The Pope’s deceitful and propagandistic bleating about non-existent manmade climate change has widened, rather than healed, the rift in Humankind caused by that issue: on one side of the rift skulks the Pope and his tiny knot of corrupt IPCC-related “scientists” who are funded by an ugly gang of Technocrat globalizers who endorse the Pope’s Word-of-God science, together with those who have bought into their line.
On the other side stand the rest of us, stubbornly demanding that scientific claims be supported with hard science, not mythic cult-like consensus and Biblical text.
It’s been this way for a while now, because, try as he might, the Pope just can’t seem to overcome our innate human ability to smell the totalitarian rat lurking under his oh so ‘umble climate change frock.
The standoff, however, is about to be broken in the most sickeningly inhuman and insane manner possible: we are to have our “unsustainable” resistance to the Pope’s Warmist dogma genetically removed, along with anything else about us that is “unsustainable”; perhaps we’ll be given smaller lungs that emit less CO2, or be made less intelligent, so that we’re not so uppity, or we’ll be bred to be hardier and with a shorter lifespan, thus reducing our need for heat, food and shelter, and, if we breed better night vision into humans, we could live in unlit caves.
Think I’m nuts?
This abstract from a research paper that lays out the Warmists’ psychopathic nuclear option for saving the planet shows that I’m not:
Anthropogenic climate change is arguably one of the biggest problems that confront us today. There is ample evidence that climate change is likely to affect adversely many aspects of life for all people around the world, and that existing solutions such as geoengineering might be too risky and ordinary behavioural and market solutions might not be sufficient to mitigate climate change. In this paper, we consider a new kind of solution to climate change, what we call human engineering, which involves biomedical modifications of humans so that they can mitigate and/or adapt to climate change. We argue that human engineering is potentially less risky than geoengineering and that it could help behavioural and market solutions succeed in mitigating climate change. We also consider some possible ethical concerns regarding human engineering such as its safety, the implications of human engineering for our children and society, and we argue that these concerns can be addressed. Our upshot is that human engineering deserves further consideration in the debate about climate change.
Human Engineering and Climate Change by S.Matthew Liaoa, Anders Sandberg & Rebecca Roacheb
Many of us thought that eugenics — the genetic creation of a super race (or, more likely, a servant race, which amounts to the same thing) died with the Nazi Party. But it did not. Eugenics has been bubbling under the surface of human-hating “Green” politics, most recently under the guise of bio-engineering, since even before it temporarily very publicly erupted in WWII. People who assume they know more than the rest of us have always held the desire to enslave us. Advanced technology means that our children are even more at risk now of being bred to serve a master than they were under the Nazi regime.
I don’t know about you, but the thought of an empty-eyed, white-coated monster manipulating my grandchildren’s DNA to produce sustainable and obedient low-carbon humans terrifies me.
Rather than curl up in the fetal position and let this atrocity play out, I suggest we take a page out of the eugenicists’ playbook and attack their institutional DNA. Fortunately, the globalizers’ DNA is much less complex than ours, and it’s much more fragile. And its weakest link — “sustainability” — is also its most important. If we expose “sustainability” for the ridiculous lie that it is, then the entire global governance house of cards collapses.
The best way to attack the “sustainability” gene is by destroying ICLEI, which is the name of the body that carries the “sustainability” lie, laid out in UN Agenda 21/2030, to local communities, with the goal of slowly creating a homogenous, communitarian, one-world government. Almost certainly, the district, city etc you live in will be a member of ICLEI. It has a membership fee which would be available for inspection in your council’s accounting if you want to find out.
If your council is infected with ICLEI, then you must enlist local citizen help to eradicate it immediately, along with the mountains of UN land-use and other local regulations that it will already have infected your council’s law books and plan with. If you don’t eradicate the whole ICLEI cancer, from membership to law book, it will grow back. The good news is that other communities worldwide have already permanently expelled ICLEI, and they are glad they did, so there are successful models of resistance you can refer to. If ICLEI hasn’t yet infected your council, then do all that you can to make sure it never does. (Ed: Action note for UKIP Councillors?)
Or, of course, you could continue to do nothing, which, now that I think about it, actually might not be so bad since humans bred to be stupid, low-carbon, cave-dwelling, obedient slaves won’t know or care that they’re slaves, assuming, of course, that it’s even possible to be a slave and not know it.