
SUS2: The electric car at the end of its life compared to a gasoline
one and with the same kms, pollutes more, there are many that
have caught fire, it is much more expensive and according to
experts, lithium and cobalt have a short expiration date.
133

The big scam?: They say that hybrid vehicles

pollute more than you think
The big scam?: They say that hybrid vehicles pollute
more than you think Los coches de gasolina ademas
cada día son mas baratos, excepto que compres un ferrari
un bugatti o una limusina. Ven nuevo negocio y muy
prolifico la oligarquia de fabricantes de coches y las
petroleras. Los coches electricos como los Tesla se van
del presupuesto de cualquier miembr de media o clase
trabajdora de occidente. En los que respecta solo a los
100% eléctricos, el líder sigue siendo Tesla aunque en
septiembre cayó un 5%. Sin embargo, Volkswagen y
Renault la siguen de cerca, con crecimientos de 352% y
211%, respectivamente.
These cars also seem to explode, the batteries are so

large that they produce some radiation, that it is difficult to
weigh its effects in the short and medium term. Not only
have cars been seen exploding or burning, but also
scooters, motorcycles and trucks.
Several transport companies do not want to take

them in their containers, ships or transport and delivery
convoys, for fear of material and human losses. Chemicals
including ithium that are given off during the burning of the
material are highly toxic. On the internet you can even find
platforms in several countries affected by the electric
vehicle scheme plan.
134

The 'scam' of electric vehicles: they pollute the

same as conventional ones
The most toxic emissions for health do not come out of
the exhaust pipe. The electric ones emit more of these
particles than the conventional ones. But the reality is
always a bit more complex: it is not just that CO2 is also
emitted when manufacturing these vehicles... which we
know is harmless and non-toxic) the problem is that when
they move they expel into the atmosphere more dangerous
pollutants than diesel cars.
Achten and Victor Timmers of the University of

Edinburgh have published a report on this in the scientific
journal Atmospheric Environment. In fact, the authors of
the study recall that of all the emissions of PM10 and
PM2.5 particles that are generated in any of our streets or
highways, 90% and 80% respectively have nothing to do
with the vehicle's engine.
This had already been demonstrated by a study with

real traffic in a closed environment (a tunnel on a British
motorway, by Professor Ranjeet Sokhi of the University of
Hertfordshire), which concluded that only a third of the 34
to 39 micrograms of particles registered in the tunnel they
came from the engines that burn petroleum derivatives.
The remaining two-thirds come from a place that car

manufacturers don't usually focus their advertising on: the
surface of the wheels, the braking systems and the road.
Although often ignored, they are all sources of pollution
particles known to be directly linked to ailments such as
heart attacks or seizures.
135

The problem, explain the scientists from the Scottish

university, is that the hybrid and plug-in electric vehicles
that have become fashionable weigh on average 24%
more than their comparable oil-burning ones. And that
extra weight results in greater wear on the three
aforementioned components.
Comparing different versions of cars on the market,

scientists show that a Volkswagen Golf weighs 16% more
in its "ecological" version than in the conventional diesel or
gasoline version, while in the case of a Ford Focus the
weight differential is 15%, 24% in the case of the Fiat 500
and up to 29% in the Smart Coupé. With more mass, the
scientists explain, electric vehicles must use their brakes
more intensely when they have to stop (and this despite
the use of regenerative braking), but they also wear more
on their wheels and the road (an obvious phenomenon that
drivers of truck know well).
The result is that electric vehicles tear up more particles

from brakes, tire rubber and asphalt... and release them
into the atmosphere.
"We can conclude," Achten and Timmers explain, "that

the increasing popularity of electric vehicles will surely not
have a large impact on particulate matter levels." That
means that electric vehicles do reduce the amount of
greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere, but they are
completely useless in preventing pollution that is toxic to
humans. And another study warns about the risk in older
car parks, which could collapse due to the greater weight
of battery models.
136

The weight of EV’s too heavy for old

infrastructures and parking lots.
Any car fan knows the most famous phrase of the
founder of Lotus, Colin Chapman: “Simplify, then add
lightness.” The Briton always preferred his cars, both
street and competition, to be lighter rather than more
powerful.
Up to 1,000 kg of difference: the brutal and dangerous excess

weight that you take when buying an electric car instead of its
gasoline version.
It is the opposite philosophy to what in Spain we know

colloquially as "big donkey, don't walk".
The American cars serve to perfectly illustrate this

philosophy, while the Lotus are at the opposite pole,
offering top-level performance, with less powerful engines
and a featherweight. But, to what extent is weight so
important? And we are not only talking about benefits, but
also about safety because the mass of a vehicle is
decisive when talking about this last issue.
And is that the weight is essential when designing a car.

Manufacturers have always taken this factor into account,
especially in sports-style models, which have traditionally
sought lightness to guarantee the best possible
performance. However, it seems that this issue has been
forgotten in recent years. It is true that cars are more
comfortable, faster, safer and better equipped, but they are
also bigger and heavier than ever.
137

In the last two decades, its dimensions have grown

tremendously, to the point that there are compact C-
segment cars that are practically as big as the D-segment
sedans of 15 years ago; You just have to look at the length
of the current Honda Civic (4.55 meters) and that of the
2005 Honda Accord (4.66 meters). This increase in size,
power and equipment has inevitably translated into higher
weights. It affects all cars, but it is especially serious in
electric cars due to the tareness of their batteries, as has
been shown on more than one occasion.
And why I point out this fact, because a few months

ago, the British Parking Association (BPA) warned that the
weight of electric cars can cause damage in some car
parks, since most of them were designed long ago to
support the weight of vehicles much lighter.
A question of security or pasta

They are going to cram on more taxes on EV’s in the
long term, you'll see. Once only trucks were considered,
but now electric cars are also blamed for causing more
wear and tear on infrastructure than a lighter combustion
model. For this reason, there are those who ask that
electric cars pay more taxes than combustion ones to
offset their impact on the roads.
The electric vehicles are going to wear down bridges,

viaducts, parking lots, garages and other infrastructures
that are already used to the current combustion lighter cars
we have unless you had a Hummer, of course.
138

Is the electric car worth it?

Since electric cars are significantly more expensive than
their gasoline equivalents, if we are going to use the
electric car as the only vehicle, we may have to opt for
more expensive models with greater range, and adapt our
way of traveling (and, perhaps destination) to
accommodate recharges; or assume the cost of renting a
gasoline car for those trips.
Because the electric car and its autonomy is bad

compared to liquid gold and let's not talk anymore in snowy
or cold or very hot areas, where up to 4 times more is
spent than gasoline having air conditioning, heating or
other tools to mitigate both temperatures. Let's not say if
you get stuck in traffic with the car running in a snow storm
that is frequent in fall and winter throughout Europe and
parts of America.
We must not forget the issue of the charging point

either. If we live in a single-family home with a garage, this
is an easy point to fix, but if it is a community garage, it is
more expensive. And on the road, we have seen people
with electric cars charging several times before even
passing 150KM. And electric car batteries are much less
durable, larger and more expensive. Imagine the electric
cars parked in the street in a row and bring electricity to all
the parked cars and dig into the asphalt to install wiring,
cables etc.
139

Not even dare tell you about the mining of the minerals
required for electric cars in developing countries where
they are insignificant, copper and lithium are scarce
materials and that do produce a lot of pollution and wear of
mountains, landscapes and rivers and fauna, and with
leeching. A lot of water is used to clean copper and other
products, more rare earth resources are used, it is not
automated in the majority but handmined and extracted -
that is, by hand and the wear and tear of land and
contamination of those countries and their peoples.
140

CHAPTER XII: FAKE NUCLEAR

BOMBS
«Without birth and death, and without the
perpetual transmutation of all the forms of life,
the world would be static, rhythm-less,
undancing, mummified.»
-Alan Watts
Two US Presidents (Roosevelt and Truman) met USSR

gangster dictator Stalin three times in 1943/5 to agree to
end WWII using standard propaganda assets and lies,
fake news, of a secret and fantasy atomic bomb.
After World War II, the farce/lie of nuclear weapons

propaganda was on, with the help of the media, into a
historical Truth at little cost. Imagine tha!t: the 1945 atomic
bombs were a hoax concocted by Roosevelt, Truman, and
mad scientists of all walks of life. (Check
heiwaco.tripod.com)

141

US Presidents Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson

and Nixon lied about the situation in Vietnam and got away
with it until the Pentagon Papers were released in 1971.
The media has yet to report on the atomic bomb hoaxes
and fake human space travel.
Various US presidents eventually met with various

USSR leaders 19 times between 1967 and 1991 to agree
to bogus ICBM and other arms deals.
The details of all the secret nuclear weapons, the space

race, ICBMs, and other weapon fantasies were easy to
hide for US presidential, executive, and national security
reasons. The world lived in a fog of fear and secret lies.
Politicians of all kinds love to sell fear. It is the only way to
stay in power.
It is a world based on wars, aggression, more wars,

cowardice, more wars, lies and fear. The US has regularly
started and lost wars since 1945 to keep its economy
going, so, special interests can make money. And nobody
really cares. The American and Western public are very
easy to fool using propaganda as we have seen during the
plandemic. Most Americans believe that Arabs attacked
the US on September 11, 2001 and destroyed the World
Trade Center, New York, etc., which US Presidents
Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump lied about.
Of course, a structure does not turn to dust from top to

bottom by gravity alone according to the laws of physics.
Many people today wonder why I don't believe in nuclear
weapons. I once believed in honest people.
142

It's so easy to falsify history by spreading disinformation and

having criminal people in charge of all sorts of... science [sic] and
just killing people who know about it!
US Presidents Bush Senior, Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama,

Trump and Russian dictators met numerous times
between 1991 and 2018 to agree on their fear
relationships based on propaganda, lies and fake news.
Once again, the details of secret deals are easy to hide for
US presidential and executive privileges. Not to mention
national security! The purpose of secrecy is to allow US
presidents to fool the west and waste money on weapons,
wars and space using useless scientists and liars of all
kinds, while Russia/USSR just watches and doesn't even
spend a dime.
This cozy time may now be gone. American

politicians have suddenly been afraid of Russia and want
to take control away from the president and punish
Russia.They have not understood the deception of fear!
In July 2017, the US Senate voted 98-2 to apply

sanctions against Russia based solely on unsubstantiated
allegations that Russia exerted undue influence in the
2016 US presidential election.
The US House of Representatives voted 419-3 on the

same bill, the "Russia Sanctions Review Act of 2017," a
little earlier. The bill ties the president's hands by giving
Congress the last word on sanctions and any relationship
with Russia.
143

Congress doesn't know about the old secret

Russia/USSR fear deals. Of course, the President of the
United States can veto decisions and ignore Congress.
Only a clown like Trump would. It's a great show! I don't
take the shows of American presidents from the 90's or
any clown puppet seriously but rather laugh at them.
Maybe it's time for Russia to finally announce that all

information, that is, lies, about manned space travel and
nuclear weapons, incl. Were ICBMs fake from the start?
We will see.
Knowing or understanding that you have been misled

about atomic bombs and human space travel for so long
can be a real shock for many people. It's called cognitive
dissonance.
According to researcher and scientist Bjorkman, many

people who suffer from it contact him and are unpleasant.
But many are grateful.
On November 28, 2017 North Korea launched an ICBM

4,475 kilometers (!) into the sky, which then, after 53
minutes flying mostly in empty space, including a re-entry
through the atmosphere, crashed 950 kilometers north in
Korea proper or in Japan. Sea... in the middle of the
night... that's what they told us!
US Secretary of Defense James Mattis was no less a

witness to the spectacle. But it never happened! It was
fake news!
144

To start at sea level with speed 0 and a gravity of 9.8

m/s² and reach 4,475 km altitude, where gravity is reduced
to only 3.4 m/s², it is required to apply a great force for a
certain amount of time. time to first accelerate and then
catapult the intercontinental ballistic missile, to 4,475 km
altitude, where the vertical velocity is again 0. It requires a
lot of fuel. No rocket from Korea or the globe can do it!
Then the fuel-free ICBM fell back to the ground on its own
due to gravity, while the speed increased.
Just dropping something from an altitude of 4,475 km

into a variable gravity field ignoring air friction takes time...
say 20 minutes... and then the impact speed might be
7,600 m/s, but you can't ignore friction.
Friction not only slows down the ICBM but also heats it
up...so it burns up at, say, 80km altitude like a meteorite. It
is one of the reasons why all ICBMs have been
propaganda for more than 50 years.
It was just the latest standard US fake news and

propaganda show. No one saw any ICBMs launched or
crashed anywhere. The media just published everything
without reviewing the basics, as usual. ICBMs just melt on
re-entry and are useless! Imagine: 4,475 kilometers in the
sky! To take down Washington, DC, the White House, and
the Donald!
Today, 2022, it should be blatantly obvious to any

intelligent person that the 'space race' was from day one in
the 1950s, and to this day, nothing more than a silly 'reality
TV' show and, to no avail.
145

Definitely a very effective one. It was a brilliant idea on

the part of the American (Hollywood?) screenwriters to
have the 'evil Russian communists' as the first 'conquerors
of space' and the Russians play along. All Russian
cosmoclowns were and are actors, just like the American
actornauts are clowns too! Nobody was in space either!
Quantum Mechanics is a Scam

Just as astronomical phenomena have been discovered
or invented (!) during my 1930s and 1940s such as
quasars (1963), microwave background radiation (1965),
pulsars (1967) and early black hole candidates (1981). ),
the theories or principles of relativity explained their
attributes, and their measurement further confirmed (?) the
theories of relativity, we are told! What a coincidence!
To be perfectly clear, I do not believe in any 1905/15

theory of relativity or atomic bombs invented in 1945 at Los
Alamos, NM, USA by Albert Einstein, a German con artist,
and that their theories can be confirmed and proven ( sic)
for curious and strange observations in the past and today
in the Milky Way galaxy and the Universe.
Their nukes were just fake! Einstein just made up most

of the stuff including theories to impress stupid people into
collecting Nobel prize money etc. Einstein never realized
that the planet Earth was stationary at the center of the
solar system in the Milky Way!
146

But to recap, this story begins when the grandfather (b.

1889) of a Swedish physicist friend of mine, Ander
Bjorkman, went to the University of Lund, Sweden, around
1909-1914 to study mathematics and statistics.
There he met Manne Siegbahn (b. 1886) who was

researching physics and building scientific instruments to
study atoms and molecules. In Copenhagen, near
Denmark, Niels Bohr (b.1885) had his ideas on atomic
structures and what became quantum theory. Manne and
Niels needed help with the math and statistics of their
nuclear ideas, so they met my friend's grandfather in Lund
and became friends. World War I started in 1914 and
Manne and her grandfather moved to Stockholm and Niels
returned to Copenhagen but they remained friends and in
contact. Manne and Niels later won the Nobel Prize in
physics for their nuclear findings.
Niels thought that the central nucleus of an atom that

accounted for most of its mass was the nucleus, which, in
turn, was made up of subatomic particles called protons
and neutrons, or nucleons, which were held together by
nuclear forces and that very small electrons revolved
around the central nucleus in different orbits.
Bohr could never explain it. One idea was that electrons
could jump from one orbit to another, which became the
quantum theory. Bohr never understood that electrons
do not exist (!) and that the nucleus was linked by an
invisible electromagnetic field without electrons and that
you cannot jump from one orbit to another.
147

Then World War II began in 1939 and Denmark was

occupied in 1940 by Nazi Germany. Because Niels was
Jewish, he moved to Sweden in 1941 and to his
grandfather's house for a while. Niels took over his
mother's bedroom. His mother had moved to Lund to study
Russian. One day, in 1942, Niels disappeared (!) and then
it was said that he had gone to Los Alamos, New Mexico,
USA.
Niels left a trunk in Bjorkman family’s room and no one

dared to open it. He Might Have Atomic Secrets in it!!!
World War II ended in 1945 and Niels returned to collect
his trunk containing only dirty underwear! Niels was not
popular then for having developed the atomic bomb that
had killed so many civilians in Japan (actually it was a
bombardment of mustard gas and napalm bombs), but
Niels said, as usual, that he could not explain the secrets
of how it worked. and returned to Copenhagen.
At the same time, the Swedish government asked

Manne to build a Swedish atomic bomb! Manne agreed (!)
subject to all details becoming public knowledge, not
secret! Manne didn't get the job. Everything had to be
secret! Then my friend was born in 1946.
In 1964 Manne asked him about Bjorkman’s plans for

the future and suggested particle and theoretical physics.
Manne didn't support the idea, so he luckily studied
something else, which he explains below.
148

Nuclear physics was around 1940 still in its infancy.

Only a few physicists were involved from the start 40 years
earlier and they all knew each other. The biggest star was
Einstein with his theory of relativity that nobody
understood.
Another physics star was Heisenberg who invented

quantum mechanics, another weird nonsense.
Without forgetting Bohr and his contributions to the

understanding of atomic structure. Bohr was never able to
explain later in the 1950s how fission (in fact fission is not
explosive) splits an atom explosively just as it was and it's
2022 a military secret! Relativity and quantum mechanics
together are the two pillars of modern nuclear physics
today.
The Atomic structure was a mystery in 1940. An atom

was thought to consist of protons, p, and neutrons, n,
particles in the nucleus surrounded by orbiting electron
particles, e, and that there were 92 different atoms
beginning with hydrogen n #1 consisting of one proton and
one electron and ending with #92 uranium with 92 protons,
various numbers of neutrons in the nucleus surrounded by
92 orbiting electrons. Atoms were held together by four
forces: gravity, electromagnetism, strong and weak nuclear
forces, but no one really knew how. The reason was that
the atoms were very small and the protons and neutrons in
the nucleus a million times smaller and the electrons were
even smaller and could not be seen or studied.
149

Therefore, the nuclear physics of 1940 was and still is in

2022, not a real science, but a pseudoscience or what
some physicists agreed to without any evidence. In June
1942, the United States Army Corps of Engineers
assumed control of the nuclear weapons program, and the
Compton Metallurgical Laboratory became part of the
Manhattan Project.
That month, Compton gave Robert Oppenheimer,

another mad physicist, responsibility for the bomb's design.
It fell to Compton to decide which of the different types of
reactor designs that scientists at the Metallurgical
Laboratory had come up with should be followed, even
though no successful reactor had yet been built. Bohr
joined the team in Los Alamos, NM from Denmark via
Sweden. Heisenberg was unable to join as he belonged to
Hitler's team.
Nuclear fission was discovered in 1938 in Germany.

Germany was then controlled by Hitler. According to
Bjorkman and other researchers, Fission occurs when the
nucleus of an atom A (for example, Uranium 235) absorbs
a free n neutron under controlled conditions, whereby A
splits into two smaller atoms B and C which split apart and
release two free n neutrons, energy/heat E and radiation.
R (light at different wavelengths/frequencies) by formula:
A + n = B + C + 2n + E + R ... (1)
150

The strong forces holding the protons and neutrons of

atom A together disappear producing heat E and radiation
R, while the two new free neutrons n have trouble finding
other A atoms to continue fission. If a free neutron n is not
absorbed by another atom A, it dies after ten minutes or
becomes a proton, an electron, and a meson. Free n
neutrons can produce more fission, but only due to
restraint (slow down!) within a peaceful nuclear
plant/reactor (or a lab). The heat E heats the water and the
radiation R is damped by the water and the power plant
enclosure. Easy to display at any nuclear power plant.
Since then, this fission has been studied in laboratories

for years and is described in peer-reviewed articles. It
takes place at the nanometer scale: the nuclei of A atoms
are very, very small and the neutrons n are even smaller
and they are very, very fast (fission lasts a nanosecond)
and can be done sparingly in plants and laboratories of
nuclear energy.
It should be noted that the mass of atom A is equal to

the masses of atoms B and C after fission, i.e. no mass
m(kg) is lost or transformed into energy E(J) in the process
as you suggest, For example. Einstein and his E = mc² (c
= speed of light (m / s)). Mass is a measure of the amount
of matter in an object/atom. Mass is usually measured in
kilograms (kg) and the mass of an object is constant under
all circumstances.
The heat E and radiation R produced in fission are due

solely to the disappearance of the strong forces.
151

Einstein and other clowns quickly, as early as 1939,

suggested that fission could also be used for military
purposes like a bomb. He was wrong or lying through his
teetth. You will find all the details below at
heiwaco.tripod.com
A fission bomb, also known as a nuclear bomb or

atomic bomb, is a fission reactor designed to release as
much energy E and radiation R as fast as possible to kill
civilians (!) in a nanosecond, before the energy released it
causes the reactor and contents to melt and the chain
reaction to stop, we are told.
According to Bjorkman, this explosive military fission

bomb was secretly invented in 1942/5 by criminal
pseudoscientists/terrorists in the US, evidently without any
peer review or so. Of course, many of the American
scientists had German training.
Fortunately, Hitler – who was lousy for the Allies but

was a benevolent being of light when it came to the bomb
– never developed a fission bomb in 1939-41. If he had, he
would have won World War II by bombing London back to
the Stone Age, even along with Moscow, Leningrad, Minsk
or Kyiv as early as 1941.
All nuclear engineers and scientists of any nationality

must accept today that nanosecond fission FLASH Boom!!
explosive military is real to get a job, for example in the
International Atomic Energy Agency or in a university, that
is, they start their careers with a lie in order to get a Nobel
prize! But true nuclear fission is not explosive!
152

Fission can only be used in nuclear power

plants/reactors and the like under controlled conditions,
eg.: by cooling it with water.
Plutonium Fictional Element

Plutonium was first produced and isolated in the US on
December 14, 1940. It was a new and unusual element. Its
invention created unique opportunities and challenges for
pseudoscientists and capitalist corporate partners in the
top-secret Manhattan Project seeking easy profits.
Plutonium could be used as a weapon!
Thus, plutonium production was essential to the

Manhattan Project, and scientists at institutions across the
country were secretly competing with isotope separation
methods to create more plutonium during 1942. The
invention meant that all design effort plutonium weapons
facility at Los Alamos had to be modified to a more
complicated explosion device, code-named "Fat Man."
According to Bjorkman, the explosion design would use

a series of explosive lenses to compress (sic) a solid
sphere of plutonium-239 into a high-density core (sic),
initiating a nuclear explosion (sic), the media reported
years later. Before the physicists at Los Alamos could test
the design of the explosion, they needed more plutonium
for the experiments.
In October 1943, construction began on a revolutionary

plutonium production reactor at Hanford, WA. Reactor B,
as it became known, was completed in March 1945
153

and began producing plutonium for the burst-type atomic

bomb that destroyed Nagasaki in August 1945.
1,000 scientists and engineers worked at Los Alamos

1943 and had to pass this little door every day. Was
plutonium dangerous to humans? The first human injection
of plutonium occurred on April 10, 1945. Etc, etc. But don't
worry. No plutonium was used anywhere at all. It was and
is today just propaganda.
Einstein just made up most of the stuff including

theories to impress people stupid to steal Nobel prize
money etc. Einstein never realized that planet Earth was at
the center of the solar system (a non-heliocentric binary
system) in the Milky Way just like all other star systems in
the universe!
You yourself can read Einstein's book on his

foolishness. It is not a difficult, peer-reviewed and
approved doctoral dissertation. A crazy idea of Einstein's
was about a swimmer with speed v (m/s) in a long pool on
a moving barge in a canal (pool length L meter) and speed
c (m/s) in the water. Depending on the direction of the
speed of the barge c, the time for the swimmer to swim 1
meter in the pool varied!
Einstein did not understand that when the swimmer

jumped into the pool from the stern of the barge and swam
forward, the trim of the barge changed at the bow and all
the water in the pool flowed forward...sinking the pool!
barge! Give it a try, when you go on a cruise with a pool
ship.
154

Einstein's idea is that what you see on Earth just by

looking (or swimming!), doesn't work in the space/universe
outside of Earth, where (1) lines are no longer straight but
bent, and ( 2) not knowing what time it is, and (3) there is
some mysterious "matter", m, to consider, whose density is
unknown.
You can't trust your own senses! The reason is the

speed of light c (300,000,000 m/s) and that you have to
adjust, what you see, with the square of c, that is, c by c or
c², and what you see on Earth in the Universe happened a
long time ago somewhere far away, until light reached your
eyes at the speed of light!
Newton and old Newtonian physics/mechanics describe

events on Earth and some simple dynamics of planets
orbiting the Sun and moons orbiting planets in space due
to the forces of gravity, which are easy to understand.
Actually, the Sun orbits around the Earth! Einstein never
understood it. Einstein had not read The Earth Stands
Fast from the year 1900.
Einstein's theory of special relativity that describes

physical phenomena in the absence of gravity in space is
just a fantasy.
Massive celestial objects fly through space at the speed

of light with densities many times greater than gold! The
only thing that flies through space at that speed is light
itself! Nothing else. In the 1920s, the small community of
physicists understood and accepted the fantasies of
special relativity.
155

They quickly became an important and necessary tool

for theorists and experimenters in the new fields of atomic
physics, nuclear physics, quantum mechanics, and other
fantasies.
Einstein's general relativity is said to explain the law of

gravitation and its relationship to other forces of nature. It
applies to the cosmological and astrophysics realm,
including a singularity that created the Universe 13.8 billion
years ago (this number is now over 15 trillion and
stretching the gum) and similar astronomy, but it proves
nothing and especially nothing about the creation of space,
light, matter and the Universe.
According to Bjorkman, Einstein ended his career as a

poor sick Princeton college professor to teach bogus
science fiction to paying students! He died in 1955 at the
age of 76 after his aorta ruptured causing internal
bleeding, despite the fact that his aorta had been
strengthened by surgery as early as 1948 to prevent it
from rupturing, he learned. Bjorkman is over 70 years old
and the doctors say his heart is weak and needs
reinforcement and medication! But He feels fine, he eats
healthy and does sports and enjoys life and never gets
sick. And Princeton University still teaches Einstein's
nonsense!
Not to be outdone by Einstein, his friend Niels Bohr

invented the entanglement principle for him in 1927. It
too was complete nonsense like most principles at the
time. Depending on how you looked at an electron, it was
either a wave or a tiny particle, blah blah!
156

Much later, Andrei Sakharov tried to outsmart Einstein

and Bohr. Read on!
Sakharov's parents were fanatical and opportunistic

Stalinists, that is, the only way to survive in Moscow in the
20/50s, so little Andrei was able to study Stalinist physics
at the university 1938/43. He earned a Ph.D. in 1948. In
mid-1948, Sakharov was involved in the Soviet atomic
bomb project under the direction of Igor Kurchatov and
Igor Tamm on how to falsify basic physics.
1953 he designed, built and tested the USSR's first

hydrogen bomb! Sakharov soon saw "striking parallels"
between his own fate and those of J. Robert Oppenheimer,
Edward Teller, Einstein and Bohr in the US who had faked
the 1942/5 atomic bomb. Sakharov never felt that by
creating nuclear weapons he had "known sin," in
Oppenheimer's phrase. He just did what he was told! For
Stalin!
Already in 1951, Andrei invented and tested the first

explosively pumped flux compression generators,
compressing magnetic fields using explosives (!,?,
hahahahahahaha). Sakharov called these generating
devices MK (for Magneto Kumulative). The radial MK-1
produced a pulsed magnetic field of 25 megagauss (2500
tesla). The resulting helical MK-2 generated 1 billion amps
in 1953. It ignited Stalin's fake hydrogen bomb! Imagine all
that nonsense!! After 1965, Sakharov returned to
fundamental science (LOL) and started working on particle
physics and physical cosmology.
157

Since the late 1950s, Sakharov had worried about the

moral and political implications of his work, he writes in his
memoirs. In May 1968, Sakharov completed an essay,
"Reflections on Progress, Peaceful Coexistence, and
Intellectual Freedom." He described the Soviet ballistic
missile defense as a major threat of global nuclear war.
After the essay was circulated in Samizdat and later

published outside the Soviet Union, Sakharov was barred
from doing any military-related research and went back to
the drawing board to falsify fundamental theoretical
physics. Poor guy! 1972 he marries for the second time.
And in 1975 he received the Nobel Peace Prize. What a
bad joke! 1980 he was exiled to Gorki. 1986 he was able
to return to Moscow. 1989 he was assassinated, so he
could not tell everything he had done and falsified in his
life. What a sad life. Of course, the Western media would
never be able to tell, either then or later. You have to read
it here.
Bjorkman studied the forces acting on moving ships and

their structures at the stormy ocean/air interface on Earth,
and it's much more complicated and interesting than any
relative fantasy!
Bjorkman fully supports actual human observations as a

tool to understand things and he does this himself by
looking out the windows of his home on Earth every
morning using his eyes like me and anyone else. Other
people have observed and filmed the Universe since the
early 1900s. There are many images of the Milky Way and
many other galaxies. They prove nothing.
158

Questions and answers FAQ

No atomic bomb detonated in Hiroshima or Nagasaki,
being an incendiary bombing like that of Dresden in
Germany. No local Japanese have been known to develop
rare diseases, although groups of eco-lovers want to live
off the tale and the Americans and Russians continue with
the hoax of radioactive atomic bombs.
-Can you do nuclear fusion?

It is easy. Hydrogen is heated to a billion degrees
centigrade and becomes hotter than helium. Don't forget to
refresh it and enjoy. You would have free energy forever.
- Can nuclear weapons keep the peace in the world?

world? First of all, nuclear weapons do not exist. It is an
invention of FDR and Truman. Which killed thousands of
civilians. Thank god nuclear bombs don't work. Otherwise I
would have made a bigger slaughterhouse. Thanks to
manipulations, the whole world believes that they exist and
are there to start other Wars and perpetuate fear.
-The Americans had nuclear supremacy, why didn't

they launch an attack to annihilate the Russians with
atomic bombs? They obviously have nothing. Stalin and
the USSR were partners of the USA. They have been
partners for almost more than 100 years.
-North Korea says they have ICBMs and ballistic and

nuclear missiles… It's all a theater. All mambo-jumbo
with trkey filling and a lot of air inside.
159

-What did they drop in Japan then?

Personally and other military and scientists believe that it
was napalm and mustard gas mostly.
-What happens in a nuclear explosion?

Nothing. Nuclear fission is not explosive.
-Why did the US sell uranium to Russia and who did

it? No, it was East Germany that supposedly sold him
Uranium until 1991 through the private company WWismut
AG which was started by the KGB and never produced
Uranium. It's just propaganda for peace between the West
and Russia.
-After dropping the bomb in Japan, the international

court did not sanction the US? No, the US, UK, Russia
and the CIA occupied Japan and introduced censorship.
Anyone who went against the official theory would be
damned. -Who founded the International Atomic Agency?
The sellout of President and military Eisenhower.
-Does radiation melt ice? Yeah. Most radiation is like

light or heat from the sun. If you are exposed to sunlight,
you can burn of course. Your ice cream melts. But
radiation from atomic bombs is harmless. It only lasts a
nanosecond. In theory it should vaporize everything up to
the atmosphere. But no Japanese got vaporized which
means the atomic bomb doesn't work.
160

-Would we be able to stop a ballistic missile or tactical

warhead? A ballistic missile that is flown into space to
destroy enemy fire in the air would self-destruct from
reentry friction and heat just like any spaceship and would
melt, plus the fuel and acceleration required is
technologically impossible, since you have to accelerate
more and more as you approach orbit.
Warheads are a fairy tale. A cruise missile would be

easily shot down by a good air defense, even as it
approaches the target. Wars are won on the ground, not in
the air. And that's why you can't travel in space either due
to reentry friction, the heat of the atmosphere, and
incredible speeds changing eratically direction and orbit.
-What happens with North Korea and why the US does

not end them? It's all bullshit. If South Korea opens the
border to North Korea and lets anyone with a passport
through customs. Later, if there were terrorists, they would
be monitored by South Korea. The US does not need to
defend the border.
The New York Times claimed in a 2010 article that “in

all, atomic filmmakers created 6,500 secret movies around
the world.” It is impossible to review every film to analyze
every anomaly FRAME BY FRAME by frame. But certain
strange features occur frequently ENOUGH to make a
critical analysis checklist. I am not claiming that the
presence of any or all of these problems in a given film
totally invalidates the FEAR hypothesis. I don't trust special
effects in movies. However, as you do your own research,
it might be interesting to see how often these little issues
crop up.
161

Alternatively, several German newpapers including the

Bild on February 22nd 2023 said that Putin has no longer
working nuclear weapons (The article says a spy was
claiming they had no functional bombs neither do the US
or others, not much detail and BILD is a tabloid read by
over 20 million Germans)
162

Works Cited
1. Jaworowski, Z., Stable lead in fossil ice and bones. Nature, 1968.
217: p. 152-‐ 153.
2. Mulvaney, R., E.W. Wolff, and K. Oates, Sulpfuric acid at grain
boundaries in Antarctic ice. Nature, 1988. 331(247-‐249).
3. Jaworowski, Z., T.V. Segalstad, and N. Ono, Do glaciers tell a true
atmospheric CO2 story? The Science of the Total Environment,
1992. 114: p. 227-‐284.
4. Shoji, H. and C.C. Langway Jr., Volume relaxation of air inclusions
in a fresh ice core. Journal of Physical Chemistry, 1983. 87: p. 4111-‐
4114.
5. Neftel, A., et al., Evidence from polar ice cores for the increase in
atmospheric CO2 in the past two centuries. Nature, 1985. 315: p.
45-‐47.
6. Friedli, H., et al., Ice core record of the 13C/12C ratio of
atmospheric CO2 in the past two centuries. Nature, 1986. 324: p.
237-‐238.
7. IPCC, Climate Change -‐ The IPCC Scientific Assessment. ed. J.T.
Houghton et al. 1990, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, pp.
364.
8. Boden, T.A., P. Kanciruk, and M.P. Farrel, TRENDS '90 -‐ A
Compendium of Data on Global Change. 1990, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory: Oak Ridge, Tennssee, pp. 257.
9. Jaworowski, Z., Ancient atmosphere -‐ validity of ice records.
Environ. Sci. & Pollut. Res., 1994. 1(3): p. 161-‐171.
10. Schwander, J., et al., The age of the air in the firn and the ice at
Summit, Greenland. J. Geophys. Res., 1993. 98(D2): p. 2831-‐2838.
11. Slocum, G., Has the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
changed significantly since the beginning of the twentieth
century? Month. Weather Rev., 1955(October): p. 225-‐231.
12. Callendar, G.S., On the amount of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere. Tellus, 1958. 10: p. 243-‐248.
13. Wagner, F., et al., Century-‐scale shifts in Early Holocene
atmospheric CO2 concentration. Science, 1999. 284: p. 1971-‐1973.
14. IPCC, Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis., ed. J.T. Houton et
al. 2001, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 892
15. Mann, M.E., R.S. Bradley, and M.K. Hughes, Global-‐scale
temperature patterns and climate forcing over the past six
centuries. Nature, 1998. 392: p. 779-‐787.
163

16. Soon, W., et al., Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental

Changes of the past 1000 years: A Reappraisal. Energy &
Environment, 2003. p. 233-‐ 296.
17. McIntyre, S. and R. McKitrick, Corrections to the Mann et al.
(1998) proxy data base and Northern hemispheric average
temperature series. Energy & Environment, 2003. 14(6): p.
751-‐771.
18. Editorial, A., IPCC's ritual on global warming. Nature, 1994. 371: p.
269. 19. Maddox, J., Making global warming public property.
Nature, 1991. 349: p. 189.
19. Paul J. Crutzen et al. "Biomass Burning as a Source of Atmosferic
Gases CO, H2, N2O, NO, CH3Cl, and COS" Nature, (Nov. 15),
pp.253-‐256.
20. A.C. Delaney, J.P. Sheldovsky, y A.N. Davis, 1974 "Stratospheric
Aerosols: Contributions from the Troposphere", Journal of
Geophysical Research, (Dec.20), vol. 79, No. 36, pp. 5646-‐5650
21. J.D. Devine, H. Sigurdsson, y A.N Davis, 1985, "Estimates of Sulfur
and Chlorine Yield to the Atmosphere From Volcanic Eruptions and
Potential Climatic Effects", Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol.
89, No. B7, 6309-‐ 6325)
22. Scott D. Doiron, Gregg J.S. Bluth, Charles C. Schnetzler, A. J.
Krueger, y L. S. Walther, 1991. "Transport of Cerro Hudson SO2
Clouds," EOS (Nov. 5), pp. 489-‐491.
23. E. Eriksson, 1959. "The Yearly Circulation of Chloride and Sulfur in
Nature: Meteorological, Geochemical and Pedalogical
Implications", Tellus, vol. 2 (July 25), pp. 375-‐403
24. Brian M. Goodman, 1984. "The Climatic Impact of Volcanic
Activity." Tesis para doctorado (Ph.D.), University of Wisconsin,
Madison Wisc. EEUU.
25. David A. Johnston, 1980. "Volcanic Contribution of Chlorine to the
Stratosphere: More Significant to Ozone Than Previously
Estimated", Science, vol. 209 (July 25), pp. 491-‐493.
26. W.W. Kellog, et al., 1972. "The Sulfur Cycle." Science, Vol. 175
(Feb. 11), pp. 587-‐596
27. P.R. Kyle, K. Meeker y D. Finnegan, 1990. "Emission Rates of Sulfur
Dioxide, Trace Gases and Metals From Mt. Erebus, Antarctica."
Geophysical Research Letters, Vol 17 (Nov) pp. 2125-‐28.
28. B.G. Levi, 1988. "Ozone Depletion at the Poles: The Hole Story
Emerges" Physics Today, vol. 41 (July), pp. 17-‐21.
29. William G. Mankin y M.T. Coffey, 1984. "Increases Stratospheric
Hydrogen Chloride in El Chichón Cloud", Science, vol.226 (Oct. 12),
pp. 170-‐172
164

30. R. Monastersky, 1991. "Pinatubo's Impact Spreads Around the

Globe. Science News (Aug 31) p.132.
31. Nathaniel C. Nash, 1991."Volcano Ash Is Smothering Vast Areas of
Argentina." The New York Times, (Oct. 21)
32. Elmar R. Reiter, 1975. "Stratospheric-‐Tropo-‐spheric Exchange
Processes." Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics. Vol. 13, No.
4, pp. 459-‐474
33. Reinholt Reiter, 1983, "Modifications of the Stratospheric Ozone
Profile After Acute Solar Events." Weather and Climate Responses
to Solar Variations, ed. Billy M. McCormac. Boulder, Co. Colorado
University Press.
34. W.I. Rose, R.I. Chuan y P.R. Kyle, 1985. "Rate of Sulfur Dioxide
Emission from Erebus Volcano, Antarctica, December 1983."
Nature, vol. 316 (Aug. 22), pp. 710-‐712.
35. Fred Brockman et al., 1989. "Isolation and Characterization of
QuinolineDegrading Bacteria from Sub-‐surface Sediments."
Applied & Environmental Microbiology, vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 1029-‐32
36. John L. Bullister, 1989. "Chlorofluorocarbons as Time-‐Dependent
Tracers in the Ocean." Oceanography (November) pp. 12-‐17
37. P. Fabian, R. Borders, S.A. Penkett, et al. 1981. "Halocarbons in the
Stratosphere." Nature, (Dec. 24), pp. 733-‐735.
38. P. Fabian, R. Borders, G. Gömer, et al. 1984. "The Vertical
Distribution of Halocarbons in the Stratosphere." Atmospheric
Ozone, Publicación del Simposio Cuatrienal del Ozono, Sept. 1984
Eds. C. Zerefos y A. Ghazi. Dordrecht, Holanda: Reidel.
39. Aslam Khalil y R.A. Rasmussen, 1989. "The Potential of Soils as a
Sink of Chlorofluorocarbons and Other Man-‐Made
Chlorocarbons." Geophysical Research Letters, vol. 16, No. 7 (July),
pp. 679-‐682
40. Aslam Kahlil, R.A. Rasmussen, J.R.J. French, et al., 1990. "The
Influence of Termites on Atmospheric Trace Gases: CH4, CO2,
CHCl3, N2O, CO, H2 and Light Hidrocarbons," Journal of
Geophysical Research, vol. 95 No. D4 (March 20), pp. 3619-‐3634.
41. Aslam Kahlil, R.A. Rasmussen, M.Y, Wang, et al. "Emissions of
Trace gases from Chinese Rice Fields and Biogas Generators: CH4,
N2O, CO, CO2, Chlorocarbons and Hidrocarbons," Chemosphere,
vol. 20, No. 1-‐ 2, pp. 207-‐226.
42. Derek Lovely y Joan Woodward, 1990. "Consumption of Freons F-‐
11 and F-‐12 in Me-‐thaneProducing Aquatic Sediments."
Publicación presentada en el encuentro de otoño de la American
Geophysical Union, San Francisco, Calif., (Dic. 3-‐7)
165

43. F. Sherwood Rowland y Mario Molina 1975. "Clorofluoromethanes

in the Environment," Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics,
vol. 13, No.1, pp. 1-‐35.
44. Judith L. Sims, Joseph M. Suflita y Hugh H. Russel, 1991.
"Reductive Dehalogenation: A Subsurface Bioremediation
Process," Remediation, vol. 1, No.1 pp. 75-‐93
45. Peter Warneck, 1988. Chemistry of the Natural Atmosphere, vol.
41: International Geophysics Series. New York: Academic Press.
46. V. Beral, H. Shaw, S. Evans y G. Milton, 1982. "Malignant
Melanoma and Exposure to Fluorescent Light ing at Work", Lancet,
(Aug. 7), pp. 290-‐93
47. Xataca Blog mayo 2021
https://www.xataka.com/automovil/merece-‐pena-‐coche-‐
electrico-‐aqui-‐tienes-‐calculadora-‐para-‐comprobarlo-‐2
48. Motor Catalunya Cotxe electric
https://motor.ara.cat/novetats/circular-‐cotxe-‐electric-‐barcelona-‐
gasolina_1_3096762.html#Echobox=1611008191
49. Thomas Gold; Soter, S. (1982), "Abiogenic methane and the origin
of petroleum", Energy Exploration & Exploitation, 1 (2): 89–104,
doi:10.1177/014459878200100202, ISSN 0144-‐5987, S2CID
135282142.
50. Gold, T.; Soter, S. (1980), "The deep earth gas hypothesis",
Scientific American, 242 (6): 155–161,
Bibcode:1980SciAm.242f.154G,
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0680-‐154, ISSN 0036-‐8733.
51. Anders Bjorkman, http://heiwaco.com/bomb.htm
166

Your support is essential for Colín Rivas, which is hanging on 100% thanks to
donations from fans and subscribers like you. Please support the show by
making a donation at:
PAYPAL https://paypal.me/COLINRIVASSHOW
▶1. Web : http://www.colinrivas.tv

▶2. Books : http://colinrivas.com/libros.html
▶3. http://www.colinrivas.show
▶4. Join my telegram https://t.me/TheColinRivasShow
▶5.US and EU https://www.amazon.com/-/e/B07SJJ3R5Q
Gracias por vuestro apoyo!
167

168

169

Climat Ocracy en

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Climat Ocracy en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COLIN RIVAS

Cap. 1 WARMOLOGY CHRONICLES 23

Cap. 2 THE CHURCH OF WARMOLOGY 31

Cap. 4 GLACIAL HEAT 53

Cap. 5 THE SUN CHANGES THE WEATHER 73

Cap. 6 THE CO2 SCAM 85

Cap. 7 THE OZONE LAYER SCAM 91

Cap. 8 THE HAARP FEAR MONGERING 107

Cap. 9 LOCAL OR GLOBAL CHEMTRAILS 113

Cap. 10 OIL & GAS FOREVER 125

Cap. 11 THE EV SCAM 141

Cap. 12 THE FAKE NUCLEAR BOMBS 149

«... The crime of those who deceive us is not in

My conclusions and those of my colleagues and

Viruses, pathogen bacteria or similar have never been

Manmade global warming and/or Cooling are basically

Atomic bombs don't work.

Humans cannot travel to the Moon.

Skyscrapers don't collapse from the top down when

Any information to the contrary is pseudoscience,

Suffering from cognitive dissonance is a commonality

What should you believe?

The old lies or the truth?

To the intoxicating mass media and if there are any

My friend Anders asked me once if I heard of Trofim

No climatologist believes that man can change the

Those to the contrary, I have coined the term

CO2 was never evil or even poisonous and global

We will have nothing. Bill Gates and his biz

The vegan movement wants all of humanity to learn

Since the beginning of 2021, a video entitled Eight

"It will not be basic food for the good of the

For a long time, in various parts of the world,

They are going to con us via the eco-animalist

The funny thing is that most are paid by oil

For humans, food is more than the simple intake of

In his book, How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The

On the other hand, thinking that fossil fuels are

It was magnates like Rockefeller who changed the

That’s why, oil is a clean fuel, renewable and not like

In addition to this method, which uses children as

Is it possible that we do not realize that we are being

Yes, because the controllers or architects of control

Surveillance technologies and the immense neural

Work will no longer exist either, replaced by “time to

There will be no need to go shopping, "the algorithm

In exchange, they received protection and the

We will talk and deal with controversial issues. you

The heat, like all of the summers I have spent in

At that moment, my mother-in-law made an appearance

«Blame it on climate change not on the boogie»

After a long day of business travelling, I considered the

A word like "global warming" is taboo in my house

« The greatest conspiracy theory is that the state

Given the exorbitant and hasty implementation of new

Technology is always a double-edged sword. It applies

One of those businesses that uses as a tool of fear,

«The biggest fallacy is that CO2 causes climate

The religious climatocracy and their priests have set up

There is no such word in the dictionary except for those

«My rights do not end where your fears begin»

This has a purpose and is to confront one group against

Just as the majority of the world population swallowed