Connect with us

Alternative News

Greta Thunberg Wants You To Be Scared & Big Business Will Make a Killing off It

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Greta Thunberg seems to have a good heart with good intentions, but she also seems to be a puppet for big business and powerful interests.

  • Reflect On:

    Why don't the victims of child trafficking and war in the Middle East receive a platform like Greta has received?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

Eva Bartlett spent years on the ground covering conflict zones in the Middle East, especially in Syria and occupied Palestine, where she lived for nearly four years in becoming one of the world’s most prominent journalists. Scrolling through her twitter feed reveals thought-provoking messages that can really help us further our understanding about what’s really happening on our planet, especially with regards to geopolitics.

advertisement - learn more

Her posts are heavily censored by social media giants and search engines like Google because the information directly opposes fake narratives that are constantly spewed by mainstream media at the behest of their puppet masters, among them the Western intelligence agencies. A great example would be what’s happening in Syria, as many of her posts greatly expose networks like CNN and the BBC for reporting and spreading information that is completely fake. She backs up her tweets with proof and credible sources, not to mention that she goes directly to the places where she reports from.

-->Free e-book - Eat to Defeat Cancer : Are you eating any of the foods that fuel cancer... or the foods that help PREVENT it? Get the TRUTH, and discover the top 10 Cancer-Fighting Superfoods Click here to get the free ebook.

She isn’t the only one. Several insiders have joined the quest for truth. For example, William Arkin, a longtime well known military and war reporter who is best known for his groundbreaking, three-part Washington Post series in 2010 has gone public outing NBC/MSNBC as completely fake government run agencies. You can read more about that here.

Then there is Riam Dalati, a well known BBC Syria producer who recently put out a tweet stating that the supposed gas attacks in Douma were “staged.” You can see that and read more about it here.

Comments On Greta Thunberg

Bartlett is very sharp, which is why it was refreshing to come across some of her recent tweets and retweets that express her perspective on young climate activist Greta Thunberg.

She retweets a post from Ollie Richardson from September 25th, which resonated with her experiences:

advertisement - learn more

“Please forgive me for not “caring” about the climate. It’s because every single day I am faced with images and videos of children in Donbass who try to survive despite the West’s conscious decision to drop bombs on them.

Another one from Corey Morningstar explains how this movement was actually orchestrated by powerful forces, giving a short timeline of events that transpired:

May 2018: a teleconference led by a 350/fossil Fossil Free rep. & Climate Reality Project (Al Gore NGO) proposes a large climate march. Greta Thunberg partakes in this call as well as others that transpire. The idea of a strike came about. Thunberg was receptive. May 2018: Rentzhog is in contact with Greta’s mother (Malena Ernman) at a conference. June 2018: The Thunberg social media accounts are created. August 2018: Greta sits on a sidewalk. Ingmar Rentzhog, CEO of We Don’t Have Time discovers “the lonely girl.”

Not too long after these came out Eva Bartlett got in on it by retweeting the following:

Then another,

Dear #GretaThunberg if you want to know how stolen childhood looks like you have to speak to children in Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Libya or Donbass whose childhood is being destroyed by acts of the biggest polluter in the world  #Pentagon

Finally, Bartlett tweets about an article that she called “timely” and “well written.” It was an article from last month entitled “Greta Thunberg wants you to be afraid, and big business will make a killing off it” published by RT, which includes this tidbit:

Since she shot to fame after organizing school walkouts in her native Sweden last year, Thunberg has been on a whirlwind tour of the world’s corridors of power. Appearing at economic forums, houses of parliament and most recently on Capitol Hill, the content of Thunberg’s speeches are always the same: what we’re doing for the planet isn’t good enough, and the end is nigh.

“I want you to act as if the house is on fire,” she told the world’s economic movers and shakers at Davos in January, asking them to “feel the fear I feel every day.”“We probably don’t even have a future anymore,” she told British lawmakers in April. And so on at every appearance, her portents of doom dutifully reported by the world’s media.

Thunberg’s emotional, fear-driven rhetoric has been criticized by climate scientistspoliticians, and conservative pundits. While Thunberg told Congress last week to “listen to the scientists,” even the scientists of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stepped on the brakes, with one saying that the temperature rises predicted by Thunberg are simply “not going to feel like Armageddon to the vast majority of today’s striking teenagers.”

Putin Weighs In

This type of sentiment is shared by many who have peered into the politics of climate change, like Vladimir Putin, for example. He had this to say about Greta:

I may disappoint you, but I don’t share everyone’s enthusiasm about Greta Thunberg’s speech. You know, the fact that young people, teenagers to the acute problems of the modern world, including ecology, that is right and very good. We need to support them. But when somebody uses children–teenagers and children in their own interest, it deserves only to be condemned.

“Im sure that Greta is a kind and very sincere girl,” Putin added. (source)

Vladimir Putin has been quite outspoken of the “powers that be” with regards to a number of issues, claiming that they create “imaginary” and “mythical” threats in order to justify immoral actions. For example, he’s stated that the Western military alliance created and armed terrorist groups, whose cruel actions have sent millions of civilians into flight, made millions of displaced persons and immigrants, and plunged entire regions into chaos.” You can read more about that here. It’s the reason that current democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard created the Stop Arming Terrorist Act, in order to stop the US government from funding terrorist organizations.

CO2 & Big Business

Connecting CO2 with climate has been going on for a while. (source)

In 1988, NASA scientist James Hansen told the US Senate that the summer’s warmth reflected increased carbon dioxide levels. Even Science magazine reported that the climatologists were skeptical.

The reason we now take this position as dogma is due to political actors and others seeking to exploit the opportunities that abound in the multi-trillion dollar energy sector. One person who benefited from this was Maurice Strong, a global bureaucrat and wheeler-dealer (who spent his final years in China apparently trying to avoid prosecution for his role in the UN’s Oil for Food program scandals). Strong is frequently credited with initiating the global warming movement in the early 1980s, and he subsequently helped to engineer the Rio Conference that produced the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Others like Olaf Palme and his friend, Bert Bolin, who was the first chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, were also involved as early as the 1970s. – Dr. Richard Lindzen, an atmospheric physicist who has published more than 200 scientific papers and books. He was the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and he is actually the lead author of Chapter 7, “Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,” of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Third Assessment Report on climate change. (source)

The ‘Green New Deal (The Sunrise Movement) is already being adopted in the US,  104 members of Congress, and three of the four frontrunners for the Democratic nomination next year have endorsed it. The legislation promises to cut carbon emissions to zero by 2050 and gives the  government large amounts of control over healthcare, wealth redistribution, transport, food production and housing. This movement has it’s roots in the financial elite, a bunch of neoliberal think-tanks and financiers.

Formed by French President Emanuel Macron and investment corporation BlackRock capital last year, the Climate Finance Partnership sees government-funded carbon reduction as a “flagship blended capital investment vehicle.” Salivating at potential profits in the world’s “developing and emerging markets,” the partnership calls for the “unlocking” of pension funds and government money to finance green industry in the developing world. Only instead of calling our planet’s situation a “climate emergency,” they call it “the climate opportunity.”

The Blended Finance Action Taskforce – comprised of 50 financial giants including HSBC, JP Morgan Chase and Citi – is even more explicit, calling for a “layer of government and philanthropic capital,” as there are “profits to be had” in “climate-related sectors…across three regions including Latin America, Asia, and Africa.”

Put simply, financial giants want your pensions and your taxes to support their investments half a world away. Greta Thunberg and The Climate Emergency Movement are paralyzing you with fear, and knowingly or unknowingly aiding the interests of the world’s mega-rich. (source)

This isn’t about the planet, it’s about money, period. Climate change is no different than using ‘the war on terror’ to create patriotism and to drive the population into accepting measures that hurt them, not benefit them. These ‘fear’ narratives are completely fake. We saw the same thing with Al-Qaeda:

“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al-Qaeda, and any informed intelligence officer knows this. But, there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an intensified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive TV watchers to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the United States.” (source)

Using Children

Somehow, the use of children seems to make the deception even more egregious, as described by.

Children are representative of all that is pure, innocent, and truthful, and girl children add that extra element of vulnerability and need: the need for urgent rescue. Lighting a candle on the path toward mass hysteria, with the intention of stimulating a mass response, we have had young girls play in similar roles (as Greta). There have been at least nine since 1990.

(1) The notorious Nayirah al-Ṣaba who lectured at the UN about the infamous and entirely made up “incubator babies” murdered by Iraqi forces in Kuwait in 1990.

(2) Severn Cullis-Suzuki, another young girl lecturing at the UN’s Rio Summit on the Environment, in what appears to be the template that has been copied almost to the letter by Greta Thunberg.

(3) Malala Yousafzai, who became the figurehead that somehow justified US occupation in Afghanistan and intervention in Pakistan, celebrated by the US State Department;

(4) Bana Alabed, the Syrian sock puppet of Twitter fame, a darling of imperialists who served as the angel of regime change on the side of foreign terrorists—see Eva Bartlett for more analysis.

(5) Now Greta Thunberg, promoted to the world stage declaring that mass extinction is already here, a prophet of doom who will profit certain well positioned investors.

And, don’t forget a whole array of other iconic girls featured on TIME and National Geographic magazine covers, such as (6) the famous “Afghan Girl,” Sharbat Gula, whose image was used to champion US support for the Afghan anti-Soviet resistance (an investment with proven blowback value), or more recently (7) Aisha, used as a motif to support continued US occupation of Afghanistan. One girl to oppose occupation of Afghanistan, another girl to promote occupation of Afghanistan.

The Rockefeller Report

In the 1980s, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund became the sole authority of the global warming agenda. The fund boasts of being one of the first major global activists by citing its strong advocacy for both the 1988 formation of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the 1992 creation of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

“The global elite have always benefited in some way shape or form from crises, we’ve seen it over and over again with war.

What is important, however, is to acknowledge the role of the Rockefeller family –which historically was the architect of “Big Oil”– in supporting the Climate Change debate as well as the funding of scientists, environmentalists and NGOs involved in grassroots activism against “Big Oil” and the fossil fuel industry.

Debate on the world’s climate is of crucial importance. But who controls that debate?

There is an obvious contradictory relationship: Whereas “Big Oil” is the target of Global Warming activism, “Big Oil” through the Rockefeller Family and Rockefeller Brothers Trusts generously finance the Worldwide climate protest movement. Ask yourself Why?” – Michel Chossudovsky, Canadian economist and Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Ottawa (source)

You can access the full report here. It was published by the Energy & Environmental Legal Institute in 2016.

The Science

The climate is changing, and it has been changing for a very long time. In fact, the climate has always been changing, and there are a myriad of factors that influence climate change like solar activity and much more. If you’re not educated on climate science, it’s easy to adopt the “doomsday” perspective that’s often dished out by mainstream media. However, when you look at what actual climate scientists are saying, it doesn’t seem like anyone on either side agrees with the media’s “climate hysteria” narrative.

The main argument among those who ascribe to the hysteria perspective is that CO2 levels are the highest they’ve ever been since we started to record them, currently sitting at approximately 415 parts per million (ppm). It’s not like climate scientists disagree on the idea that C02 causes some warming of our atmosphere, that seems to be a fact that’s firmly established in scientific literature. But what’s never mentioned is the fact that CO2 levels have been significantly higher than what they are now; in fact, CO2 levels have been in the thousands of ppm and Earth’s temperature has been much warmer than it is now. The idea that human CO2 emissions are responsible for shifts and changes in climate is not scientifically valid, yet policy initiatives that do nothing for our environment are being produced and put forward, putting large sums of money in the pockets of some very powerful people.

“Our crop plants evolved about 400 million years ago, when CO2 in the atmosphere was about 5000 parts per million! Our evergreen trees and shrubs evolved about 360 million years ago, with CO2 levels at about 4,000 ppm. When our deciduous trees evolved about 160 million years ago, the CO2 level was about 2,200 ppm – still five times the current level.” – Dennis T. Avery, agricultural and environmental economist, senior fellow for the Center for Global Food Issues in Virginia, and formerly a senior analyst for the U.S. Department of State (source)

CO2 causing a temperature increase is the backbone of the global warming argument, but does CO2 even cause the temperature to increase, or does an increase in temperature cause a rise in C02?

“The question is how does the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) determine that an increase in atmospheric CO2 causes an increase in global temperature? The answer is they assumed it was the case and confirmed it by increasing CO2 levels in their computer climate models and the temperature went up. Science must overlook the fact that they wrote the computer code that told the computer to increase temperature with a CO2 increase. Science must ask if that sequence is confirmed by empirical evidence? Some scientists did that and found the empirical evidence showed it was not true. Why isn’t this central to all debate about anthropogenic global warming?” – Dr. Tim Ball, (source) former professor in the Department of Geography at the University of Winnipeg

William Happer, American physicist and the Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Emeritus, at Princeton University, is one of what seems to be thousands of academics to go unheard by the mainstream media who shares the same perspective:

n every careful study, the temperature first rises and then CO2 rises, and the temperature first falls and then CO2 falls, temperature is causing changes of CO2 at least for the last million years, there’s no question about that. (source)

He also pointed out the major ice ages in Earth’s past when C02 levels were also extremely high, much higher than they are now, and did so to show how the correlation between C02 and temperature is “not all that good.”

In their paper on the Vostok Ice Core, Petit et al (1999), they show how CO2 lags temperature during the onset of glaciations by several thousands of years, but offer no explanation. They also observe that CH4 and CO2 are not perfectly aligned with each other, but offer no explanation. The significance is that temperature may influence C02 amounts. At the onset of glaciations, temperature drops to glacial values before CO2 begins to fall, suggesting that CO2 has little influence on temperature modulation at these times as well.

Since 1999, this theory has been discussed in numerous scientific papers, but not one shred of evidence exists to confirm that a CO2 increase causes ‘extreme warming.’

Doubling COinvolves a 2% perturbation to this budget. So do minor changes in clouds and other features, and such changes are common. In this complex multifactor system, what is the likelihood of the climate (which, itself, consists in many variables and not just globally averaged temperature anomaly) is controlled by this 2% perturbation in a single variable? Believing this is pretty close to believing in magic. Instead, you are told that it is believing in ‘science.’ Such a claim should be a tip-off that something is amiss. After all, science is a mode of inquiry rather than a belief structure. The accumulation of false and/or misleading claims is often referred to as the ‘overwhelming evidence’ for forthcoming catastrophe. Without these claims, one might legitimately ask whether there is any evidence at all. Lindzen (source)

Another quote stressing this point:

Now here is the currently popular narrative concerning this system. The climate, a complex multifactor system, can be summarized in just one variable, the globally averaged temperature change, and is primarily controlled by the 1-2% perturbation in the energy budget due to a single variable – carbon dioxide – among many variables of comparable importance. This is an extraordinary pair of claims based on reasoning that borders on magical thinking. It is, however, the narrative that has been widely accepted, even among many sceptics. This acceptance is a strong indicator of the problem Snow identified. Many politicians and learned societies go even further: They endorse carbon dioxide as the controlling variable, and although mankind’s CO2 contributions are small compared to the much larger but uncertain natural exchanges with both the oceans and the biosphere, they are confident that they know precisely what policies to implement in order to control. Lindzen (source)

A number of times, Lindzen and many others have been quite outspoken regarding the conclusions of this document that are drawn by politicians, not scientists. There will be more on that later in the article.

According to Dr. Leslie Woodcock, emeritus professor at the University of Manchester (UK) School of Chemical Engineering and Analytical Science, is a former NASA scientist:

The term ‘climate change’ is meaningless. The Earth’s climate has been changing since time immemorial, that is since the Earth was formed 1,000 million years ago. The theory of ‘man-made climate change’ is an unsubstantiated hypothesis [about] our climate [which says it] has been adversely affected by the burning of fossil fuels in the last 100 years, causing the average temperature on the earth’s surface to increase very slightly but with disastrous environmental consequences. The theory is that the CO2 emitted by burning fossil fuel is the ‘greenhouse gas’ causing ‘global warming’ — in fact, water is a much more powerful greenhouse gas and there is 20 times more of it in our atmosphere (around one per cent of the atmosphere) whereas CO2 is only 0.04 per cent. There is no reproducible scientific evidence CO2 has significantly increased in the last 100 years. Anecdotal evidence doesn’t mean anything in science, it’s not significant…(source)

In the IPCC documents, we can see how tenuous the link between climate change and CO2 emissions are, specifically in their findings titled ‘Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis.’ Here was one of their recommendations:

Explore more fully the probabilistic character of future climate states by developing multiple ensembles of model calculations. The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future exact climate states is not possible. Rather the focus must be upon the prediction of the probability distribution of the system’s future possible states by the generation of ensembles of model solutions.

If we go back to the 1995 2nd Assessment Report of the UN IPCC, we can see how much the agenda overshadowed and muted the actual science. The scientists included these three statements in the draft:

  1. “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed (climate) changes to the specific cause of increases in greenhouse gases.”
  2. “No study to date has positively attributed all or part (of observed climate change) to anthropogenic (i.e. man-made) causes.”
  3. “Any claims of positive detection of significant climate change are likely to remain controversial until uncertainties in the natural variability of the climate system are reduced.”

The “Summary” and conclusion statement of the IPCC report was written by politicians, not scientists. The rules force the ‘scientists’ to change their reports to match the politicians’ final ‘Summary.’ Those three statements by ‘scientists’ above were replaced with this:

  1. “The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.”

Here’s another great point made by Lindzen:

How did we get to this point where the science seized to be interested in the fascinating question of accounting for the remarkable history of the Earth’s climate for an understanding of how climate actually works and instead devoted itself itself to a component of political correctness. Perhaps one should take a broader view of what’s going on. (source)

HERE are some more informative comments about the politics of climate change.

The Other Side of The Coin

A 2013 study in Environmental Research Letters claimed that 97% of climate scientists agreed with the ‘humans changing the climate’ narrative in 12,000 academic papers that contained the words “global warming” or “global climate change” from 1991 to 2011. Not long ago, that paper hit 1m downloads, making it the most accessed paper ever among the 80+ journals published by the Institute of Physics (as Lindzen mentions above, many of these papers are being published by scientists outside of climate physics), according to the authors.

A recent article that presents more scientific studies was published in the Guardian, titled ‘No Doubt Left About Scientific Consensus on Global Warming, say experts.’

But is this true? Do “97 percent of scientists” really agree as is so often promoted by the mainstream media?

“This claim is actually a come-down from the 1988 claim on the cover of Newsweek that all scientists agree. In either case, the claim is meant to satisfy the non-expert that he or she has no need to understand the science. Mere agreement with the 97% will indicate that one is a supporter of science and superior to anyone denying disaster. This actually satisfies a psychological need for many people. The claim is made by a number of individuals and there are a number of ways in which the claim is presented. A thorough debunking has been given in the Wall Street Journal by Bast and Spencer. One of the dodges is to poll scientists as to whether they agree that CO2 levels in the atmosphere have increased, that the Earth has been warming (albeit only a little) and that man has played some part. This is, indeed, something almost all of us can agree on, but which has no obvious implication of danger. Nonetheless this is portrayed as support for catastrophism. Other dodges involve looking at a large number of abstracts where only a few actually deal with danger. If among these few, 97% support catastrophism, the 97% is presented as pertaining to the much larger totality of abstracts. One of my favorites is the recent claim in the Christian Science Monitor (a once respected and influential newspaper): “For the record, of the nearly 70,000 peer-reviewed articles on global warming published in 2013 and 2014, four authors rejected the idea that humans are the main drivers of climate change.” I don’t think that it takes an expert to recognize that this claim is a bizarre fantasy for many obvious reasons.” – Richard Lindzen, from his paper “Straight Talk About Climate Change,” where he goes into greater detail.

This is a deep topic and there are many points to make. Here’s a great video by Alex Epstein, founder of the Center for Industrial Progress for Prager University, explaining the 97 percent myth and where it came from.

Obviously, there is an ongoing debate surrounding climate change, and many people still think something fishy is going on here. It’s similar to the vaccines argument, or a host of other issues that never receive any attention from the mainstream media. Instead of presenting the concerns of scientists from the other side, or the side often labelled ‘skeptics,’ these scientists are often heavily ridiculed by mainstream media.

A great example is this dialogue, which is quite old now, between Lindzen and Bill Nye. It’s not hard to see that Nye has no idea what he is talking about, and he’s simply being used because, at that time, he had a large following.

The reason why so many people are unaware of the arguments made by climate ‘skeptics’ is because their points are never presented by mainstream media in the same way the other side’s are. The media controls the minds of the masses, but thankfully this is changing.

We Are Not Denying Climate Change/The Takeaway

We are not denying climate change, we are simply presenting the evidence showing that climate change has been happening for a long time, and that human CO2 output doesn’t seem to play a significant role at all, and that this is simply being used for profit, control, and to take more ‘power’ away from the people and put it into the hands of politicians and the global financial elite.

This is not about the planet.

We here at CE care deeply about our planet and creating harmony on it. Since we were founded in 2009, we’ve been creating massive amounts of awareness regarding clean energy technologies and the harmful industries polluting and destroying our planet. The issue is not with finding solutions, we already have those for the most part, the issue is with the systems we have that prevent these solutions from ever seeing the light of day. In fact, we have been heavily involved with multiple clean energy projects and assisting them in coming into fruition.

Opposing the ‘doom and gloom’ global warming narrative does not mean we do not care for our environment; in fact, it’s quite the opposite. We feel that politicians meeting every single year for the past few decades have done absolutely nothing to clean up our planet, and instead have been coming up with ways to simply make money off of green technology that cuts CO2 emissions.

If the people in power, with all of their resources, really wanted to change the planet, it would have happened by now.

While our focus is on CO2, not nearly enough attention and resources are going into re-planting our planet, cleaning up our fresh water lakes and oceans, and changing our manufacturing habits to cause less waste and less pollution. If anything, this should be our main focus, especially when it’s not really clear that C02 is an issue.

Environmental and species protection should be our first priority, but it’s not. I believe this green revolution is a distraction and, in many ways, further harms our environment by taking our focus off of what’s really important and putting it on something that is not impacting our planet in a negative way.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

F18 Navy Pilot Uses His iPhone To Take A Picture of UFOs: Pentagon Confirms

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 9 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Last year, many media outlets reported on supposed leaked UFO photographs captured by the rear-seat weapons system officer of an F/A-18 fighter jet. The Pentagon has recently confirmed that the pictures are indeed authentic.

  • Reflect On:

    Can we rely on governments and mainstream media to properly disclose what they know about the subject? Will there be an attempt to manipulate our perception of the phenomenon? Should this be something citizens look into for themselves?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

There are so many leaks coming out regarding UFOs right now that it’s difficult to cover and keep up with. Many of these leaks are hitting mainstream media, but not all of them, and it seems over the past five years or so, there is a story put out by mainstream media that has been attracting the attention of the masses. That story centered on the New York Times publishing a piece about three videos released by the Pentagon of US Navy UFO encounters, where objects performed maneuvers no known man-made piece of machinery are capable of, defying our understanding of physics and aerodynamics.

In one of these encounters, the object descended from 60,000 feet in the air to near ocean level, and began hovering – all in a span of milliseconds. That same object could also appear in other locations in what seemed to be instantaneous transport, all  while apparently being able to predict the future location of the Navy pilot.

Not long ago the New York Times also broke a story of retrievals involving “off world vehicles.” When I came across this it reminded me of former Apollo 14 mission astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell’s statement, “yes there have been crashed craft, and bodies recovered.”

Keep in mind, there are thousands of these encounters that have been released via de-classified documentation over the past few decades, it’s only this instance from the Navy that got any real mainstream media coverage.

Another common theme within this phenomenon seems to be the loss of critical electrical instrumentation of military jets, like the inability to fire their weapon, or the air radar going haywire, for example. Here’s a case from Iran you can read about that provides a good example of that.

What Happened: For the past couple of years, the U.S. Department of Defense’s “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force” (or UAPTF) has been busy briefing lawmakers, Intelligence Community stakeholders, and the highest levels of the U.S. military on encounters with what they say are mysterious airborne objects that defy conventional explanations.

A supposed leak was brought to my attention when it was tweeted by Christopher Mellon, Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. It came in the form of multiple videos and pictures taken by Navy personnel. You can access the video in this article if you’d like to see the video footage. Below are some pictures an F18 pilot snapped with his iPHONE.

According to a recent article by The Debrief,

“The Pentagon has confirmed that U.S. Navy personnel captured several leaked images and a video depicting unidentified aerial phenomena, or UAP, involving incidents being investigated currently by the Department of Defense’s Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force (UAPTF). Pentagon Spokesperson Susan Gough told the The Debrief in an email.”

John Greenwald, who runs the popular government document archive The Black Vault, also confirmed the videos were authentic via a statement from Susan Gough. He also conducted an interesting interview with Ex CIA Director James Woolsey.

Here are a couple of the pictures, captured by the rear-seat weapons system officer of an F/A-18 fighter jet.

The object in the first photo, now referred to as the “Acorn,” and two other newly leaked images depicting unusual aerial objects, were published by KLAS Las Vegas investigative journalist George Knapp on April 6, 2021. The other two images, described by Knapp as “the metallic blimp” and “sphere,” were all reportedly captured within a period of 30 minutes on the same day. The other object in the second photo looks like a translucent sphere.  

You can refer to the cover photo (above) for a close up of that specific object you see there in the first photo.

Below is a picture taken by two Royal Canadian Air Force pilots on August 27th, 1956, above Fort MacLeod, Alberta, Canada. (“Physical Evidence Related To UFO Reports” – The Sturrock Panel Report – Electromagnetic Effects) (source) (source)

The pilots were flying in a formation of four F86 Sabre jet aircraft. One of the pilots described the phenomenon as a “bright light which was sharply defined as disk-shaped,” that looked like “a shiny silver dollar sitting horizontal.” Another pilot managed to photograph the object, as you can see below.

Then there are pictures that can expand the mind a little more, also still open to interpretation. The picture below comes from Norman Bergrun, a scientist and engineer who was part of NASA’s voyager program. He worked at NASA for decades at the Ames Research Centre. He also worked at Lockheed Martin where he managed the Polaris missile tests. The picture comes from the Voyager mission in 1980. That mission was tasked with photographing Saturn, its rings and its moons.

What is the picture of? It’s a “luminous source,” that comes from Bergrun’s Book, “The Ringmakers of Saturn.” According to Bergrun, there are several large craft “proliferating” out around Saturn and its moons. His book goes into much greater detail. According to him, extraterrestrial craft, even craft of this magnitude, are a certainty.

Why It’s Important: Again, videos and pictures locked up within the black budget world seem to be a reality, and it makes one wonder what type of video footage and photographs are being concealed from the public. For example, a document obtained via the CIA’s electronic reading room outlines an examination of the UFO phenomenon that took place more than a decade ago between Chinese & Russian researchers. It states,

Scientists of the PRC and the Soviet Far East have begun a joint study of UFO’s. The first meeting of ufologists of the two countries has ended in the small maritime townlet of Dalnegorsk. The Soviet and Chinese specialists on anomalous phenomena have mapped out a program for investigating incidents that are already known and have also arranged to directly exchange video and photographic materials on new similar phenomena.

I do not believe that the masses will ever be told what exactly has been discovered about these objects from government sources, and we will simply receive a “sanitized” version of “disclosure”, one that perhaps does not represent the phenomenon well. The sources of government and mainstream media have always attempted to manipulate our perception of major topics and events.

The idea of a “threat” has been a common theme in mainstream UFO disclosure discussions, this is quite concerning to many researchers in the field given the fact that the behaviour of these objects are not indicative of any type of threat. They’ve always performed evasive maneuvers to avoid our own aircraft. This has been emphasized by many, like Canadian Defense Minister Paul Hellyer in 2008, General Nathan Twining in the 1940’s, and more recently Richard F. Haines, a senior NASA research scientist for more than two decades now.

The Department of Defense established the UAPTF to improve its understanding of, and gain insight into, the nature and origins of UAPs (Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon). The mission of the task force is to detect, analyze and catalog UAPs that could potentially pose a threat to U.S. national security.

Another recent quote is from Renowned UFO researcher, scientist, mathematician, and astrophysicist Dr. Jacques Vallée touches upon this concern.

We have to stop reacting to intrusions by UFOs as a threat, I mean that’s the whole thing behind this new task force, as much as I respect, you know, the task force, my colleagues and I want to cooperate with them to the extent that we can bring information or resources to what they do. But there is more, this is not, should not be looked at specifically as a threat…With the phenomenon that we observe if they wanted to blow up those F18s they would do it. Obviously that’s not what it’s all about, and this idea of just labelling it all as a threat because it’s unknown, that’s the wrong idea. (source)

The mainstream media and government are quickly gaining a reputation for manipulating the consciousness of the masses with regards to a number of topics, why would UFOs be any different? You can read more about that discussion here and here.

The Takeaway: The main takeaway from this article can be that we may not want to rely solely on governments, mainstream media and intelligence agencies to provide us with information about the UFO phenomenon. This goes with all things. Mainstream media has long been able to “control” the perception of the masses, effectively telling us when we’re allowed to explore certain topics culturally, and when we’re not. Just look at the UFO subject, 6 years ago it was ridiculed, once mainstream culture spoke of it, it was all of a sudden acceptable. Why?

Most of us now simply rely on our T.V. for information without doing our own research, and this leaves us open to large amounts of perception manipulation on a topic.

Having researched this topic for more than 15 years, I can tell you that the phenomenon is vast and, as I say in virtually all my articles on the subject, it has huge implications and leaves no aspect of humanity untouched. These sightings have been documented for thousands of years in many different forms, and just as there was evidence for the existence of UFOs when they were considered a “conspiracy theory,” now, I can tell you there is very strong evidence, based on my research, that these objects do not originate from any human being on planet Earth.

This is a major paradigm shifting topic that can help expand human consciousness and change the way we look at ourselves, the cosmos, and the nature of reality. Ultimately, in some unexplainable way I believe the phenomenon can be a great catalyst to help us look within, observe ourselves, and ask ourselves why we live the way we do and do the things we do when we have the potential to do so much better and create a human experience where everybody can thrive.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Another EX-CIA Director Comments on UFOs & Shares A “Paranormal” Story

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 7 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Ex CIA Director James Woolsey comments on the reality of the UFO phenomenon and shares a story about an aircraft being stopped in mid-air at 40,000 feet.

  • Reflect On:

    What are the implications of the masses becoming aware of such phenomena?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

For anybody who has heavily researched the evidence behind “paranormal phenomenon”, it’s common that hearing about other paranormal phenomenon is simply “normal.” After all, the evidence does suggest paranormal events happen all the time, culture simply hasn’t caught up to realizing how normal these events are. Those who recognize how normal these events are include scientifically minded people, like Dr. Jessica Utts, former Chair of the Department of Statistics and professor at the University of California, Irvine.

“What convinced me was just the evidence, the accumulating evidence as I worked in this field and I got to see more and more of the evidence. I visited the laboratories, even beyond where I was working to see what they were doing and I could see that they had really tight controls…And so I got convinced by the good science that I saw being done. And in fact I will say as a statistician I’ve consulted in a lot of different areas of science; the methodology and the controls on these experiments are tighter than any other area of science where I’ve worked.”  (source)

That was her take on remote viewing, a phenomenon where people are trained to view details about places and objects from a position very far away. This illustrates the non local nature of our consciousness. The remote viewing studies Utts is talking about are incredibly rigorous and yielded repeatable results time and time again.

When it comes to numerous experiments at the quantum level, consciousness has been shown to have some sort effect on physical/material reality as well. There are also topics such as precognition, telepathy and more examples of mind/matter interaction, like “distant healing” which are quite intriguing.

What I find the most intriguing are the examples of people with “special” abilities. I came across much of this documentation via the CIA’s electronic reading room. Examples of children and people with psychokentic ability, able to “break through spatial barriers” by teleporting small objects in small containers from one location to another, perform “paranormal writing” and more, all done under controlled double blind conditions.

When it comes to the topic of UFOs, they’re going mainstream with extreme legitimacy as well. This has many people concerned that mainstream media and government disclosure will result in perception manipulation regarding the phenomenon. Many long time researchers feel we will get a sanitized version of disclosure. That is to say, many key details will be left out purposefully, yet the government will claim all has been told.

Having studied the subject for approximately 15 years now, I can tell you that the phenomenon is quite vast and touches upon all aspects of humanity. There is a lot to the UFO story that I don’t think people will ever hear about from governments and intelligence agencies. If you want to go through our article archive on the subject, you can do so here

The former Director of the CIA, John Brennan (2013-2017) was recently asked about the UFO phenomenon and expressed his belief that we may be dealing with some other form of life.

He stated the following:

I think some of the phenomenon we may be seeing continues to be, um, unexplained, and um, might in fact be some type of phenomenon that is the result of something that, um, we don’t yet understand, and that could involve some type of activity that some might say, um, constitutes a different from of life.  (source)

James Woolsey, another retired CIA director 1993-1995 also spoke up on the subject an interview with John Greenwald, founder of The Black Vault, a resource for declassified documents pertaining to UFO related phenomenon.

In the interview he describes an interesting paranormal event that happened to a plane that was “frozen” and stopped in the air at 40,000 feet. He also makes a number of comments about the UFO phenomenon.

“…A friend of mine was able to have his aircraft stop at 40,000 feet or so and not continue operating as a normal aircraft. What was going on? I don’t know, does anybody know? We’ll have to look into it. There have just been enough things like that that have occurred…”

Why This Is Important: Paranormal phenomenon and the study of parapsychology has the potential to create a major paradigm change for humanity. In fact, it’s happening right now, we’re living in it and part of this phenomenon involves non material science. I believe this field represents the next scientific revolution and will push humanity to open up to a broader view regarding the nature of reality, who we are and how we relate to our universe. There is still so much we have to discover.

The UFO/extraterrestrial phenomenon is not even the tip of the iceberg. There is so much more to learn, and it is my hope that the phenomenon itself somehow sparks humanity to ask itself deeper questions about the human experience and why we live the way we do, when we have the potential to do so much better and create a planet where all life can truly thrive.

Again, it is also my belief that mainstream media and government may try and shape the perception of the masses when it comes to this phenomenon, as they do with so many other topics.

Many decades ago, the mentor of Wernher Von Braun, Hermann Oberth (both seen in the picture above), the founding father of rocketry and astronautics, also known as the ‘father of Spaceflight’ stated his belief that “flying saucers are real” and that “they are space ships from another solar system.” He went on to say that “I think that they possibly are manned by intelligent observers who are members of a race that may have been investigating our Earth for centuries.” He wrote these words in “Flying Saucers Come From A Distant World”, The American  Weekly, Oct 24, 1954

According to a paper published in the Journal History and Technology titled Extraterrestrial encounters: UFOs, science and the quest for transcendence, 1947–1972,

At the Internationaler UFO/IFO-Kongress, hosted in Wiesbaden and organized by Karl Keit (1907-2001), credulous UFO-impresario and president of the Deutsche UFO/IFO-Studiengemeinschaft (DUIST), Oberth repeated claims first made in 1954 that he was no longer willing to exclude the possibility that UFOs could indeed be of extraterrestrial origin. Having examined all existing arguments, Oberth proclaimed in front of ‘many hundreds of people who apparently believe that the Earth has been visited by emissaries from outer space,’ as The Times wrote, that he was now convinced that flying saucers were ‘very real,’ and carrying visitors from outer space.

Oberth later repeated that ‘the UFOs are a kind of sentinel, here simply to observe and report; because a humankind which is as gifted as inventors and researchers as we are, yet has remained politically and morally on our stage of development, constitutes a threat to the entire cosmos.’

Perhaps he’s right? Perhaps there are multiple groups observing? Perhaps some are concerned for multiple reasons? The UFO/extraterrestrial topic is a deep one, and endless discussions and questions can emerge from it, especially when discussing the benevolent/malevolent narratives.

If you’d like to go deeper and comb through our article archive on the subject, you can do so here.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Chris Sky Enters Big Chain Stores Without Mask & Films It: His Version Of Non-Compliance

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 7 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Chris Sky, a social media 'influencer' has gained a lot of attention lately due to the fact that he is demonstrating non-compliance when it comes to the various covid measures that are being put in place.

  • Reflect On:

    Why is there such a large group of people, who see issue with governmental measures, taking action to stop them? Does it show we don't agree on our collective approach? Does it show we don't agree on the threat level of COVID-19?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

Is non-compliance a solution? Of course it is, what other way can a citizenry function against what are perceived to be tyrannical authoritarian measures that are imposed on them? What’s so difficult about non compliance today when it comes to COVID-19 is that we have a population that’s completely separated on what’s happening.

On one hand, you have a large group of people who believe that COVID is extremely dangerous, this includes a number of people, doctors scientists and journalists. On the other hand you also have a large group of people, doctors, scientists who believe that the measures being used to combat COVID are not warranted given the fact that it has a 99.95 percent recovery rate, and strong protection from antibodies.

Of course, death is not always the key concern, overloading hospitals and ICUs is a key detail, however, places who have not introduced lockdowns don’t seem to be having a problem with overloaded hospitals, why? Perhaps we don’t know the answer, but it’s something to consider. After all, we are repeating waves of lockdowns over and over and yet the ‘problem’ is not going away, why?

Part of what separates the two camps seems to be the amount of censorship that journalists, doctors and scientists are receiving for presenting peer-reviewed science, information, data and opinions that, in many ways, completely contradicts what we are being told by our governments and mainstream media.

There are countless examples of censorship. For example, A letter to the editor published in the New England Journal of Medicine titled “Open Schools, Covid-19, and Child and Teacher Morbidity in Sweden” has found that:

“Despite Sweden’s having kept schools and preschools open, we found a low incidence of severe Covid-19 among schoolchildren and children of preschool age during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic…No child with Covid-19 died…Among the 1,951,905 children who were 1 to 16 years of age, 15 children had Covid-19, MIS-C, or both conditions and were admitted to an ICU, which is equal to 1 child in 130,000.”

It was published by Jonas F Ludvigsson, a paediatrician at Örebro University Hospital and professor of clinical epidemiology at the Karolinska Institute. He received so much backlash and hatred for his discovery that he has now quit his work on COVID.

Even the (at the time) executive editor of the British Medical Journal published a piece explaining how:

“science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. There are many examples, especially when it comes to “alternative treatments.”

Why is it that a government scientist, or a scientist who ‘agrees with the narrative’ gets all of the attention and virality they want, but when some of the world’s leading experts in the field share data and science contradicting this information they are censored? Mainstream media is a major source of information for people. It’s one reason why so many people, including healthcare professionals, are completely unaware of important information pertaining to the pandemic when it comes to al’ things covid such as  the vaccine, as well as the effectiveness of masks and more.

Lockdowns are another great example, despite a wealth of science and data showing that lockdowns do nothing to stop the spread of covid and may actually kill more people than covid, not many people are aware of this perspective. When the mainstream does address, it, they simply label it as a “conspiracy” and as a result, mainstream media watchers repeat this rhetoric, especially when you try and have a conversation with them. At the end of the day things aren’t as black and white as they’re being made out to be, which strongly suggests, in my opinion, that people should be able to free to choose what they would like to do and that governments should be making recommendations, not mandates.

What Happened: Below is a video of Chris Sky, in conjunction with BlockTalkTO, entering into various stores showing how he chooses non compliance when it comes to mask wearing. To be clear, Chris Sky is demonstrating an example of how some might choose to not comply with these COVID measures, we say this because many have criticized him for his approach and tone with store workers. That said, it would certainly be difficult to remain calm and cool in tense situations like this.

Chris makes it quite clear to workers that he is not breaking any laws and is choosing to push back against the loss of his rights. As you will see below, not everyone in the store will agree with his approach and the nature by which he handles his encounters. Which brings up the question, how else could this situation be approached? Can it even be approached without tensions running high?

You can check out his Instagram account to see his multiple encounters at the Toronto airport showing and explaining that one doesn’t have to comply and that one supposedly can’t get in trouble for not complying.

Why This Is Important: As tensions rise due to such a deep level of division and confusion, many notice the mental health effects of this reality. Since it’s not customary in our mainstream culture to have tools of physiological regulation, we tend to lack the capacity to do much more than simply survive day to day. We might avoid looking at information that might challenge narratives that are effortless to receive –  like that of mainstream media.

As a society, we are failing to have appropriate conversations about ‘controversial’ topics. Even information that is backed by a tremendous amount of evidence, if it conflicts with what one believes, it doesn’t really register. This happens to all of us on both “sides.”

For example, The COVID pandemic is bringing a stark reality into question that suggests governments may be withholding clinically proven effective treatments for COVID, contributing to the needless deaths, all while favoring the rollout of a highly profitable vaccine. Many people can see this and begin asking questions about intentions of leaders. While at the same time, many could not fathom the possibility that governments would do such a thing, and so it’s labelled a conspiracy and the topic is avoided entirely – regardless of looking at the evidence. Can you see the division this could create?

The Takeaway: So, what are we to do when we are forced into measures that may not be in our best interests? In my opinion, given the fact that so many agree with them, and so many don’t, it seems freedom of choice is the best answer. The challenge is, when governments claim that the solutions require very large numbers of the population to be involved for them to work, say 80% – 100%, do we really have a choice? Is it our duty to comply for the safety of all? Perhaps in a highly dangerous situation, but the point being made by many professionals is that COVID is not that dangerous situation, and most don’t recognize this possibility due to unfair coverage by mass media.

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. (Propaganda)

This is why non compliance, in a peaceful manner, is such a revolutionary act and always will be. Which is why we must couple non compliance with sound reasoning. To this point, it’s hard to say that COVID is as dangerous as it’s being made out to be, and many places around the world have no locked down and their hospitals are fine. Why is this the case?

Society must have controversial conversations in a meaningful way. Chris Sky is inviting us to have controversial conversations in his own way. We are not getting anywhere by taking authoritarian actions that harm the well being of general society and our ability to stay connected as communities. Mainstream culture is expecting everyone to side with the idea that fringe ‘conspiracy theories’ are undermining truth in society, yet mainstream culture does not want to take responsibility for its role in this phenomenon via censorship and corporate favoritism.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!