Climate Weaponized for War on Meat

Robert Malone writes at Brownstone Institute ‘Science’ in Service of the Agenda.  Excerpts in itallics with my bolds.  H/T Tyler Durden

We all know what climate change is. The truth is that the UN, most globalists, and a wide range of world leaders” blame human activities for climate change. Whether or not climate change is real or that human activities are enhancing climate change is not important to this discussion. That is a subject for another day. [That subject is pursued here GHG Theory and the Tests It Fails.]

Most climate change scientists receive funding from the government. So they must comply with the government edict and policy position that human activity-caused climate change is an existential threat to both humankind and global ecosystems. When these “scientists” publish studies supporting the thesis that human activities cause climate change, they are more likely to receive more grant monies and therefore more publications and therefore are more likely to be academically promoted (or at least to survive in the dog-eat-dog world of modern academe).

Those who produce a counternarrative from the government-approved one soon find themselves without funding, tenure, without jobs, unable to publish and unable to procure additional grants and contracts. It is a dead-end career wise. The system has been rigged.

And by the way, this is nothing new. Back in the day, during the war on drugs, if a researcher who had funding by the NIH’s NIDA (National Institute of Drug Addiction) published an article or wrote an annual NIH grant report showing benefits to using recreational drugs, that would be a career-ending move, as funding would not be renewed and new funding would never materialize. . . The administrative state at NIH does that! And anything that went against the war on drugs was considered a war on the government. Funding denied. 

The new wrinkle in what has now happened with corrupted climate change activism/ propaganda/ ”science” is that the manipulation of research is crossing disciplines. No longer satisfied with oppressing climate change scientists, climate change narrative enforcers have moved into the nutritional sciences. This trend of crossing disciplines portends death for the overall independence of any scientific endeavors. A creeping corruption into adjacent disciplines. Because climate change activists, world leaders, research institutions, universities, and governments are distorting another branch of science outside of climate science. They are using the bio-sciences, specifically nutrition science, to support the climate change agenda. It is another whole-of-government response to the crisis, just like with Covid-19.

They are distorting health research to make the case that eating meat is
dangerous to humans. Normal standards for publication have been set aside.
The propaganda is thick and easily spotted.

As the NIH is now funding researchers to find associations between climate change and health, it is pretty clear that those whose research is set up to find such associations will be funded. Hence, once again, the system is rigged to support the climate change narrative.

Some Recent “Peer Reviewed” Academic Publications on Climate Change and Diet:

Enter climate change regulations, laws, and goals – such as those found in UN Agenda 2030. Enter globalists determined to buy up farmland to control prices, agriculture, and eating trends. Enter politics into our food supplies and even the science of nutrition What a mess.

Below are some of the more outlandish claims being made in the name of climate science and nutrition. The United Nations’s World Food Program writes:

The climate crisis is one of the leading causes of the steep rise in global hunger. Climate shocks destroy lives, crops and livelihoods, and undermine people’s ability to feed themselves. Hunger will spiral out of control if the world fails to take immediate climate action. 

Note that “Climate shocks” have always existed and will always exist. The existence of readily observed (and easily propagandized) human tragedies associated with hurricanes, fires, and droughts are embedded throughout the entire archaeological record of human existence. This is nothing new in either written human history or prehistory. This does not equate to a pressing existential human crisis.

In fact, reviewing the evidence of calories and protein available reveals a very different trend. Over time, per capita caloric and protein supplies have increased almost across the board.  Despite clear and compelling evidence that climate change is not impacting on food availability or undernutrition, websites, news stories, and research literature all make tenuous assertions about how the climate change “crisis” is causing starvation.

This is not to say that that the poorest nations in the world don’t have issues with famine; they do. It is an issue, but not a climate change issue. It is a gross distortion of available data and any objective scientific analysis of those data to assert otherwise.

The best way to stop famine is to ensure that countries have adequate energy
and resources to grow their own food supply, and have a domestic
manufacturing base. That means independent energy sources.

If the United Nations and the wealthy globalists at the WEF truly want to help nations with high poverty and famine rates and reduce our immigration pressure, they would help them secure stable energy sources. They would help them develop their natural gas and other hydrocarbon projects. Then they could truly feed themselves. They could attain independence.

Famine is not a climate change issue; it is an energy issue.

Apples and oranges. This is not “scientific.” Rather, it is yet more weaponized fear porn being used as a Trojan horse to advance hidden political and economic objectives and agendas of political movements, large corporations, and non-governmental organizations.  Facts matter.

 

 

7 comments

  1. Mark Krebs's avatar
    Mark Krebs · January 10, 2024

    I’m a dedicated meat eater and avid meat smoker. There are real environmental problems associated with mainstream system industrialized meat Feedlots can be especially unhealthy (and stinky). Livestock is routinely dosed with antibiotics and passed on to humans.

    As far as feedlot methane emissions are concerned, methane can be recovered and marketed as “biogas.” Such systems are becoming routine within dairy farms and are growing in popularity/profitability in pig and poultry farms.

    It should also be noted that open range livestock have been a great benefit to the environment. Eons of buffalo “doing their (carbon spreading) thing”in the “great plains” are the main reason those soils have been so productive.

    Unfortunately, much of that carbon has been removed through industrialized agriculture and has ended up in the atmosphere. But that is another issue.

    Like

    • Ron Clutz's avatar
      Ron Clutz · January 10, 2024

      Thanks Mark. Some important food process issues unrelated to CO2 emissions. As you say there are strong financial incentives to capture CH4 for its market value. My detailed post on meat climate science is here:

      Climatists Aim Forks at Our Food Supply

      Like

      • Mark Krebs's avatar
        Mark Krebs · January 10, 2024

        I read your article “Climatists Aim Forks at Our Food Supply.” Perhaps you can illuminate what the main “beef” is that climate alarmists have with nitrogen fertilizers. My understanding is that it’s CO2 emissions at the point of production as depicted here: https://www.fertilizerseurope.com/paving-the-way-to-green-ammonia-and-low-carbon-fertilizers/

        Another gripe I hear about about nitrogen fertilizers is that it can “run-off” and cause algae blooms, etc. The “run-off” problem is intensified by poor soil carbon quality that adversely affect soil ability to retain moisture. But that is different than climate gripes.

        My point is that the problems call for systematic solutions and about myopic “fixes” as is all to often the case.

        So what am I missing Ron?

        Like

      • Ron Clutz's avatar
        Ron Clutz · January 10, 2024

        Mark, we discussed this at the Briggs and Hanekamp post. The hypothetical crisis is from Nitrogen deposition, and the focus is on cattle manure and urine. Thus the push to kill dairy and meat. It’s bullshit, but whatever serves Agenda 2030.

        Phony Nitrogen Crisis for Making War on Farmers

        Like

      • Mark Krebs's avatar
        Mark Krebs · January 10, 2024

        sorry, I must have missed Briggs and Hanekamp post.

        Like

  2. beththeserf's avatar
    beththeserf · January 10, 2024

    What’s on the menu at the Davos conferences?

    Like

  3. Pingback: Climate Crisis Talk Obscures Reality | Worldtruth

Leave a reply to Ron Clutz Cancel reply