Information is like water. You can divert it, freeze it, boil it away or dam it up but it is still there. The river returns to its natural course, the spring thaw comes, the rain falls and the dam breaks. And when it returns, as gentle rain or as the torrent, there can be no shelter. The alethotropic mind that is the gift of God to every human being awakens and recognises the truth, however long it’s been hidden away. The flood is upon us now. The truth has become so obvious that the servants of the Liar and the Father of Lies have had every excuse stripped from their bones. Climate change, the panademic madness, gender ideology, race ideology, globalism…all of these stand exposed as lies from the mouth of Satan.
On the pandemic, study after study has emerged from sources regarded by the governing classes as unimpeachable showing without doubt that the vaccines did are continuing to do significant damage to the health of many who took them. From the pen of Anthony Fauci himself comes this article in Cell stating unequivocally that the COVID vaccine did not and could not have worked either to prevent infection, prevent the spread or reduce the severity of the illness. He knew this three years ago.
“Because the pulmonary immune system is semi-autonomous, it may be difficult for either systemically administered or upper respiratory-administered vaccines designed to prevent infection to additionally prevent pulmonary infection if upper respiratory infection spreads to the lungs.” and even more shocking,
“Taking all of these factors into account, it is not surprising that none of the predominantly mucosal respiratory viruses have ever been effectively controlled by vaccines. This observation raises a question of fundamental importance: if natural mucosal respiratory virus infections do not elicit complete and long-term protective immunity against reinfection, how can we expect vaccines, especially systemically administered non-replicating vaccines, to do so?”
The rains now pounding New Zealand present a teachable moment. Everytime some climate cultist starts bleating about the storms, just ask them to explain the direct link between atmospheric CO2 and this particular series of storms. They won’t be able to do it. You can then ask them to do the same for any discreet weather phenomenon. They won’t be able to do that either. Then ask what is the ideal global temperature. Then ask why a certain starting date was picked as a benchmark and not another date. You get the idea. Under specific questioning, the dialectic destroys the entire fabric of the lie.
Another general dialectic exchange goes like this:
Climate cultist : “You don’t believe in climate change?” (Note how this is presented as a quasi-religious question rather than a scientific one)
You: “I believe that the climate changes, the climate is a dynamic system and has been changing since there has been an atmosphere and an ocean.” (You’ve now reframed the question as an actual scientific one..is there change in a dynamic system?)
CC: “But you don’t believe that human activity causes climate change?” (He’s setting up the begged question now.)
Y: “I believe in the scientific method and no hard evidence has been produced of a direct link between human activity and climate change.”
CC: “What about all that global warming since the industrial revolution began?” (This is the begged question…it’s not at all evident that the planet as a whole is has grown warmer since 1750…and the correlation fallacy…even if the premise is true, no causal link has been proved… all in one)
Y: Even if I assume the truth of your premise, why do you start measuring there? Why not start during the Medieval Warm Period (c. AD 940-1340) when it was 1.5 dgrees warmer than it is now or the Little Ice Age (c. 1300-1850) when it was 2 degrees cooler than it is now? For that matter, why not start with the last real Ice Age 12,000 years ago when it was 21 degress cooler and mankind nearly went extinct? What’s special about 1750?
CC: Thats when humans started producing carbon dioxide from fossil fuels. (Note the circular argument AND the begged question: any warming since 1750 must be the result of human activity because thats when human industrial activity began)
Y: That’s a circular argument. What about climatic change BEFORE the Industrial Revolution?
CC: Those are anomalies. (If the cultist is singing from the Book of Common Climate, they’ll say this)
Y: Is it scientific to dismiss all countervailing examples as “anomalies” if they do not fit your theory?
You get the idea and you may even be able to force upon the cultist a degree of cognitive dissonance that will shock him into normality.
The flood is here and the governing class and its catamites and parasites, its pharisees and janissaries will not be able to claim they were misled or that they were ignorant of the truth. However dull, witless or careless they may be, the glaring reality now visible to all has taken away ignorance, stupidity and incompetence as excuses. Those who would control us stand exposed clothed in the last remaining explanation for their actions: they are evil.
Cold Mountain Review 