Understanding a eugenist parasitic mind
Can you figure it out before it is too late….. what does GROK think?
Has anyone else noticed that Bill Gates eugenist parasitic mind always has a flipside countering the good that he says he’s trying to do for the world. The flipside is that his eugenist faux altruism is designed trying to remove 7 billion polluting consuming humans from earth and he believes most people are too stupid to figure out his plan before it is completed.
Here are a few of Bill Gates psychotic Eugenist Terrorist scams in progress…… All being presented for the good of mankind.
-Funding WHO to control world health and vaccinate the world
-Investing in the creation of COVID-19 to cause a pandemic
-Investing in making the bird flu virus more deadly
-Investing in the manufacturing of mRNA vaccines which have it will continue to kill hundreds of millions and sterilize.
-Funding a vaccine passport plan to make sure everyone is injected
-Investing in a plan to infect mosquitoes with vaccines so they can then infect people…
-Investing in farmland and taking it out of production
-Giving billions of dollars in university grants to bribe scientist falsely describe .04% CO2 as a deadly Greenhouse gas…. when most scientist throughout the world describe CO2 as the elixir of life on earth and it is already dangerously low, stating if it drops below .02% life on earth will die off.
-investing heavily in companies and processes that remove CO2 from the atmosphere and developed a carbon trading system for CO2 capture that is already worth trillions of dollars. Biden just announced a $17 trillion tax program to pay for this scam….With your money.
Etc,etc
I have probably missed a few, but not the least of which is one well underway that could cause millions, if not billions of people to starve.
Chemtrails, spray sulfur particles into the atmosphere to block the sun. Bill probably got the idea after reading about this volcanic eruption and the deadly effects, the sulfur Particles in the atmosphere could have.
“The deadliest volcanic eruption in recorded history was the eruption of Mount Tambora in Indonesia in 1815. This eruption is estimated to have killed around 100,000 people directly, with tens of millions more dying in the aftermath due to starvation and disease caused by the eruption's impact on global climate.”
“Recently:HUNGA TONGA-HUNGA:10X MORE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION THAN HUMANS: BUT WHERE ARE THE CLIMATE SCIENTISTS?i
"The largest and highest injection of water into the stratosphere since satellites began taking measurements:
160,900 tons (146,000 metric tons) of additional water vapor”
[THE MAIN GREENHOUSE GAS IS WATER VAPOUR, CO2 IS A VERY MINOR ONE] had entered the stratosphere since the volcano erupted, reaching a maximum altitude of 33 miles (53 km), which is in the mesosphere, the layer of the atmosphere that extends from the top of the stratosphere to an altitude of 53 miles (85 km)."
Is this the flipside of Bill Gates eugenist parasitic mind countering the good that he says he’s trying to do for the world in his belief it will be a better place with 7 trillion fewer consumers?
So as not lead anybody astray and for doubting Thomases , I asked the most independent and unbiased source of information that I could find the AI ……Grok.
Here is what had Grok had to say.
“Research on spraying sulfur particles in the atmosphere indicates that even a slight decrease in sunlight can lead to substantial crop losses. A study published in the journal Nature Climate Change found that a 1% decrease in sunlight could lead to a 1.3% decrease in crop yields. If the amount of sunlight were to decrease by 10%, the impact on crop yields will be a very severe. In addition to the direct impact on photosynthesis, a decrease in sunlight could also affect other aspects of the climate that are important for agriculture. For example, it could lead to changes in precipitation patterns, temperature, and the length of the growing season. These changes could further exacerbate the impact on crop yields.
The scenario also involves spraying sulfur particles into the upper atmosphere. This is a form of geoengineering known as solar radiation management. The idea is that the sulfur particles would reflect some of the sunlight back into space, reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth's surface. However, this approach is controversial and could have unintended consequences. For example, it could lead to changes in precipitation patterns, disrupt the ozone layer, and affect the global climate in unpredictable ways.
In conclusion, the scenario described would likely have a significant negative impact on the world food supply. The combination of reduced sunlight and the potential consequences of geoengineering could lead to widespread food shortages and economic disruption.”
For those believe the above is simply conspiracy theory continue reading .
*** CO2.
The information from the glacial earth cores in Greenland has been a topic of debate among scientists and ignored in the media. The data from these cores suggest that in the past, global warming precedes increases in CO2 levels. Which is logical because warming increases biological activity in a production of CO2 . This is contrary to the popular usher narrative in the media today, which often suggests that rising CO2 levels are the primary driver of global warming.
Here is a simple graphic representation of the composition of the Earth's atmosphere:
Nitrogen: 7,800 dots
Oxygen: 2,100 dots
Argon: 93 dots
Natural Carbon Dioxide: 3 dots
Human Carbon Dioxide Emissions: 1 dot
We are being scammed . When reading this keep in mind CO2 is the elixir of life. It is the most important part of earths carbon cycle to maintain life. It allows through photosynthesis in green plants to give us oxygen to breathe as well as food to eat.
-1. humans only produce and only control one part out the four in the 10,000 parts of CO2 in the atmosphere. Burning hydrocarbons actually contributes to a greener earth. We need more CO2.
-2. if CO2 drops below .02 % life on earth begins dying off.
-3. During earths Jurassic period which was a lush life and green period on earth and early mammals appeared. All ending in the Big Kill, most likely caused by heavy volcanic activity and/or meteor impact. Causing the sun to be blocked out for years, resulting in nearly all plants dying from the cold and lack of photosynthesis, and production of oxygen stopped. CO2 was plentiful on earth and there is no indication that it helped increase the temperature of earth.
-4. no one knows what point in blocking the sunlight that may tip the scales-and it sets off a deadly cascading cycle that can’t be easily stopped and kills kills nearly all plants and animals on earth.
CO2 is not a devastating greenhouse gas that causes uncontrolled global warming. Look at the graph . CO2 does not graphically follow any temperature increase fluctuations on earth.
The average temperature of the Earth during the Jurassic period was around 16.5°C (61.7°F). This is just slightly warmer than the current average temperature, which is about 14°C (57.2°F).
CO2 ….. Follow the money ….Let’s look at the money side of CO2 Markets . it is over $1 trillion market and growing with the transfer carbon credits and for which you are going to pay for an additional $17 trillion in taxes that Biden is trying to pass. The money
The breakdown of the markets for CO2 use and the market value includes:
1. **Carbon Dioxide Market Size and Share Analysis Report, 2030**: The global carbon dioxide market size was estimated at USD 10.94 billion in 2023 and is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.0% from 2024 to 2030. This is attributed to its growing application in enhanced oil recovery (EOR) due to the depleting oil reserves and heavy dependence on crude oil imports, mainly in the Asia Pacific region.
2. **Carbon Dioxide Market Size and Industry Share Report 2032**: The global carbon dioxide market was valued at $79.0 billion in 2020, and is projected to reach $148.2 billion by 2032, growing at a CAGR of 5.8% from 2023 to 2032. Growth in demand for carbon dioxide from food and beverage industry and rise in use of carbon dioxide in healthcare industry drives the growth of carbon dioxide market.
3. **Carbon Dioxide Market Size, Share | CAGR of 5.4%**: The global carbon dioxide market was valued at $79.0 billion in 2020, and is projected to reach $148.2 billion by 2032, growing at a CAGR of 5.8% from 2023 to 2032. Growth in demand for carbon dioxide from food and beverage industry and rise in use of carbon dioxide in healthcare industry drives the growth of carbon dioxide market.
4. **Putting CO2 to Use – Analysis - IEA - International Energy Agency**: Globally, some 230 million tonnes (Mt) of carbon dioxide (CO2) are used every year. The largest consumer is the fertilizer industry, where 130 Mt CO2 is used in urea manufacturing, followed by oil and gas, with a consumption of 70 to 80 Mt CO2 for enhanced oil recovery. Other commercial applications include food and beverage production, metal fabrication, cooling, fire suppression and more.
5. **Carbon credits: Scaling voluntary markets | McKinsey**: While carbon credits have been in use for decades, the voluntary market for carbon credits has grown significantly in recent years. McKinsey estimates that in 2020, buyers retired carbon credits for some 95 million tons of carbon-dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e), which would be more than twice as much as in 2017.
6. **Global carbon markets value surged to record $851 bln last year**: The value of traded global markets for carbon dioxide (CO2) permits grew by 164% to a record 760 billion euros ($851 billion) last year, analysts at Refinitiv said on Monday
The breakdown of the markets for CO2 use and the market value shows a significant growth in the demand for carbon dioxide and carbon credits, driven by the increasing application of CO2 in various industries, including enhanced oil recovery, food and beverage production, healthcare, and more. The market value of carbon dioxide is expected to grow significantly in the coming years, driven by the growing demand for carbon dioxide and the increasing use of carbon credits to offset carbon emissions ,
Follow the money….
Based on the information provided, it appears that the cost of CO2 removal and storage can vary significantly depending on the technology and approach used. Here are some estimated cost ranges
2. Direct Air Capture (DAC): The average cost of DAC is $6tonwia range of $600-$1000 per ton.
3. Carbon capture from point sources: The cost of carbon capture from point sources can vary depending on the concentrationCO2 in the flue gas and other factors. For low-concentsourCO2), the cost is estimated to be between $50-$100 per ton of CO2.
4. Carbon capture and storage (CCS): The cost of CCS can vary depending on the type of storage used (onshore, offshore, reservoir, geologic, etc.). The resulting emission-abatement cost curve shows that if 440 hubs are developed, 9 GTPA to 10 GTPA of existing emissions could be abated at a cost of less than $100 per ton CO2.
Bill Gates is heavily invested in this industry.. that should tell you everything.
Nearly all CO2 capture is fraud that started with Obama and Gore in a scam to use carbon credits to bilk the world out of billions. Biden just announced he is playin giving them $17 trillion more of our money. CO2 is good to help extract more oil from the ground and putting a fizz in your soft drink.
****ChemTrails…they are real
Eugenics Bill Gates has such spraying sulfur and chemicals into the atmosphere to block the sun for years. “ Gates has been giving grants to universities to study spraying sulfur into our skies and is heavily investing in companies and funding grants the Gates Foundation is involved in funding or supporting projects related to solar geoengineering, which includes spraying sulfur and other compounds into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight and potentially cool the Earth. The context mentions that Bill Gates is backing the first high-altitude experiment of one radical climate change solution, creating a massive chemical cloud that could cool the Earth, which is referred to as solar geoengineering.”
In addition to Harvard, Cornell, and the University of Chicago, several other organizations are involved in solar geoengineering research, particularly focused on spraying sulfur into the atmosphere. Some of these organizations include:
1. The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) - EDF is a nonprofit environmental advocacy group that has been involved in solar geoengineering research, particularly focusing on sulfur aerosol injection.
2. The Degrees Initiative - This is a UK-based organization that supports research into solar geoengineering in developing countries. They aim to ensure that any potential deployment of solar geoengineering is done in a way that is fair and equitable for all nations.
3. The Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering - This is a global network of researchers, policymakers, and civil society organizations working to ensure that any research and potential deployment of solar geoengineering is done in a fair and transparent manner.
4. The UK Royal Society - The Royal Society has been involved in the scientific assessment of solar geoengineering, including the potential risks and benefits of sulfur aerosol injection.
5. The US National Academy of Sciences - The National Academy of Sciences has also been involved in assessing the potential risks and benefits of solar geoengineering, including sulfur aerosol injection.
6. The Carnegie Institution for Science - This organization has been involved in research into the potential impacts of solar geoengineering, particularly focusing on sulfur aerosol injection.
7. The University of Washington - Researchers at the University of Washington have been involved in studying the potential impacts of solar geoengineering, including sulfur aerosol injection.
These organizations, among others, are involved in researching and assessing the potential benefits and risks of solar geoengineering, including the controversial method of spraying sulfur into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight and cool the planet.
—————————————————————
Many of the organizations mentioned have received funding from Bill Gates' foundations. Specifically:
1. The Harvard Solar Geoengineering Research Program has been partially funded by Bill Gates.
2. The Degrees Initiative has received support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
3. The Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering has also received funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
These organizations are involved in solar geoengineering research, which includes the controversial method of spraying sulfur into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight and cool the planet. Bill Gates has been a significant funder of this type of research, believing it could be a necessary tool to combat climate change if other mitigation strategies
Follow the money….you are paying for it.
Based on the information provided, it appears that the cost of CO2 removal and storage can vary significantly depending on the technology and approach used. Here are some estimated cost ranges
2. Direct Air Capture (DAC): The average cost of DAC is $6tonwia range of $600-$1000 per ton.
3. Carbon capture from point sources: The cost of carbon capture from point sources can vary depending on the concentrationCO2 in the flue gas and other factors. For low-concentsourCO2), the cost is estimated to be between $50-$100 per ton of CO2.
4. Carbon capture and storage (CCS): The cost of CCS can vary depending on the type of storage used (onshore, offshore, reservoir, geologic, etc.). The resulting emission-abatement cost curve shows that if 440 hubs are developed, 9 GTPA to 10 GTPA of existing emissions could be abated at a cost of less than $100 per ton CO2.
Bill Gates is heavily invested in this industry.. that should tell you everything.
All CO2 capture is fraud that started with Obama and Gore in a scam to use carbon credits and bilk the world out of billions. It is good to help extract more oil from the ground and putting a fizz in your soft drink.
Almost all scientist agreed that there is global warming. It’s just that CO2 has nothing to do with it. This happened in the past and will happen again. That is we don’t allow Bill Gates and his One World Government friends to destroy the planet first in their plan to make it their personal fiefdom .
Such a pity that mostly good reporting is mixed up with chemtrail rubbish.
The picture (one of many) ballast tanks in prototype aeroplanes that routinely make the rounds is a clear indication of fear propaganda being repeated for whatever reason. Only ignorance and malice are valid because it is not humorous in any way.
So while the bulk of the article may be correct (it looks mostly sound) the mention of systemic use or planned use of chemtrails destroys it. Those who know the facts will discount the author and those who are credulous will waste their energy following a condoned counter-psy-op conspiracy theory.
Contrails are a normal phenomenon, first investigated between the two world wars when planes started to fly high enough to cause them.
Cloud seeding is real and used to protect crops by reducing hail or increasing rain, they are generally done in small regions with small planes.
Chemtrails is a pipe dream for geo engineers who have probably never done the calculations on how much it would cost to achieve some wished for goal. There is no way to finance flights if they were not already making flights, there is no way to hide ballast tanks used for testing or firefighting onto regular flights. There is no point in having windows and all the cabling and infrastructure of a commercial passenger plane in a spray plane just so it can be demonstrated at an air-show as a new prototype with the ballast tanks in place for the flight trials. Some things are not possible or practical even if thee was enough evil to desire them, however the threat or the fear of them being used is almost as good a tool and a fearful public is easier to manipulate and having them scare themselves is even cheaper than wasting propaganda spending on it.
I would hope that you verify from PRIMARY sources the reality of chemtrails because the secondary sources are generally bad actors, I sincerely hope that you distance yourself from the propaganda because it will taint you and I have found your writing to generally be well informed and factual.