Transfer of wealth

“The matter of climate change has nothing to do with science. It is an attempt by unelected people to reshape the economy of developed nations. Carbon dioxide is a proxy for industrialisation in this political campaign and the political aim is to kill off industrialisation in the developed world.”

Professor Ian Plimer, May 2020.

For example, under the Paris Accord of 2015, China will be allowed to double their carbon dioxide output from 9 billion tonnes to 18 billion tonnes, also India will be doubling theirs from 5 to 10 billion tonnes, meanwhile the UK with their output of a measly 0.3 billion tonnes will be expected, at great cost to what's left of our economy, to reduce our CO2 emissions to near zero. This is supposed to happen by 2030 which is why we see so much media pressure as we're coming out of lockdown in 2020. It's painted as being good for the economy, but immediate and ongoing costs are astronomical.

Dr Shiva Ayyadurai, PhD from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Inventor of Email, explains how the Paris Accord transfers wealth from the grass roots to the super wealthy, and how it draws countries into the Agreement despite opposition from the citizens:


Here's another way the global transfers of wealth operate, together with the power and influence that money carries with it: Global trillionaires (and countries such as China) fund British universities and research institutes, various quangos and NGOs. The universities and other organisations then say and do exactly what their funder wants them to. Meanwhile, British money is handed over to organisations abroad, this is termed 'Foreign Aid' and it has been running at over £1 billion per month. This 'foreign aid' does nothing but cause trouble - the British economy cannot afford it and future generations are burdened with yet more debt; the people who administer the 'aid' become corrupted by the vast flows of money; the societies that receive the money are undermined, local business networks destroyed, and most of the money ends up in the hands of people who were already wealthy. All this has been understood for decades, that government aid does much more harm than good - and yet it continues and government ministers claim that they are doing good (known as "virtue signalling"). 

Reminder: carbon dioxide is not in actual fact a "pollutant". The planet needs more CO2, not less, so that plants can grow faster. 


This video demonstrates that you do not need to be a climate scientist to disprove Global Warming .... you only need to be an historian* .... and, by the way, how much does it cost?       * or an ordinary person with common sense

Another attempt at injecting common sense into the issue:

+ + + + + +

Refer to the site "UK Column News" especially the 'about' pages

On Lockdown, vaccines and global warming

+ + + + + + 

Environmental cost, just one example

Windmills, smartphones etc. help make this lake get bigger -

Please refer to Paul Homewood's site for continual updates on the costs involved:

NEXT: Psychological manipulation