TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @PaulMitchell_AB

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - January 25, 2025 at 6:22 AM
Saved - January 25, 2025 at 6:46 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Years after I and others urged the Alberta government to halt Covid injections, the task force has confirmed our concerns. For the health of Albertans, I call on @ABDanielleSmith to ban all mRNA injections immediately. The report is available for review.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Years after myself and many others told the Alberta government to stop the Covid injections, the Alberta task force finally confirms we were right. For the health of Albertans, ban all mRNA injections @ABDanielleSmith. They are harmful. Do it now.

@globeandmail - The Globe and Mail

Alberta task force recommends halt of COVID-19 vaccines in new report https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-alberta-releases-secret-report-into-the-provinces-covid-response/

Alberta task force recommends halt of COVID-19 vaccines in new report The task force’s final report into pandemic response touched on several points common with disinformation campaigns such as the effectiveness of public health restrictions and masking theglobeandmail.com
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - December 2, 2024 at 6:03 PM
Saved - December 2, 2024 at 8:31 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

How many "doctors" got rich injecting harmful jabs into the arms of Canadians? Does anyone still trust these "doctors"? Just asking. https://t.co/qSkw8nl3V3

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 17, 2024 at 9:44 PM
Saved - November 18, 2024 at 7:37 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Every foreign student in Canada who files an asylum claim should be immediately arrested, taken to the nearest airport, deported and banned from Canada for life. The "asylum seeker" scam by international students would stop immediately if this was done. https://tnc.news/2024/11/17/asylum-claims-international-students-skyrocket/

Asylum claims among international students skyrocket as Canada tightens immigration rules  While the Trudeau government begins to curb the number of study permits it issues, the number of international students filing asylum claims is skyrocketing, many of which are suspected to have been filed on fraudulent grounds.  tnc.news
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - October 31, 2024 at 9:33 PM
Saved - November 1, 2024 at 2:00 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

The push for digital ID by authoritarian governments is happening in most Western countries. ❌ Digital ID is NOT to allow citizens access to services. ✅ Digital ID is designed to DENY services to those who don't obey the government. Digital ID must be stopped. Do not comply. https://t.co/N5tbrymQfa

@Artemisfornow - Bernie

DIGITAL ID - Whilst you’re all distracted with the budget, the government has quietly launched a new department. ‘Office for Digital Identities and Attributes’ which will oversee the UK’s digital ID market and roll out. They kept that quiet didn’t they? https://t.co/TI2qehHNnt

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - October 23, 2024 at 7:03 PM
Saved - October 24, 2024 at 1:36 AM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking… Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announces new free speech legislation to ensure that professional regulatory bodies can no longer limit the speech of professionals or “compel Albertans to some official version of truth.” Very good. 👍 https://t.co/FrCPmBHV8I

Video Transcript AI Summary
The UCP government believes it's inappropriate to compel Albertans to an official version of truth, stating that "George Orwell's fictional 1984 should remain fiction." Amendments to the Alberta Bill of Rights will be introduced in the fall. The government is launching a review of Alberta's regulated professions to ensure the freedom of speech, expression, and belief of their members is protected. Legislative changes will be brought next year to limit professional regulatory bodies to regulating members' professional competence and conduct, not their speech.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In our UCP government's view, it is not appropriate for this government or any professional regulatory body to compel Albertans to some official version of truth. George Orwell's fictional 1984 should remain fiction. To ensure the government of Alberta better respects the rights of Albertans, we will introduce amendments to the Alberta Bill of Rights this fall as previously announced. And to ensure our professional regulators stay within their mandates, our government is launching a review of Alberta's regulated professions to ensure the freedom of speech, expression, and belief of their members is adequately protected. And we will bring legislative changes next year to ensure that professional regulatory bodies are limited to regulating their members' professional competence and conduct and not their speech.
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - October 15, 2024 at 8:50 PM
Saved - October 16, 2024 at 3:06 AM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking… Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says the last few months of the dying Liberal government “are when they’re the most dangerous. This is when I would anticipate that if they don’t see a pathway to reelection” the Libs are going to pass all kinds of “ridiculous policies.” https://t.co/djATNMPOXC

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker believes a dying government is most dangerous in its final months, anticipating unreasonable policies if reelection seems unlikely. These policies would be difficult to undo and could negatively impact the investment community. The speaker is particularly concerned about COP 2029 in Baku, fearing the federal government will grandstand internationally to gain favor with environmental groups, boasting about their actions in Canada. The speaker asserts the federal government lacks constitutional authority over resource management and production pace, which are provincial responsibilities. The speaker suggests taking action now to counter potentially "ridiculous policies" expected to be announced in Baku.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: These last few months of a dying government are when they're the most dangerous. This is when I would anticipate that if they don't see a pathway to reelection by being reasonable and working collaboratively, that they're going to pass all kinds of policy knowing that it would be complicated, and take some time to undo it and send a chill in the investment community. The, the, COP 2029 in Baku is taking place within the next month, and that's when we have to be the most worried that the federal government is going to be preening on the international stage and trying to win favor with a certain, environmental set, and that they're going to to try to brag about what they can do back in Canada. And the fact of the matter is they don't have the ability to determine how we manage our resources. It is under the constitution. It is our responsibility to determine the the pace of our production. So that's the reason why we would do it now is I I think that there's a a real danger that they that we're going to see some ridiculous policies announced in Baku in the coming weeks.
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - September 28, 2024 at 2:08 PM
Saved - September 30, 2024 at 12:03 AM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Canada was broken on purpose. Mass immigration was the tool used to break our country. Politicians who support mass immigration must all be fired. https://t.co/yt6q635vPe

@SteveWps - Steve Bromann

My daughter is 17 years old, -She is a straight A student -She volunteers and umpires for softball, -She plays softball at the highest level and has won the Canadian national championships twice -In grade 11 she was accepted into UBC on an athletic scholarship She has applied for minimum wage jobs for months and cannot even get an interview. Canada is broken.

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - August 26, 2024 at 4:48 PM
Saved - August 27, 2024 at 2:32 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Hey Alberta, Did you know the United Nations and its leader are actively brainwashing kids all over the world to "demand" a "just transition and the phase out of fossil fuels"? Why is Canada supporting an organization that is actively fighting against us? @ABDanielleSmith https://t.co/3VlDrgtvMy

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - August 18, 2024 at 1:04 PM
Saved - August 19, 2024 at 6:08 AM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Remember when Justin Trudeau said that Canadians who were opposed to the unconstitutional "vaccine" mandates were misogynistic? Well, the Orwellian UK is now classifying something called "extreme misogyny" as literal "terrorism". You can't make this stuff up. https://t.co/eUekNQMl0y

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - August 3, 2024 at 4:22 AM
Saved - August 3, 2024 at 5:47 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
None of the accused at Coutts were guilty of "Conspiracy to Commit Murder of a Police Officer," and I believe the RCMP was aware of this from the start. This has been a 900-day political imprisonment and show trial to satisfy politicians in Ottawa. With today's other "guilty" verdicts, it seems Ottawa will be pleased. I question whether the accused ever had a real chance of being acquitted. After years in captivity, I'm left wondering what will happen at the sentencing.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking... None of the accused at Coutts were guilty of "Conspiracy to Commit Murder of a Police Officer" and I believe the RCMP knew this from the beginning. This was a 900 day political imprisonment and show trial to please politicians in Ottawa. With today's other "guilty" verdicts, no doubt Ottawa will be happy. I wonder if the accused ever really had any chance of being acquitted across the board. I personally don't think so. After years in captivity, what will happen at the sentencing?

@JasonLavigneMP - Jason Lavigne

COUTTS VERDICT Anthony Olienick Not Guilty - Conspiracy to Commit Murder of Police Officer Guilty - Possession of Weapons for Dangerous Purposes Guilty - Mischief over $5000 Guilty - Possession of Explosives for a Dangerous Purposes Christopher Carbert Not Guilty - Conspiracy to Commit Murder of Police Officer Guilty - Possession of Weapons for Dangerous Purposes Guilty - Mischief over $5000 Sentencing/Bail Hearing August 12th, 2024

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - July 31, 2024 at 1:48 AM
Saved - July 31, 2024 at 7:48 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m alarmed by the Century Initiative's plan to increase Canada's population to 100 million by the end of the century, which could lead to significant changes in our society. The influx of migrants, many lacking shared language and values, raises concerns about housing, healthcare, and education shortages. I worry that our neighborhoods are becoming overwhelmingly foreign and that rising crime and societal disintegration are being ignored. Those advocating for the preservation of our culture are often labeled as bigots. What will Canada look like if this plan continues?

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Ignore this post at your peril: the insane plan to create an unrecognizable Canada... Millions of migrants, many of whom don't share our language, culture, history or values, are coming to Canada. It’s an endless flow. A group called the Century Initiative wants 100 million people in Canada by the end of this century, and these people will be jammed into mega-cities where migrants and will be the large, overwhelming majority. What could possibly go wrong? This bizarre social experiment is virtually guaranteed to lead to an epic disaster, but Ottawa forges full steam ahead. Not enough housing: so what? Not enough hospitals: so what? Not enough schools: so what? "diversity" neighbourhoods are becoming nearly 100% foreign: so what? Crime is rising: so what? Society is disintegrating: so what? "Diversity is our strength" so having an ever-increasing number of people who want to turn what used to be known as Canada into something completely different is just awesome! More "diversity" is always better! Just ask Ottawa and they'll tell you. Anyone who wants to preserve the Canada that used to exist will be shouted down as a hateful bigot. Preserving our culture, history or society is racist! Just ask Justin Trudeau, and he'll tell you. If you think the recent stories about a few migrants pooping in public are bad, just wait until another 60 million come to Canada. Don’t believe this could be happening? Here’s a snippet of a video where the Century Initiative speaks about their plan to boost Canada’s population. 👇 A link to the full video is in the next post below. So, what shall we do? Do you want to live in a remade Canada of mega-cities filled with migrants? 🤔

Video Transcript AI Summary
To put Canada on the right path, we can increase immigration. With a population of 100,000,000, urban centers like Toronto, GTA, Montreal, and Vancouver would see significant growth. Toronto would have 17,000,000 people, GTA 34,000,000, Montreal 11,400,000, Vancouver 7,000,000, and Greater Vancouver 12,000,000. Canada would become a nation of mega regions. Translation: To put Canada on the right path, we can increase immigration. With a population of 100,000,000, urban centers like Toronto, GTA, Montreal, and Vancouver would see significant growth. Toronto would have 17,000,000 people, GTA 34,000,000, Montreal 11,400,000, Vancouver 7,000,000, and Greater Vancouver 12,000,000. Canada would become a nation of mega regions.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: By taking reasonable steps today, such as allowing increased immigration, we can put Canada back on the right path. Now, of course, an additional 60,000,000 people will need places to live, work, and study as well as transportation links between them. And that is the opportunity I wanna talk to you about today. I suspect that the first question many of you when you heard a 100,000,000 people was, where will they all go? Now based on our projections and the trends towards urbanization, the answer is that many of them will in fact be drawn to our urban centers. If Canada had a population of a 100,000,000, the century initiative projects projects that Toronto would be home to 17,000,000 people. The GTA somebody just choked on their dinner. The GTA would grow to 34,000,000 people. Montreal would increase to about 11,400,000. The city of Vancouver itself would rise to 7,000,000 and a part of a greater Vancouver area of closer to 12,000,000. Canada would in fact become a nation of mega regions.
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - July 8, 2024 at 3:46 PM
Saved - July 8, 2024 at 8:15 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

"Foreigners interested in becoming police officers will soon be able to immigrate to Alberta and become permanent residents." This program is absurd and wrong. Albertans don't need foreigners to police us. https://tnc.news/2024/07/08/alberta-permanent-residency-path-police-officers/

Alberta introduces permanent residency path for police officers Foreigners interested in becoming police officers will soon be able to immigrate to Alberta and become permanent residents. tnc.news
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - April 24, 2024 at 8:47 PM
Saved - April 24, 2024 at 11:26 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

There have been 172 "wildfires" in Alberta in 2024. For those keeping score... 172 of the "wildfires" were caused by humans. 0 "wildfires" were caused by "climate change" or CO2. Enjoy paying your higher Carbon Tax everyone! 🤦‍♂️ https://t.co/74MgtoMxYG

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - March 26, 2024 at 10:12 PM
Saved - March 27, 2024 at 6:33 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Leftists in the US have hijacked the legal system, targeting President Trump and conservative officials. Canada's Bill C-63, the Online Harms Act, could lead to authoritarianism. It allows for kangaroo courts, anonymous informants, and punishment for thought crimes. The government could prosecute people for future crimes. This bill could muzzle dissent and establish a Stasi-like network. Leftists create laws to strip away individual liberty. Canadians may not fight back like Americans, making the situation grim.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

The lawfare that we see in the United States, where leftists have hijacked the legal system, is coming to Canada. In the US even President Trump and very senior conservative officials like General Mike Flynn have been targeted for harassment, bankruptcy and jail. With Liberal Bill C-63 (the so-called Online Harms Act)... ❌ Canada will create kangaroo courts to prosecute government targets. ❌ Anonymous government informants can ruin anyone's life and be financially rewarded for doing so. ❌ Thought crimes will be punishable for up to life in prison. ❌ Anything that hurts the government's feelings will be punishable. ❌ People could even be prosecuted for crimes they might commit in the future. In other words, Canada will become a fully authoritarian country if Bill C-63 passes as is. Under the disguise of protecting kids and fighting "hate speech", Ottawa will give itself the ultimate tool to successfully wage lawfare against citizens, muzzle dissent and establish a Canada-wide network similar to the old East German Stasi, where anything you say can be reported to the government and turn you into Ottawa's next victim. Leftist don't have to "break the law". They just create tailored laws that allow them to burn down their opposition and strip away the individual liberty of anyone who stands in their way. In America, if President Trump and General Mike Flynn can be targeted, then anyone can have the same thing happen. In Canada, I expect it will be even more flagrant, since most Canadians are so passive they won't even fight back. At least Americans have a tradition of resisting, so maybe they still have a chance to save themselves. In Canada, though, it's looking grim.

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - March 22, 2024 at 4:01 PM
Saved - March 23, 2024 at 3:00 AM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Your money and your freedom are being stolen in the name of fighting CO2-caused “climate change”. This is the biggest fraud in human history. Trillions of dollars are being consumed as Big Government solutions are imposed. “Climate the Movie” is worth the 1.5 hours to learn. 👇 https://t.co/UTRQB0x3l5

Video Transcript AI Summary
Scientists have found a link between temperature and CO2, but it's the opposite of what many believe. In the past, temperature has risen first, followed by a rise in CO2 levels. Ice ages start when CO2 is at its maximum and end when it's at its minimum, contradicting the idea that CO2 controls temperature. Looking back over millions of years, CO2 levels have changed drastically, but they have never driven temperature changes.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Scientists have indeed found a link between temperature and CO 2. The trouble is it's the wrong way around. Speaker 1: So it's true over the last few 1000000 years of the ice age that we're in now that CO 2 and temperature are correlated. But if CO 2 is the driver, it has to change first, and the temperature has to change second. Speaker 2: And, in fact, when you start to look at the data very specifically, you see the exact reverse. Temperature starts to rise first. And then on the order of a century to a few centuries later, we start to see a rise in CO2. It's long been known that, the temperature actually moves first. So temperature goes up, CO2 goes up after that. Temperature goes down, CO2 goes down. Speaker 3: Ice ages start when carbon dioxide is at its maximum, and ice ages and when carbon dioxide is at its minimum, which is the exact opposite of what would occur if carbon dioxide was controlling the temperature. Speaker 4: The question of whether CO 2 drives the climate is easily resolved. You can look back in time over 100 of 1000000 of years, CO2 levels have changed radically many times. Did this cause temperature change? No, absolutely not. CO2 has never driven temperature changes in the past. Never.

@wideawake_media - Wide Awake Media

Climate the Movie: The Cold Truth The final nail in the coffin for the "human-induced climate change" scam. An absolute MUST-WATCH! Directed by Martin Durkin (@Martin_Durkin), director of 2007's 'The Great Global Warming Swindle'. Produced by Tom Nelson (@TomANelson). Please share far and wide!

Video Transcript AI Summary
The video claims that the climate change narrative is driven by financial interests rather than scientific evidence. It suggests that the climate industry, fueled by government funding and green subsidies, has created a consensus on climate change to secure more funds. The video argues that historical climate data does not support the idea that CO2 drives temperature change and that natural factors such as solar activity and cosmic rays have a greater impact. It also questions the validity of extreme weather events being attributed to climate change. The video discusses the influence and impact of the climate crisis industry, highlighting how it relies on the existence of a climate crisis to sustain itself. It explores the suppression of dissenting voices and the censorship of skeptical views within the scientific community, academia, and media. The video argues that the climate alarm is not only an attack on science but also a means to shape society and promote anti-capitalist ideologies. It concludes by highlighting the negative consequences of the climate alarm on developing countries and the growing skepticism among the general public. Overall, the video suggests that the focus on climate change is driven by financial incentives and raises concerns about the impact of the climate crisis industry on scientific discourse and societal development.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction, and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you? Speaker 1: This is the story of how an eccentric environmental scare grew into a powerful global industry. Speaker 2: It's a wonderful business opportunity. Okay? You want climate, we'll give you climate. Speaker 3: There's a huge amount of money involved. This is a huge big money scam. Speaker 4: There are not just now 1,000,000,000, but there are 1,000,000,000,000 of dollars at stake. Speaker 1: It's a story of self interest and big government funding. Speaker 5: People like me, our careers depend on funding of climate research. This is what I've been doing just about my whole career. This is what the other climate researchers are doing with their whole career. They don't want this to end. Speaker 6: If CO 2 isn't having the huge negative impacts that we claimed it was having originally, how are we going to stay in business? Speaker 3: A lot of people's livelihoods depend on it. They're not gonna give that. Speaker 1: This is a story of the corruption of science. Speaker 7: There's no such thing as a climate emergency happening on this planet now. It's there's no no evidence of 1. Speaker 8: The climate alarm is nonsense. You know? It's it's a hoax. I've never liked hoax. I I think scam is a better word, but I'm willing to live with folks. Speaker 1: It's a story about the bullying and intimidation of anyone who dares to challenge the climate alarm. Speaker 6: To speak up against or about climate change in any sort of skeptical way was essentially career suicide. Speaker 9: Activists are even calling for any skepticism to be criminalized. Speaker 1: It's the story of an assault on individual freedom. Speaker 8: It's a wonderful way to increase government power. If there's an existential threat out there worldwide, well, you need a powerful worldwide government, you know, to cope with it. Speaker 9: We see all these kind of, authoritarian measures being adopted in the name of saving the planet. Speaker 8: You've suddenly got the population under control all over the world. Speaker 1: We called it industrial progress. Since the industrial revolution, the development of free market capitalist mass production has made ever more goods ever more affordable to ever larger numbers of people. Mass production marched hand in hand with mass consumption. In the modern age, ordinary people enjoy a level of prosperity never before achieved in human history. But all the while, we are told, we were destroying the planet. Computers have calculated what is in store for us as we produce and consume evermore. The weather will get worse. The planet will boil. We, greedy humans, must accept limits on our lifestyle, consume less, travel less. Those who deny the climate crisis are not just wrong. They're dangerous, spreading the poison of doubt among a gullible population. These deniers should be shunned and shamed and censored, for these climate deniers are flat earthers. They are anti science. Teaching at New York University is one of these climate deniers. Professor Steven Coonan is one of America's leading physicists. He was a science adviser to president Obama and both vice president and provost of Caltech, one of the prestigious scientific institutes in the world. Speaker 2: I teach climate science to my students at NYU, and I always tell them check the data or the papers yourself. And they all come out of that course with their eyes wide open. Speaker 1: Professor Koonin's best selling book, unsettled, argues that mainstream scientific studies, accepted by official agencies, do not support the notion that there is any kind of climate crisis at all. Speaker 2: Of course, I've been called a denier. And my response is tell me what I'm denying because I'm quoting from you directly from the official UN Scientific Reports. Speaker 1: Dick Lindzen also dismisses the claims of climate alarmists. He's one of the world's leading meteorologists, who's professor of meteorology at both Harvard University and MIT, and has served on the UN's intergovernmental panel on climate change or IPCC. Speaker 10: Even the intergovernmental panel on climate change, if you go to their section of working 1 group 1, which is the science, they don't support any of these claims. And I assure you having served on it, it's biased, but you couldn't get any real scientist to agree some of the nonsense that's being promoted. Speaker 1: Will Hapa is also a denier and is another of America's leading physicists. He has been science adviser to 3 presidents and professor of physics at both Columbia and Princeton University. Speaker 8: There's this mischievous, idea that's promoted that scientific truth is determined by consensus. In real science, you know, there are always arguments no science has ever settled, you know. It just is absurd when people say the science of climate is settled. It's not there's no such thing as settled science, especially climate. Speaker 1: Doctor John Clauser is one of the most respected scientists in the world. In 2022, he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics. Speaker 4: The science that's being done is appallingly bad, in my opinion. There are a large number of scientists who are in violent disagreement. They refer to themselves as skeptics. Since I am no longer worried about losing funding or a job, whatever, I call myself a climate change denier. Speaker 1: These very eminent and respected scientists and others like them are not flat earthers. They do not deny science. So what's the evidence that has caused them to dismiss the climate alarm as nonsense? We are told that current temperatures are unprecedented and dangerously high. It's possible to check if this is true because we have evidence of Earth's climate history dating back 100, 1000, even 1000000 of years. The desert of Judea by the Dead Sea. Professor Nir Shaviv from the Raqqa Institute of Physics has come here looking for clues. 1000 of years ago, this place was underwater. And etched into the rocks are lines which, if you know how to read them, tell the story of Earth's climate history. Speaker 11: And here's the climate. We're at the, lake bed of, what used to be Lake Lisan. It's a lake that existed until, the end of the last ice age. Back then, the lake level was maybe a 100 meters above where we were located. When we want to reconstruct climates of the past, we have to, look for evidence, for clues. And when the, lake existed, it had the deposits. And by looking at these, layers here, we can actually reconstruct how the climate has changed. Speaker 1: Warmer water means more life. The accumulation of more shells and bones from sea creatures, and other changes that are reflected in the ancient layers of the lakebed. The lines act as a kind of thermometer, and this is just one way geologists can reconstruct past climate. Speaker 11: In other places, we can go to, stalagmite caves and see the annual rings that you have in the stalagmite. Or we can drill, cores from the, bottom of the the ocean, and then, look at layers there, or many other places. But here, I think this is one of the nicest places because you can actually see you can actually see how, the climate has, changed. Speaker 1: So when we look back in time, what do we find? For 200000000 years, dinosaurs roamed the Earth, an Earth marked by fertile dense forests teeming with light. And at no time during those 200000000 years were temperatures as cold as they are today. Speaker 2: If you go back, let's say, 200000000 years, it was maybe 13 degrees warmer than it is now. So on the geological perspective, this is not at all unprecedented. Speaker 12: For the Speaker 1: last 500000000 years, temperatures have varied greatly. But for almost all that time, the Earth was much, much warmer than today. Compared to the last half 1000000000 years, the Earth right now is exceptionally cold. In fact, there are very few times when it's been this cold. Speaker 2: We're relatively cold. Maybe not quite the coldest it's been in 500,000,000 years, but pretty close to it. Speaker 6: We are in a remarkably cool period if we look over the last 550,000,000 years. In fact, only one other time period in that last five 50000000 years was the temperature as cool as it is now. Speaker 1: The mammals who now inhabit the earth began to evolve around 60000000 years ago when the world was much warmer than today. Speaker 6: We just look at the last 65000000 years. So this is after the dinosaurs go extinct. Mammals really start to take over and our evolutionary ancestors start to live on the land. Any time period within the last 65000000 years was warmer than it is essentially today. Speaker 1: The Earth's mammals, humans included, appear to thrive when it's warm, warmer than it is now. Speaker 7: There is no doubt that warm is better than cold in geological history. We are a tropical species. A human being in the shade naked dies at 20 C from hypothermia. We evolved on the equator in Africa, and the only reason we were able to get out of there eventually was fire, shelter, and clothing. Speaker 1: Over the last 50000000 years, temperatures steadily declined, plunging the Earth into what geologists call the late Cenozoic ice age. We are still in that ice age. Speaker 7: The reason there's all that ice on the poles is because we're in an ice age. Everybody knows that. Who knows anything about the history of the Earth? This is an ice age. We're at the tail end of a 50,000,000 year cooling period, and they're saying it's too hot. Speaker 13: If we zoom in Speaker 1: on the past few 1000000 years, we see temperatures sinking, and as they do, fluctuating between extremely cold periods and slightly milder periods. The extremely cold periods are called glacial maxima, when the planet is mostly covered in ice, and the slightly less cold are called glacial minima, when there's just ice at the poles. For the past 10000 years, fortunately, we've been in a slightly less cold glacial minimum known as the Holocene. With milder weather, humans began to emerge from their caves. And several 1000 years ago, we see the rise of the first great civilizations in a blissful period, which, according to many studies, was considerably warmer than today. This is known as the Holocene Climate Optimum. Speaker 2: It was called an optimum because people thought that warmer was better. Speaker 1: Since then, temperatures have declined and begun to fluctuate. In Roman times, there was a blissfully warm period, followed by a brutal cold period in the dark ages. Speaker 13: Then came Speaker 1: the Barmen medieval warm period, according to many studies, as warm or warmer than today, followed by especially cold period known as the Little Ice Age, possibly the coldest in the last 10000 years. And here it is, the Roman warm period, the cold dark age, the medieval warm period, and then the very cold little ice age, from which, for the past 300 years or so, we've been recovering. The longest instrumental record of temperature in the world comes from Central England, and this is what it shows. Since the worst of the little ice age from 16 50, the temperature has risen gently by little more than 1 degree Celsius. Speaker 8: The Central England record of temperature is a is a world treasure. You know, it's the longest continuous record that we have, and it's certainly not a very alarming record. It began in the depths of the little ice age, and so you can see the slight warming that followed the little ice age. And there's certainly nothing very alarming that's happening today, at the very end of the record. Most of the warming that we're observing today is the recovery from the little ice age, whatever caused that. Speaker 10: Well, you know, we're talking over the entire industrial period of about 1 degree centigrade. Speaker 1: To put this one degree in perspective, let's look at New York Central Park. Records show that there has been no overall change in temperature here since 1940. But from 1 year to the next, the average temperature can vary by 3 degrees Celsius without many New Yorkers even noticing. In fact, between the warmest year in the 19 sixties and the coolest in 2000, there's a difference of 5 degrees Celsius. Speaker 2: The average temperature on this day, in this year, might be 5 degrees different from the average temperature a year ago or 2 years. Speaker 8: You know, when I hear people pontificating about 1 and a half degrees leading to the end of civilization, I think, what have they been smoking? You know? Are you crazy? Right? So Speaker 1: According to thermometer readings since 18/80, there's been a very mild increase in temperature. Only by stretching the y axis on this graph is the increase noticeable. This is the rising line used by official agencies as proof of global warming. But is it accurate? Professor Ross McKittrick is an expert in statistical analysis at Guelph University. He noticed something odd about modern thermometer records. Thermometers, even in the same region, give out very different readings depending on where they're located. Speaker 12: I was interested in the question of how do you explain the spatial pattern of warming? So some places warm a lot, some places don't warm much. And it turns out it's highly correlated with the spatial pattern of economic activity. Speaker 1: Where there are more people and there is more human activity, there's more heat. This is known as the urban heat island effect. Speaker 13: Urban heat island effect is essentially London. Right? You pick London. With buildings, with a lot of activities, tends to be a a few degree. I mean, we're talking now Celsius. Right? Even 4 or 5 degrees Celsius, warm and then our skirt. This is a phenomenon of urbanization. These days, the obvious effect is actually concrete retaining retaining heat. Speaker 1: This can be illustrated with a satellite heat map of Paris. The center of Paris can be as much as 5 degrees Celsius warmer than the surrounding countryside. Speaker 13: Paris, London, Beijing, Shanghai, you name it. New Delhi, all of them absolutely demonstrated the effects. Speaker 1: So how has this affected the official temperature record? In the early part of the 20th century, it was normal to erect weather thermometers just outside towns, close enough to check every day, but away from the heat of urban life. But over the 20th century, those towns have expanded. Suburbs have spread. There are more roads, more cars. Thermometers, which were once outside towns, are now surrounded by shopping malls, offices, factories, and houses. Speaker 5: These towns and all the locations where thermometers are located, on average, they've all grown in population, let's say, since 18/80. You've got buildings, growing up around the thermometers. You've got parking lots. So you've got all of these non climate influences, which are affecting the temperatures, which raises questions about the quality of thermometer data for monitoring global warming. Speaker 1: To correct for this corruption of the data, an obvious solution is to use only records from rural weather stations, which have been less affected by urban development. This has now been done by a team led by doctor Willie Soon. Speaker 13: We combine all the best rural station. Any anything that we can correct for, we correct for. And we show, if you just don't use this data set and use only rural, you you get a very different kind of picture. Speaker 1: According to rural temperature records, temperatures rose from the 18 eighties but peaked in the 19 forties. Then there was a marked cooling until the 19 seventies. After that, temperatures recover, but are still today barely higher than they were in the 19 forties. Speaker 13: What we see is that, basically, you have a warming from the 1900, 18, you know, fifties or so to 19 thirties and forties and started to warm and then cool in a substantial way to the seventies, about 76 or so. Instead of a long term systematic warming trend, it has a variability. Multi decade or like every 50, 60 years or so kind of a variation. Speaker 1: It's not just rural thermometers that show little warming. Merchant ships and other naval vessels have been measuring the temperature of the sea since 19th century. In red, we see the land temperature record since the 18 sixties, which has been inflated by urban thermometers. But in blue is the ocean temperature record. From around 1900, the 2 begin to diverge. Ocean records show far less warming in the 20th century, and the pattern more closely resembles the rural temperature record. Speaker 13: Sea is not supposed to be, quote, unquote, contaminated by urban heat island effect. Am I right? Yes. So when we compare the two record, within the range of uncertainty, this behavior actually fits. Speaker 1: Scientists have also studied temperature change by looking at tree rings, which again shows very little warming. There's a gentle rise till the mid 20th century, a cooling to the 19 seventies, followed by a mild recovery. Once again, it shows temperatures today are barely different to those of the 19 thirties and forties, and the pattern closely resembles rural temperatures. Satellites too seem to be telling a different story. Our ability to measure global temperature accurately took a leap forward when satellites began to orbit the Earth. One of the scientists who pioneered the use of satellites to measure temperature is doctor Roy Spencer, who in the 19 eighties was senior scientist for climate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center. Speaker 5: We were discussing over lunch, isn't there some way we can use satellites to monitor global temperatures? Because as you know, the temperature network of thermometers is pretty skimpy around the world. So it's kinda hard to get a global temperature. Speaker 1: Doctor Spencer's development of weather satellites was revolutionary. He and his colleague, professor John Christie, have been awarded NASA's medal for exceptional scientific achievement. Speaker 5: Our satellite data begins in January of 1979. That's when we have complete global coverage, and we have it right up to the present. Speaker 1: There was one critical question about temperature that satellites were singularly well equipped to answer. Speaker 5: Has there been a spurious warming that has crept into the global temperature record over land, that's just a result of an increase in population. And that's something that we've been analyzing and working a lot on lately and we're finding that, especially in urban areas, it's large. I mean, since 18/80, most of the warming, it looks like, is due to the urban heat island effect. Speaker 8: We're lucky to have a few independent scientists like John Christie and Roy Spencer with their satellite measurements of temperature. Before they started releasing this, ground based temperature records were going wild. They were going up you know, like crazy with no no bounds. But now they have to contend with the fact that there's this independent and probably better way of measuring the whole globe's temperature, which is not alarming at all. Speaker 1: Evidence from multiple sources now agree that the official global temperature record, as used by world governments and reported in the world's media, is showing far too much warming over the last 120 years, artificially inflated by urbanization. Speaker 12: You look at the weather record, the satellite record, the rural record, the ocean record doesn't warm nearly as much as land. All of these indications show that the, like, the big warming pulse in the record is the northern hemisphere land record, and that's also where most of this data contamination is happening. Speaker 1: But if the mild warming that has taken place in the last 3 to 400 years, can any of it be attributed to human emissions of CO 2? Professor Henrik Svensmark is visiting the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and taking a stroll in the evolution garden, dedicated to preserving the oldest surviving plant geological past. Speaker 14: What we have here is a a ginkgo tree, and it's actually a living, fossil in the sense that this type of tree, first appeared about 270,000,000 years ago. On the underside of the leaf, there are what we call stomata, the cells where they can uptake c02. So they're actually measuring how much c02 is in the air, and then they adjust the number of the stomata to how much c02 there is. And by looking at fossils and measuring how many there are at a different time, it says something about what was the level of c02 back in time. Speaker 1: So when we look back in time, what do we find? Over almost all of the last 500000000 years, the level of CO 2 in the atmosphere has been far, far higher than it is now. Even with modern industry's contribution to c o two levels, by geological standards, the level of atmospheric c o two today is close to being as low as it has ever been. Speaker 14: At present, we have about 400 parts per million. 50,000,000 years ago, it might have been 2,000 parts per million. So a much, much higher concentration of CO2. Speaker 6: I think current estimates of global CO2 is 423 or so parts per million today. If we look through the Phanerozoic the last 550,000,000 years we would see a CO 2 on the order of 7,000 parts per million. Speaker 1: CO 2 is plant food and the result of much higher levels of atmospheric CO 2 in the past was a much much greener world. Speaker 6: Periods of elevated CO 2 tend to be time periods of of of a huge biodiversity on on the planet. In fact, we're in a c o two famine if we look over the last 550,000,000 years. Speaker 1: At the depths of the most recent glacial maximum, the amount of CO 2 in the atmosphere sank so low, all life on earth came close to extinction. Speaker 15: They say CO 2 is higher than it's been for a 100000 years, but what they don't tell you in that period they're talking about is that c02 sank so low that all life on earth nearly died. Speaker 7: 20000 years ago, c02 is at the lowest level it has ever been in the history of the Earth, a 180 parts per million. If it had gone down another 30 parts per million, we'd all be dead. Speaker 6: There is a low point of c o two where photosynthesis becomes so inefficient that plant life would die, then everything else starts to perish after that. Speaker 8: During the last, glacial maximum, there's good evidence that in many parts of the world, there was plant starvation from not enough CO 2. So, we should be very grateful that CO 2 levels are beginning to go back up. We're still far from the historical norms, which would be several 1,000 parts per million. There's not enough fossil fuel to get there, but at least we're making a start. Speaker 1: But has the small recent increase in CO 2 affected the temperature? We would now show you a picture of CO 2, but we can't because it's invisible. C o 2 makes up a tiny fraction of the gases in the atmosphere, just 0.04 of a percent. It is just one of 25 different greenhouse gases, which, taken as a whole, form only one part of Earth's complex climate system. So what evidence is there that this trace gas is having any noticeable impact on the climate? If it were true that higher levels of c o two caused higher temperatures, we should be able to see that in Earth's climate history. Here, scientists are drilling into ancient ice cores. These cores tell us both about past temperatures and c02 levels. Scientists have indeed found a link between temperature and c02. The trouble is it's the wrong way around. Speaker 8: Though it's true over the last few 1000000 years of the ice age that we're in now that CO 2 and temperature are correlated. But if CO 2 is the driver, it has to change first, and the temperature has to change second. Speaker 6: In fact, when you start to look at the data very specifically, you see the exact reverse. Temperature starts to rise first. And then on the order of a century to a few centuries later, we start to see a rise in CO2. Speaker 12: It's long been known that, the temperature actually moves first. So temperature goes up, CO2 goes up after that. Temperature goes down, CO2 goes down. Speaker 3: Ice ages start when carbon dioxide is at its maximum and ice ages and when carbon dioxide is at its minimum, which is the exact opposite of what would occur if carbon dioxide was controlling the temperature. Speaker 15: The question of whether CO2 drives the climate is easily resolved. You can look back in time over 100 of 1000000 of years. CO2 levels have changed radically many times. Did this cause temperature change? No. Absolutely not. CO 2 has never driven temperature changes in the past. Never. Speaker 1: Nor is it clear in recent times that c o two is having any effect on temperature. Here, we see industrial output of c o two since 17 50. From the mid 19th century to the mid 20th century, there was only a slight increase. It's not until the 19 forties that industrial production of c o two begins to take off. But this doesn't match the temperature record. According to rural thermometers, most of the warming in the past 200 years occurred before the 19 forties and have barely changed since then. Speaker 2: One of the embarrassments that IPCC doesn't like to talk about was that the 19 thirties, when human influences were much smaller, were particularly warm. Speaker 13: That's the puzzle that the first early part where we have such a sharp, warming from the 1900 to 19 thirties and 1940s, c o two could never cause the temperature rise. Speaker 1: But the 19 thirties and early forties were so hot is puzzling. More puzzling still is what happened next. Speaker 8: By the end of World War 2, CO 2 was really going up, and yet the temperature was going down. Speaker 13: From 40 to 70, while the CO 2 continued to rise, these things started to cool. What happened? Speaker 7: Journalists were writing about the coming ice age. It was on the cover of Time Magazine. Speaker 3: 19 seventies, the new ice age was the big story. Speaker 1: And how about since the 19 seventies? According to computer climate models, over the past half century, rising c 02 should have led to this increase in temperature. But according to multiple satellite and balloon measurements, what actually happened was this. Speaker 5: Well, what we found from the satellite data is that the global atmosphere is not warming up as fast as the climate models say it should be. There's a couple dozen climate models now that have been worked on for decades. You know, 1,000,000,000 of dollars, tens of 1,000,000,000 of dollars have been invested in these climate modeling efforts, and we find that generally speaking, virtually all of the climate models produce too much warming over this period since 1979 up to the present. Now, even if we say the surface thermometers are correct, they still don't produce as much warming as most of the climate models say there should have been, let's say, in the last 50 years. Speaker 2: The models individually and even collectively when you average over all of them in so called ensembles, they don't get it right. Speaker 8: You can already see that the main, support of the climate alarm movement, which are these enormous computer models, they're clearly wrong. They don't agree with what we observe. They're all running much too hot. They don't get the geographical distribution of temperatures anywhere close. They don't get El Nino, La Nina cycles. They're they're just nonsense. Speaker 1: All climate models are based on the assumption that c o two drives temperature change, but actual observations and historical evidence clearly suggest that it doesn't. Speaker 4: Yes. I assert that there is no connection whatsoever between c 02 and climate change. That's all across a crap in my opinion. Speaker 7: There is no truth to the idea that the earth is warmer now than it has been in the past. It's a lie. There is no truth that c o two is higher than it should be. That is a lie. Speaker 1: Earth's climate has changed many times over the course of its long history and will continue to change without any help from us. Speaker 8: Climate always changes. You know? Who denies climate change? It's always changing. Speaker 1: But if c o two doesn't drive climate change, what does? In Earth's atmosphere, there are powerful forces at work, and perhaps the most powerful of all are clouds. Speaker 4: C02 is quite unimportant in controlling the earth's climate. What is important is clouds. Clouds don't absorb any energy at all. They simply reflect all of the sunlight back out into space, big bright white clouds. If you look at the earth you see lots and lots of them and they vary dramatically from one day to the next. That is 100 of times more powerful than the trivial effects of c02. Speaker 1: But what controls the number and density of clouds on Earth? Professor Henrik Svensmark from the Danish National Space Institute is in Jerusalem with the astrophysicist Nir Shaviv. Together, they've been exploring cloud variation and its effect on climate. And strangely, they found a link between clouds and exploding supernovae far off in our galaxy. Speaker 14: When we have big stars, they don't live very long, relatively only maybe a few 1000000 years up to 40000000 years, but they end their life in a huge explosion, which we call the supernova. Speaker 1: An exploding supernova sends out vast quantities of debris, tiny charged subatomic particles known as cosmic rays, traveling almost at the speed of light. And as they hit Earth, they develop into seeds which attract water vapor and form clouds. Professor Shevive noticed that the amount of cloud cover on Earth is related to our journey round the Milky Way. As our solar system orbits the galaxy over 1000000 of years, it passes through the galaxy's spiral arms, dense clusters of stars. As it does, we are exposed to more or less cloud forming cosmic rays, and this corresponds to historic temperature changes on Earth. Speaker 11: The really mind boggling thing is that using geology, you can reconstruct the climate on Earth over the past 1000000000 years, and you can reconstruct our galactic journey, and both tell the same story. Speaker 1: But what about temperature change on shorter time scales? The sun, our source of heat and light, a seething mass of gigantic magnetic storms, which vary in strength and number over time and which affect Earth directly and indirectly. When it is very active, the sun sends giant gusts of solar wind through the solar system. The solar wind warms us indirectly by acting as a barrier, limiting the number of cloud forming cosmic rays reaching Earth. Speaker 14: So from the sun, we have the solar wind. It carries the sun's magnetic field, out to a large distance, and it works like a shield against cosmic rays. When the Speaker 11: sun is more active, you have a stronger solar wind. You have less cosmic rays reaching the inner solar system and reaching the atmosphere. And the clouds, which are then formed, are less white. They reflect less of the sunlight, which means that it's going to be warmer here on Earth. Speaker 1: Here is a proxy reconstruction of ocean temperatures over 1000 of years. And here is one of solar activity over the same period. What is causing the ocean temperature to change is clearly variations in solar activity. Speaker 13: Because IPCC is determined to go on a narrative that only c o two can drive the climate system, they turn off the sun essentially. Right? Because the sun is just a background thing for them. That it doesn't do anything. Speaker 1: Astrophysicist Willie Soon decided to look again at the rural temperature record for the past 150 years. Then he looked at a record of changes in solar activity over the same period. To doctor Sun, it was obvious that it was the sun, not c02, that was driving temperature. Speaker 13: As of 2023, IPCC says is that the sun have absolutely zero chance in to explain the changes of the climate system on broad scale, let's say global warming on Northern Hemisphere. We say no. We can easily deperate the sun. Can I explain all of it? There's 0 for the c o two, 100% for the sun. How's that? Speaker 1: Why are these and other studies never reported in the mainstream media? And if climate change is natural, what are we to make of the alleged terrifying increase in extreme weather events, of the heat waves and hurricanes, of forest fires, droughts, and the rest. Speaker 2: My first instinct as a scientist and what I teach my students is, well, let's look at the data. And when you do that, you discover, as you can read in the IPCC reports themselves, that it's pretty hard to find trends in extreme events, much less attribute them to human influences. Speaker 12: You've now had decades of putting the idea in people's heads that anytime the weather is bad, it's climate change and greenhouse gases. So I think people at this point can't help themselves. If you have a heat wave, immediately, everybody's thinking, oh, what have we done to the weather? Speaker 2: If somebody says in the news this is the warmest day since 1980 or something, well, you can look up the temperature records and see for yourself whether it was in fact warmer in the 19 thirties as it often is. Speaker 1: US temperature records are the best in the world, and here is the official US government record of heat waves in the US over the past century. It shows very clearly that the 19 thirties were far more prone to heat waves than we are today. Not only were there more heat waves in the 19 thirties, the heat waves then were much hotter than those of today. Likewise, official figures show that the number of hot days in the US has markedly declined. Speaker 3: United States was much hotter in the 1930. North Dakota reached a 121 degrees. South Dakota was a 120 degrees. Wisconsin was a 114 degrees. These sort of temperatures are just completely out of range of anything people experience now. Speaker 1: A common mistake is to suppose that higher average temperature will mean more hot weather, but this isn't true. Here again is the Central England temperature record, the longest instrumental temperature record in the world. Summer temperatures over the past 3 to 400 years since the end of the little ice age have barely changed at all. It is winter temperatures that have been slightly rising. The earth's climate has not been getting hotter. It's been getting milder. Speaker 8: That's certainly being observed all over the world. If you look at temperature records, high temperatures are almost unchanged. But cold temperatures at night or during the winter are are going up a little bit. Not very much, but you can measure it. Speaker 2: When the average goes up, it's really more due to the coldest temperatures getting warmer. So the temperature's getting milder rather than getting hotter. Speaker 1: What about the increasing number of wildfires we're often told about? Speaker 2: If you look at the actual number of forest fires from satellite observations, the actual number's going down. Speaker 1: Here is an estimate of global wildfires since 1900. It shows a clear decline. And here is a record of areas affected by wildfires in the US. It shows that wildfires were far, far worse in the 19 thirties. Speaker 13: From 19 thirties and 19 twenties when you have data, it was huge. Five to 10 times bigger than the current level. Speaker 1: How about hurricanes? The US has by far the best record of hurricane activity in the world. Over the past 120 years, there is no overall change. In fact, the trend is slightly down. Speaker 2: When you look at the data for hurricanes, technically tropical cyclones, you see that there is no long term trend. Speaker 1: How about the rest of the world? Here is a chart of global hurricane activity over the past 40 years. Speaker 8: The hurricanes have been around forever. You know? We've got good proxy records of hurricanes, and, there's been no change in their frequency. Even the IPCC admits that. Speaker 1: How about melting ice caps and drought? Here's a satellite record of temperature in Antarctica since the late 19 seventies. And here is a record of global drought since 1950. There is no And here is a record of global drought since 1950. There is no observable increase at all. Polar bears are meant to be going extinct, but studies suggest their numbers are growing. The Great Barrier Reef too has recently reached record levels. Speaker 7: There's no such thing as a climate emergency happening on this planet now. It's there's no no evidence of 1. Speaker 3: Yeah. The extreme weather event story is is just absurd. There there's no basis to it at all. It's just based on propaganda. The actual data shows the opposite. Speaker 2: I've shown you the official data, the official science. Tell me what I'm denying. Speaker 8: The climate alarm is nonsense. You know, it's it's a hoax. As as a I I don't I've never liked hoax. I I think scam is a better word, but I'm willing to live with hoax. Speaker 1: But why are we told again and again that man made climate chaos is an undisputed scientific fact beyond question, beyond doubt. To answer this, we must examine the so called consensus on climate change. Speaker 4: Thank you very much. Speaker 1: Until the 19 eighties, global warming was little more than an eccentric scare story put about by radical environmentalists. But then the cause was picked up by an ambitious young senator, Al Gore, who would soon become vice president. A $1,000,000,000 a year of public money was made available for research into climate change. This quickly rose to 2,000,000,000. Speaker 4: Up to that level. Speaker 1: Academic researchers in various disciplines began to apply for this climate funding. Speaker 2: If you want to qualify for money that's labeled climate, well, you take whatever you're doing and you add a little bit, of climate speak to it and away you go. Speaker 10: You're dealing with the sexual habits of cockroaches. You'll add and the impact of climate. Speaker 12: So all I have to do is add a little wrinkle to my grant application to explain how, well, I'm worried that climate change will mean the death of all the maple trees. And so right away, you qualify for funding. Speaker 1: Academics of every kind lined up for climate funding. Climate became an exciting new area of interest for sociologists, biologists, professors of English literature, lecturers in gender studies, and many more. Speaker 10: And it also served to create a community. I mean, you know, you've become a climate scientist now even though you know nothing about the physics of climate. Speaker 1: Thousands of papers were published on climate change and prostitution, climate change and beer, climate change and the black death, climate change and disability, climate change and video games, and everything else imaginable. Speaker 12: There's an almost comical list of studies out there. Just do a Google search on climate change and and and everything comes up. Speaker 1: Few of these papers ever questioned whether climate change was actually true. Speaker 2: After you've done the research and you write the paper up, sometimes you find there's no effect at all from climate, but you still have to say in your papers, oh, yes. Climate change is real, and, we just need to study this some more. Speaker 1: Since so few of these so called climate studies challenged the idea of climate change, it was declared that there was a scientific consensus. Climate change must be true. Climate also became a new focus for government funded research bodies. Speaker 4: Scientific research in the United States tends to be dominantly funded by, government grants. And so whatever government grants are offered, sort of determine much of the science being done. Speaker 1: It was during the Cold War that many government research bodies were set up. But the end of the Cold War and pressure on government spending has left many of them struggling to justify their continued funding. Speaker 5: United States Congress only funds problems. Okay? Research into problems, whether it's money that goes to NASA or NOAA or National Science Foundation or Department of Energy or any other alphabet soup, you know, organization. Speaker 8: It's always been a problem to support your research or your existence or raison d'etre. And so climate was a godsend. If Congress is willing Speaker 5: to pay you to find evidence of global warming, by golly, as a scientist, we're gonna go find evidence of it because that's what we're what we're being paid to do. And guess what? If you don't find evidence or say the evidence suggests it's not a problem, your funding ends. This totally corrupts the way we look at the science. Speaker 4: Who the famous gangster asked, why do you rob banks? And he said, well, because that's where the money is. Speaker 1: The climate alarm brought funds. And the bigger the supposed threat, the more funds seem to flow. The publicly funded science establishment now had a direct financial interest in playing up the alarm. Speaker 6: So there's a huge incentive to over exaggerate or to speak in hyperbole, even if the data doesn't support exactly what you're saying, because that's what brings the funds. I was in that boat. I was someone that was defending climate change as a grad student, quite a bit, because the truth is I didn't give it too much thought, but I, I thought well, it's getting a ton of attention. It brings a ton of money into the earth sciences. Even if I don't buy all the hyperbole, what's the problem? Speaker 1: By the late 19 nineties, what had started as an environmental scare story was gaining momentum. Western governments and their senior civil servants were more than willing to address the climate problem. Green taxes were levied, green regulation expanded, and this in turn generated more climate related jobs and activity. Speaker 12: Take the banking sector, for instance. Say to a banker, we want you to file reports with the the regulatory commission on how climate change is gonna affect your bank. Well, the banker doesn't know anything about this subject, so then they have to commission studies from academics. And, of course, the academics are happy to come and tell them, well, it's gonna be terrible for your bank. It's gonna cause all kinds of problems, and you could you need to give us money to research this. Speaker 1: Green subsidies and regulation meant there was now money to be made in climate. Renewables firms sprouted. Consultancy firms offered advice on what they called sustainability and climate compliance. Speaker 2: It's a wonderful business opportunity. Okay? You want climate, we'll give you climate. Speaker 1: The renewables industry alone now turns over a $1,000,000,000,000 a year, and that's expected to double in the next few years. Speaker 4: What used to be a cottage industry has is now blossomed to become a major part of the world economy. Speaker 1: The growth of this climate industry has seen an explosion of highly paid green jobs. Chief sustainability officers, carbon offset advisors, ESG consultants, climate compliance lawyers, and countless others. Speaker 6: Students started to come into our departments as earth science departments with a focus on climate. That never happened before. But they started to look at their career prospects, and they were smart, and they were looking at who's hiring. And the fact of the matter was is that everything in the hiring pool had climate somewhere attached to the name. Speaker 12: I started a few years ago seeing programs like, a master's degree in climate finance. And I just what on earth is is climate I don't understand what a master's degree in finance is. Well, now you need a university that's going to teach this program. You need professors of climate finance. Speaker 9: Every single school or university or business will have a climate officer or climate officers and a climate program. And you look at any of these institutions or businesses, you will find they all are signed up to it, and anyone who hasn't signed up will come under pressure. Speaker 1: At the last gathering of the publicly funded UN's IPCC, 70,000 delegates flew in from around the world. Government bureaucrats, green NGOs, carbon sequestration consultants, environmental journalists, heads of renewables companies. But this is just the tip of the iceberg. Many hundreds of thousands of jobs worldwide now depend on the climate crisis. Speaker 12: When you start building this enormous population whose job is to manage the crisis and, and also, explicitly to make sure that people are alarmed about the crisis because this whole industry depends on the existence of the crisis. Speaker 1: But therein lies the one great threat to this multi $1,000,000,000,000 industry. All the jobs, all of the funding are totally dependent on there being a climate crisis. If Speaker 6: c o two isn't having the huge negative impacts that we claimed it was having originally, how are we going to stay in business? How do we justify our existence if climate change isn't this existential threat that we claimed it was over the last 4 decades or so? Speaker 5: People like me, our careers depend on funding of climate research. This is what I've been doing just about my whole career. This is what the other climate researchers are doing with their whole career. They don't want this to end. Speaker 2: If NASA Speaker 3: said global warming is not a problem, where does their funding disappears? Right? So they can't say that. I mean, you've got the United Nations intergovernmental panel for climate change. If they said the climate isn't changing, they'd have no reason to exist. Speaker 6: The IPCC has a self preservation instinct to show that climate change is an existential threat. Otherwise, there's no reason for them to be collecting the money and doing the work in the first place. Speaker 4: There are not just now 1,000,000,000, but there are 1,000,000,000,000 of dollars at stake. Speaker 3: There's a huge amount of money involved. This is a huge big money scam. A lot of people's livelihoods depend on it. They're not Speaker 2: gonna give that up. If suddenly the notion becomes apparent that this is not such a problem, you're gonna see that as an existential threat. Speaker 1: Scientists who studied the natural causes of climate change began to be viewed with suspicion as 2 Harvard astrophysicists discovered. Speaker 13: How much does the sun change, and how does it change, and why does it change? And then we didn't even want to get into the temperature record. The climate thing immediately, they will come after because when we started to estimate that the sun changed by quite, you know, significantly in terms of climatic sense, immediately the attack is there. Because it's not following the narrative because they need the c o two to be the only one, the only dominant player. Speaker 16: When you try to say, well, see, we're just looking for the background of natural variability, which the response would be we can't have natural changes as an effect. It has to be human caused. And some of that was directly stated, but most of it was indirect. Your funding for this kind of project will be dropped. This kind of project doesn't go anywhere. Speaker 10: By that time, anything that contradicted the narrative of global warming as a serious problem was not going to get funded. Speaker 1: Editors of academic journals came under pressure not to accept papers, which were deemed to be skeptical of the climate crisis. Speaker 10: We will not publish anything that questions this. I mean, it's not something surreptitious. Speaker 1: Scientists who dared to point out in public that there was no climate chaos began to be sidelined and shunned. Speaker 12: If a scientifically qualified person stands up and says, we don't see an upward trend in the data on Pacific typhoons, well, suddenly they lose standing to address the topic of Pacific typhoons, not because what they said is wrong, but because it's off message. They can marginalize any kind of criticism of the narrative by saying you're not qualified to talk about this because you don't support the narrative. That is then and then having marginalized everyone who doesn't support the narrative, they can turn around and say, well, everybody who counts supports the narrative, so we must be right. Speaker 1: Journalists ignored skeptics and instead offered headlines to anyone prepared to make the most outrageous claims and predictions Speaker 5: doesn't come true. You're still gonna retain your status as an expert, and the media is still gonna come and ask you for your opinion even though you were crazy wrong about your predictions. Speaker 1: But the consensus on climate is not only enforced by those in the climate industry. To explain the broader appeal of the climate alarm, we must look at the politics behind climate. From the start, the climate scare was political. It came from the environmental movement, the sworn enemy of free market industrial capitalism. Speaker 9: Finally, we've got them. We can claim that it is the free markets who are destroying the planet, and we need big government to save us. Speaker 1: The climate problem, it is said, stems from the irresponsible actions of greedy, feckless individuals who have too many babies and drive too much and consume too many products, and of the capitalist corporations who pander to their whims. The solution is for government to have greater power to regulate private companies, but also to guide and reshape the lives and habits of individuals. The Speaker 12: policy agenda has sprawled into micromanaging everybody's lives on the most minute detail, what kind of stove you can use, what kind of heater you can have, how much you can set the thermostat out, where you can drive, what kind of car. You can't according to the the planners, we're not gonna have internal combustion engines an hour from now. Speaker 5: All of these things require the government to get involved. Right? Because the government has to sort of force changes upon the public. If it was up to the public, we wouldn't be buying electric vehicles because, you know, they're impractical. Speaker 1: Support for the climate alarm is now virtually synonymous with disdain for free market capitalism and a Speaker 5: yearning for bigger government. It's liberals versus conservatives in the United States. And generally speaking, liberals are worried that we're destroying the planet, and they're also, of course, for big government. And then conservatives are are at the other end of the spectrum where they a lot of them don't believe that we're destroying the planet and they don't want government involved in their personal lives. Speaker 1: Paying lip service to the climate alarm has become almost universal among those who depend on government for their livelihoods. This includes those in the publicly funded education, arts, and science establishments. Tony Heller recalls his time at Los Alamos Labs. Speaker 3: The entire county of Los Alamos was kept going by government money that we we had the highest incomes in the state. So naturally, people who lived in Los Alamos supported big government because that was where their livelihood came from. That was where their good schools came from. You know, every everything good unless all of us came from the government. So, of course, they were all believers in big governments. Speaker 1: Among the largely publicly funded Western intelligentsia, support for more government spending and regulation is almost a defining moral badge. In these circles, to question the climate alarm is socially unacceptable. To be a climate skeptic is taboo. Speaker 6: Somebody that goes against it, it really does get met with a lot of anger and vitriol and you know, you're called a denier, a science denier, and a heretic. Your colleagues won't engage Speaker 2: with you anymore. You don't get invited to conferences. Your students, may desert you. This is all really terrible. Speaker 1: Professors Henrik Swensmark and Nir Shaviv describe what happened when they published their results on the climatic effects of solar activity. Speaker 14: It was like all hell had broken loose because of this work. I had no idea that things would, escalate as they did, and it completely changed my life. Speaker 11: Once we said that, people didn't like hearing it, and we became a persona non grata. Speaker 14: I mean, I have so many instances of people doing really nasty things. When I applied for a job, a group of scientists writes to the university say they shouldn't hire me. And that's a typical story, Speaker 11: unfortunately. If you don't agree with the standard, polemic, you become an outcast. You'll shun as if you have leprosy. Speaker 1: For professor Sally Balayounas, the personal attacks became too much. Speaker 16: I retired early, and my family said I should have retired even sooner, years sooner. So they noticed the toll. It took a toll on them and me. Speaker 1: Doctor Matthew Wailicki was an assistant professor of geology at the University of Alabama when he decided to speak out about the climate scare. As a result of the backlash, he has decided to leave teaching. Speaker 6: To speak up about climate change in any sort of skeptical way was essentially career suicide. Absolutely. There was no possible way that I would publish in quite a few of the mainstream journals that I was required to publish in. I essentially isolated myself from many of the funding institutions. This is one of the reasons you can build a consensus in a community is because anybody who is skeptical of that consensus essentially gets kicked out Speaker 2: of the community. Speaking out in scientific ways that go contrary to the consensus, I would say is a career killer for people at the early stage of their careers. Speaker 8: If I were 30 years old in a university trying to make a career, I I would certainly keep my mouth shut. And in fact, I I went to some effort to keep my mouth shut when I was younger. I I knew climate was nonsense then, but I was a little bit careful. Speaker 10: If a young person is questioning this, they can't put that in a proposal. The proposal will be denied, and they can't effectively publish because the gatekeeper will keep them out. And so it it would end their career. Speaker 3: You have to go along with with the global warming story. If you don't, you're gonna get cut off. You're gonna lose funding. You're gonna get your career ruined. You're gonna be trashed by the community. You'll be despised by your coworkers. Speaker 1: The so called consensus on climate has itself become a weapon, a form of bullying, intimidation, and censorship used against those who refuse to conform. Speaker 6: It's a it's a tool that people use to bludgeon their opponents and the skeptics and to attack their character. Speaker 1: According to its critics, far from being scientific, the militant intolerant climate consensus represents a devastating assault on free scientific inquiry. Speaker 2: I see my job as a scientist as just laying out the facts and letting people decide what they wanna do. When you can't talk about the facts, things become corrupt. Speaker 16: If you shut the door on ideas, if you say you're not allowed to test it, you're not allowed to have that idea, you've left the realm of science. Speaker 5: I don't think climate researchers will ever back down from their claim that increasing c 02 is the control knob on today's climate system. I I don't think they will ever back down from that no matter what the evidence is. Speaker 10: It's clear it's now a cult completely divorced from science. Speaker 1: But the apparently unstoppable climate scare does not just represent an attack on science. It is starting to shape for us a new kind of society. Environmentalists like to pose as anti establishment, but their demands are well received and piously echoed by King Charles and the archbishop of Canterbury, the BBC, the UN, the EU, by heads of government, the World Bank, and World Economic Forum, in fact, by the entire state funded ruling establishment. Speaker 5: Global warming is like the perfect problem that government can get involved in to grow the influence of government. Speaker 8: It's a wonderful way to increase government power. And, if there's an existential threat out there as worldwide, well, you need a powerful worldwide government, you know, to cope with it. Speaker 17: If you're a climate activist, you're actually facilitating a huge, validation of the government running our lives. Speaker 18: Many environmentalists, most environmental, all environmentalists who consider themselves to be radical progressive alternatives are in fact simply reinforcing the mantras and the mainstream arguments of the entire establishment. Speaker 17: The demands on the government mean that the government suddenly gains the authority to interfere into every nook and cranny of our lives and how we live. Speaker 6: Everything has a climate narrative attached to it. How much you consume, where you spend your money, how much you travel, who you interact with, what types of food you eat, whether you eat meat. Everything has some sort of aspect that can be controlled with a climate lens. Speaker 12: Suppose 20 years ago, somebody had hatched the idea that I would really like to ban cheap energy. I'd really like to control everybody's appliance purchases. I'd really like to tell everybody where they can go. And, basically, I'd like to have dictatorial control over everything. Well, it's not gonna fly. I know everybody would think you're a knot and would ignore you. But fast forward 20 years, that's what's happening. Speaker 1: The publicly funded establishment in the west is so large and powerful that it's able to impose and enforce the official consensus on climate through its control of schools, universities, government, and much of the media. State broadcasters like the BBC exclude climate skeptics. Broadcasting regulatory bodies forbid private stations from disseminating skeptical views, threatening them with having their broadcasting licenses revoked. Speaker 9: What normally happens in an emergency is that all normal forms of openness and democracy have to be suppressed because how else to deal with an emergency? So we are facing a situation, not unlike lockdown, where basically all normal forms of behavior, normal forms of social communication, and normal forms of democracy are essentially ruled out. Activists are even calling for any skepticism to be criminalized. Speaker 1: In certain jobs and professions, it is now dangerous to express dissent on climate. Speaker 9: It's no surprise that people, who are more skeptical will think twice before voicing their concerns because they might risk their careers, they might risk their business, they might risk being sacked. Speaker 7: If you're a professional of any kind in science or law or medicine, if you belong to a professional association or you are in a university, you can be fired for saying what you believe. Speaker 9: The consequence is a censorious authoritarian regime that has to control every move, every word, everything you want to do because everything you do is a potential risk to the survival of mankind. Speaker 1: Climate protesters condemn capitalism, but at their anti capitalist rallies, it's hard to spot anyone who looks like a worker, like a docker or crane driver or steel worker or a beautician or a trucker. The workers, it appears, are totally absent from these rallies and for very good reason. Today's climate alarmists complain not that capitalism isn't producing enough, but that it's producing too much. Speaker 17: The modern capitalist system has led to prosperity. More and more people have more and more things. The modern anti capitalism of the present time is a critique of capitalism that it gives us too much. Speaker 19: They think that the problem with capitalism now is actually that it's giving out too many rewards en masse to ordinary workers. And what they want instead, and this is often very explicit actually, is a much more austere, simple kind of lifestyle in which the mass consumption, the consumption choices of the great bulk of the population are controlled or even prohibited. Speaker 9: You have to consume less. You have to holiday less. You have to drive less. You have to eat less, and so on. Speaker 1: It seems that what upsets many environmentalists is not the failure, but rather the success of capitalism in producing an abundance of affordable goods for the masses. Speaker 17: Ordinary working people, for once, we've arrived at a point in history, in the Western world at least, where mass manufacturers allowed them cheap clothes, cheap food, cheap furniture therefore you get a clash when affluent environmentalists express their disdain for mass consumption. People going on those big huge cruise ships. It's like thousands of them. It's like what are they doing? Oh my God. And all those cruise ships are like ruining Venice, you know, ruining all our beauty. We own them, don't we? They're not what are they going there for? Speaker 19: What you have here is a classic example of class hypocrisy and self interest masquerading as public spirited concern. You could take these kind of green socialists much more seriously if they lived off grid. They cut their own consumption down to the minimum. They never flew. Instead, you get constant talk about how human consumption is destroying the planet. But the people making all this talk show absolutely no signs of reducing their own. Speaker 1: What environmentalists call degrowth is being achieved by the trashing of our conventional energy and transport systems and the forced introduction of expensive and unreliable alternatives. Already, this is having the desired effect on industrial manufacturing, which is straining under the burden of punitive green taxes and regulation and higher energy prices. Speaker 15: The people behind the climate alarm couldn't give a damn about manufacturing. They have nothing to do with it. They don't know people who work in manufacturing whose jobs and lives depend on it. They're not excited by industry or industrial progress. They explicitly wanna shut it down. Speaker 1: Kisii, Kenya, East Africa. According to many leading environmentalists, the world's poorest people should not aspire to the lifestyle of people in the first world. The planet will not cope. Grace Nyakananda is one of the many Africans who do not have electricity or gas to cook with or heat their homes. The resulting indoor smoke from burning wood and dried dung is the deadliest form of pollution in the world. For millions, the cause of lung disease, blindness, and early death. It's not just cheap, reliable electricity that Africa needs. Agricultural productivity here is incredibly low. Increasing it takes fossil fuels to make fertilizer and drive tractors and other farm machinery. Jasper Mashogu is a farmer. Speaker 20: Each and every African wants to develop and increasing, improving agriculture is one of the easiest ways Speaker 1: to Speaker 20: do that. Agriculture is tightly tied to fossil fuels. Fossil fuels that the western nations are saying we should not have access to. Speaker 1: Around a third of the food produced in Africa rots before it ever reaches the mouths of consumers. To prevent this terrible waste, Africa needs plastic packaging, refrigerated lorries, and good roads. All are opposed by Western environmentalists. All come with industrial development. All rely on affordable fossil fuel energy. Diarrhea from drinking dirty water still kills 100 of thousands of African children. But clean water requires large industrial water purification plants and a modern water supply network. And this will come only with cheap energy. Speaker 20: I think it's pretty obvious that the West has got what it has because of fossil fuels. When people say Africa doesn't need fossil fuels, I wonder. I don't think they want what's best for us. They don't want us to develop, and that means we continue being starving. We continue being, poor. Most people don't know what climate change is. They don't care. They just they want food on their table. They want to beat poverty. They want to beat hunger. They need money to better their lives. They want to flourish. That's just it. Speaker 18: When they use the word sustainable development, they're talking about no development. Exactly. I mean, it's the point is is that, you know, to develop sustainably means not to use too much energy, not to use too much carbon, you know, net zero. The idea that you mustn't use too many resources, the fact you mustn't produce enough consumer goods because consumption is bad. So ultimately, you know, the idea of development is out the window. Speaker 9: The greens think the Africans should never use their resources the way the Europeans Speaker 1: or the Americans or the Speaker 9: Canadians or the Australians have used theirs. They are also in favor of punitive taxes, border taxes on any African country that wants to export their goods to Europe if they do use their resource. So that sums up the ethical ruthlessness and depravity of the green agenda. Speaker 1: The climate alarmists have a problem. Many countries in Africa and across Asia are simply ignoring the environmentalist demands of Western governments and international agencies. Communist China is estimated to be building an average of 2 new coal power plants a week. China now uses more coal than the rest of the world combined. Speaker 9: Which is one of the reasons why this whole climate agenda is falling apart because the rest of the world is not cutting emissions, is not moving to renewables. Speaker 1: In the west too, for many people, climate alarmism is wearing thin. Speaker 15: Ordinary people are not stupid. They have seen one ridiculous claim after another fail over and over. What this does is leave people with a profound and justified cynicism about what the scientific establishment says and about what the government says. Speaker 1: To fix the climate crisis, we're told we must give up our cars. Speaker 13: Cars is like fracking. Speaker 1: We must pay more for fuel, heating, clothes, food, fly less, limit where we go. This attack on mass travel, mass tourism, mass consumption holds little appeal to the masses. Speaker 17: People have started to realize it's going to cost them a lot of money to simply live the lives that they weren't leading, that they want to lead. And as soon as that started to happen, I could see people in the United Kingdom, who had previously been indifferent to environmentalism, suddenly think, how dare they do that, right? How dare they try and take away what we consider to be not luxuries, but necessities. Speaker 18: The whole policy of sustainability is about restraint. It's about restrictions, it's about doing less, and that obviously for most people is anathema to their everyday needs. Speaker 17: The fact that there is actually an ideological movement of people who think that cheap mass production, whether it's houses or anything else, is a problem. I mean, for god's sake, no wonder people become disdainful of the kind of middle class outlook of environmentalism. But that is literally what people say. How can we stop people buying cheap things in shops? Speaker 1: When climate protesters climbed onto an underground train in London's East End, they were not cheered on by working commuters. They were heard abuse, pelted, angrily dragged off the train, and received rough treatment on the platform. Speaker 19: If you were to go into a pub, frequented mainly by what the Americans call blue collar workers, you will find that being skeptical about climate change policy is not going to get you thrown out. Quite the contrary, some people will probably buy you a drink. They can tell that behind all the talk about climate, emergency climate crisis, what there actually is, is an animus and a hostility towards them, their lifestyle, their beliefs Speaker 1: Anti establishment politicians and movements are gaining support. Speaker 17: What they what they underestimated was the fury that this would meet, with ordinary people who just say you can't do this, so you suddenly get this new movement. Speaker 1: Many working people are not merely skeptical, but positively angry about the climate alarm and all that flows from it. There is a suspicion or perhaps realization that climate change is an invented scare, driven by self interest and snobbery, cynically promoted by a parasitic publicly funded establishment, hungry for ever more money and power, an assault on the freedom and prosperity of the rest of us.
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - March 1, 2024 at 6:17 PM
Saved - March 1, 2024 at 9:03 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
CPP has been involved in questionable deals, selling land to Bill Gates and a Manhattan office tower for $1.00. Concerns are raised about the extent of their shady investments and the potential impact on Albertans. There are doubts about the availability of funds and the value of their investments. Alberta is considering creating its own pension plan due to these concerns. The CPP program may have significant issues, including a potential bond portfolio collapse and being likened to a Ponzi scheme.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Yesterday I posted an article about how CPP had sold a large office tower in Manhattan for $1.00. Today we see 👇 that CPP was also accumulating farmland and then selling it to Bill Gates. What other shady crap is CPP up to, and how much of our money did they "invest" in China? As Albertans wait to hear from Ottawa how much we would be owed by CPP if we remove our funds to create an Alberta Pension Plan (as is specifically allowed by law) the evidence is accumulating that Albertans should act as quickly as possible to get our money out. Is CPP going to implode? Is it filled with dubious "investments" that are illiquid and hopelessly overvalued on the CPP balance sheet? What happens when CPP is forced to mark-to-market some of their trash investments and bonds? Is it already too late for Alberta to pull out, because CPP is so impaired and messed-up that the money isn't even available for Albertans to be paid what we are owed? 🤔

@G____322 - G🇨🇦

@PaulMitchell_AB Hey Paul, look at CPP's land deal with Gates. They sold all the land acquisitions to Gates in one shot in an almost secretive deal!!

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Here are screenshots of an article about CPP, Bill Gates and the sale of agricultural land 👇

@G____322 - G🇨🇦

@PaulMitchell_AB

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Here is yesterday's post about the Manhattan office tower that CPP sold for $1.00 👇

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

"Canada Pension Plan Investment Board has recently done three deals at deeply discounted prices... but it was its Manhattan office tower redevelopment project that shocked the industry: the Canadian asset manager sold its stake for just $1" Is this why Alberta is being massively stalled by the federal government who so far hasn't give us an answer as to how much Albertans would be owed by CPP if we created our own Alberta Pension Plan? Other than the growing commercial real estate debacle, does CPP have a large bond portfolio that has also blown-up as interest rates skyrocketed? I suspect they do. Of course, the CPP has always looked like somewhat of a Ponzi scheme, but now I wonder if hiding the sad reality can continue much longer. If Alberta can't get an answer or if Ottawa seriously low-balls Alberta, then Canadians from coast-to-coast can rest assured that the CPP program has massive problems. https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/who-could-be-next-largest-canadian-pension-fund-sells-manhattan-office-tower-1#comment-stream

"Who Could Be Next": Top Canadian Pension Fund Sells Manhattan Office Tower For $1, Sparking Firesale Panic ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero zerohedge.com
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - January 30, 2024 at 6:15 PM
Saved - January 30, 2024 at 10:50 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
A peer-reviewed study suggests that COVID-19 vaccines are gene therapies rushed through the regulatory process. Trials may have overestimated vaccine efficacy and underestimated adverse events, including death. Serious adverse events are well-documented despite claims otherwise. The study calls for a global moratorium on mRNA vaccines and their removal from childhood schedules.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking... Peer-reviewed study: 1. The COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ are reclassified gene therapies that were rushed through the regulatory process in a historically unprecedented manner. 2. Steps were taken in trials to overestimate vaccine efficacy. 3. The trials underestimated the adverse events, including death, despite evidence in the data. 4. Numbers of Serious Adverse Events in the trials and post-rollout reporting are well-documented, despite claims to the contrary. 5. The failure to appropriately test for safety and toxicity poses serious problems. 6. There are many different possible biological mechanisms that cause Adverse Events and vaccine ineffectiveness. Stop all the mRNA injections. Now! https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/scientists-global-moratorium-mrna-vaccines-removal-childhood-schedule/

Scientists Call for Global Moratorium on mRNA Vaccines, Immediate Removal From Childhood Schedule A review paper published last week in the journal Cureus is the first peer-reviewed paper to call for a global moratorium on the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. The authors say that reanalyzed data from the vaccine makers’ trials and high rates of serious post-injection injuries indicate the mRNA gene therapy vaccines should not have been authorized for use. childrenshealthdefense.org
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - January 1, 2024 at 9:18 PM
Saved - January 1, 2024 at 11:45 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Dr. William Makis alleges that former AHS CEO Dr. Verna Yiu murdered or harmed 2456 Alberta cancer patients and claims a $400,000 bribe was authorized by former Premier Rachel Notley. Makis further accuses various officials and leaders in Alberta of being involved in the scandal. Makis plans to expose all the details in 2024. The allegation against Yiu's appointment as Vice President of the University of Alberta is also raised.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking: Dr. William Makis alleges he refused a $400,000 bribe to cover-up that former AHS CEO Dr. Verna Yiu "murdered or inflicted bodily harm on 2456 Alberta cancer patients". Makis further claims the bribe "was authorized by" former Alberta NDP Premier Rachel Notley. Wow. https://t.co/6kRGckNg9k

@MakisMD - William Makis MD

This is defamation @elonmusk. @CommunityNotes are now engaging in defamation. For any lawyer interested - this is a easy multi-million dollar case. Let me address this fraudulent "Community Note". I have never harassed anyone in my life, and my license was not "lost in 2015". In 2015, former Alberta Health Services CEO Dr.Verna Yiu (@DrYiu_verna) conspired to illegally shut down my Cancer Treatment Program in Edmonton, Alberta (Cross Cancer Institute) which was curing end stage Neuroendocrine Cancer in 90% of patients. It was Clinical Trial NCT01876771 and was the largest of its kind in North America. The illegal sabotage of this Clinical Trial would inflict bodily harm or death on more than 2456 Alberta Cancer patients. In 2017, AHS CEO @DrYiu_Verna offered me a $400,000 bribe, in return for signing a non-disclosure agreement about the sabotage of my cancer program and murder of my cancer patients. I refused the bribe. Within 6 hours of my refusal, College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta @CPSA_CA took my medical license #023044 hostage and started threatening my family & my children. They threatened & extorted my family for 1.5 years, claiming they would destroy my professional reputation and my medical career if I didn't sign that deal with Alberta Health Services. They claimed: "we will punish your family financially". I reported these threats to @edmontonpolice Chief Rod Knecht who opened an EPS Criminal Investigation File #18-132308, but it was covered up by EPS Detective Kevin Schindeler Reg#2049 who protected CPSA and AHS Officials. After I refused CPSA's threats to settle with AHS, they cancelled my medical license on Feb.12, 2019 for "non-payment" of College fees, which included a $75,000 "administrative penalty" they were extorting my family with, to get me to sign the non-disclosure agreement with AHS. This license cancellation is still recorded on the College website. Over the period 2015-2022, Alberta Health Services CEO @DrYiu_Verna murdered or inflicted bodily harm on 2456 Alberta cancer patients, with many more dying because they couldn't access life saving treatments in the Clinical Trial after it collapsed in 2017. It is the greatest healthcare scandal in Alberta history, and probably Canadian history. This scandal involves many politicians (including @RachelNotley & @jkenney who provided funding to AHS in the millions of dollars to cover up these patient murders), and it involves many other prominent leaders in Alberta. They murdered or inflicted bodily harm on 2456 Alberta cancer patients. And I have over 50,000 pages of documents to prove it. Including names. I will be exposing all the details of this scandal in 2024, which involves many Alberta Judges as well, each of whom I will name, and the exact role they played in this scandal. I have never shown the $400,000 Alberta Health Services bribe before, but here it is. It was authorized by former Alberta Premier @RachelNotley & her Alberta Ministry of Health, led by Sarah Hoffman in 2017. It has been under a total Alberta media blackout for 6 years now. No one will dare report on it. @DrYiu_Verna, after murdering or inflicting bodily harm on 2456 Alberta cancer patients, was recently appointed Vice President of University of Alberta @UAlberta, as announced by President @BFlanaganUofA who is deeply involved in this AHS scandal personally. Who else is involved? Entire leadership of Alberta Health Services Entire leadership of @CPSA_CA Several officials of @AlbertaDoctors Law Society of Alberta @LawSocietyofAB A number of top Alberta Law Firms including Bennett Jones, Gowling WLG, Field Law LLP, Shores Jardine LLP, CMPA, etc. A number of prominent Alberta Judges including Chief Justices at both Court of King's Bench and Court of Appeal who have been committing fraud in Court for 5 years now, on behalf of AHS and CPSA, to help them cover up these patient murders. Much more to come in 2024. This is only the beginning of what I will expose. @ABDanielleSmith @AdrianaLagrange @GoAHealth @YourAlberta @CBCEdmonton @ctvedmonton @EdmontonJournal @SunRickBell @CityNewsYEG @GlobalEdmonton #cdnpoli #ableg #abhealth

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

I would ask Rachel Notley about this, but she has me and many others blocked. Did the former NDP government of Alberta collude to cover-up murders by Alberta Health Services and its former CEO Verna Yiu? Will this allegation get proper press coverage from the pro-NDP media? 🤔

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Dr. Makis: "@DrYiu_Verna, after murdering or inflicting bodily harm on 2456 Alberta cancer patients, was recently appointed Vice President of University of Alberta @UAlberta" Would @UAlberta care to comment on this serious allegation against their newly appointed Vice President?

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - December 7, 2023 at 9:25 PM
Saved - December 8, 2023 at 8:47 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking… Alberta Premier Danielle Smith: “You do not come to an international conference and then drop 2 unilateral policies in our jurisdiction…. The attitude that Minister Guilbeault has taken towards our province is absolutely unacceptable…. He is a menace.” Yep! 🤠👍 https://t.co/3xqyVFkVWb

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker criticizes the federal government's production cap on Alberta's oil and gas sector, calling it an intentional attack on the economy. They argue that Alberta has the exclusive jurisdiction to develop and manage its resources. They express concern about the impact on investments and social programs. The speaker also criticizes the Minister of Environment and Climate Change for disregarding their province's input and unilaterally announcing policies. They hope for collaborative work with ministers who are willing. The speaker suggests that the Prime Minister should replace the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, whom they consider a menace to national unity and common ground.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Today's announced de facto production cap on on Alberta's oil and gas sector amounts to an intentional attack by the federal government on the economy of Alberta and the financial well-being of millions of Albertans and Canadians. Alberta owns our resources. And under the constitution, we have the exclusive jurisdiction to develop them and to manage them. With his pronouncement today singling out the oil and gas sector alone for punitive federal treatment, Justin Trudeau and his eco extremist minister of the environment and climate change, Stephen Giebeau, are risking 100 of 1,000,000,000 of dollars in investment in Alberta's and Canada's economy and core social programs. You do not come to an international conference and then drop Two unilateral policies in our jurisdiction out of the blue without getting our agreement. That is what they essentially did this past where he gets unacceptable and it's unprofessional. The attitude that that minister Ghebeau has taken towards our province is absolutely unacceptable. And in fact, He has so he has arrogantly said that whatever conversations that we've had at this table are irrelevant. And he's demonstrated that by coming here, unilaterally announcing 2 policies and accepting, expecting us to just suck it up. So absolutely, we want to work collaboratively with those ministers who want to work with us. I quite frankly hope that Justin Trudeau replaces this minister. He's a menace. He's a menace to us. He's a menace to national unity. He is clearly destructive in trying to to get to some common ground, and that is on him. It's not on us.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking… Trudeau Liberals declare war on Alberta’s economy by announcing an aggressive oil and gas emissions cap that will likely cost Alberta hundreds of billions of dollars in lost investments. Liberal Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson says the cap level will be 35-38% below 2019 levels in 2030. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith responded that “our province is simply done with what amounts to a steady stream of economic sanctions and punitive measures thrown upon our citizens and businesses to intentionally damage their livelihoods.” Alberta has promised to respond with a “constitutional shield” to protect against this and other hostile actions by Ottawa. What are your thoughts? I personally think this is pushing Alberta straight toward pursuing independence.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Canada is proposing to set the cap level for emissions at 35% to 38% below 2019 levels by 2030. This is crucial for Canada to achieve its target of reducing emissions by 40% to 45% across the economy by 2030.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We are proposing to set the cap level at 35% to 38%, below 2019 levels in 2030. This is an important part of Canada achieving its goal of a 40% to 45% reduction across the economy by 2030
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - December 7, 2023 at 4:58 PM
Saved - December 7, 2023 at 10:51 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Alberta's Premier, Danielle Smith, vows to create a constitutional shield against Ottawa's de facto production cap on the province's oil and gas sector. She sees this as an intentional attack risking billions of dollars in investments. Smith argues that such measures undermine national unity and impose economic sanctions on Albertans. She calls for an end to the abusive relationship with Ottawa.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking... Alberta to "develop a constitutional shield" against Ottawa. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith: Ottawa's "de facto production cap on Alberta’s oil and gas sector amounts to an intentional attack.... risking hundreds of billions of dollars of investments." 1 of 2

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Premier Smith: "This proposed cap also undermines the unity of our country. Albertans will not tolerate it. Our province is simply done with what amounts to a steady stream of economic sanctions and punitive measures thrown upon our citizens and businesses to intentionally damage their livelihoods and the economic engine that disproportionally powers our national economy and the programs that Canadians rely on." Let's stop messing around. Alberta is in an abusive relationship with Ottawa, and the abuse must stop. Now. https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?xID=89438B171E888-D02B-9F79-00A589DAF2E96A07

Federal emissions cap: Joint statement Premier Danielle Smith and Environment and Protected Areas Minister Rebecca Schulz issued the following statement in response to the federal government’s oil and gas sector greenhouse gas emissions cap, announced Dec. 7: alberta.ca
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - December 7, 2023 at 6:40 PM
Saved - December 7, 2023 at 7:47 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Trudeau's Liberals have declared war on Alberta's economy with an aggressive oil and gas emissions cap. This move could cost the province billions in lost investments. Alberta's Premier, Danielle Smith, is fed up with the constant economic sanctions and punitive measures imposed by Ottawa. In response, Alberta plans to use a "constitutional shield" to protect against hostile actions. This could potentially push Alberta towards pursuing independence.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking… Trudeau Liberals declare war on Alberta’s economy by announcing an aggressive oil and gas emissions cap that will likely cost Alberta hundreds of billions of dollars in lost investments. Liberal Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson says the cap level will be 35-38% below 2019 levels in 2030. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith responded that “our province is simply done with what amounts to a steady stream of economic sanctions and punitive measures thrown upon our citizens and businesses to intentionally damage their livelihoods.” Alberta has promised to respond with a “constitutional shield” to protect against this and other hostile actions by Ottawa. What are your thoughts? I personally think this is pushing Alberta straight toward pursuing independence.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Canada is proposing to set the cap level for emissions at 35% to 38% below 2019 levels by 2030. This is crucial for Canada to achieve its goal of reducing emissions by 40% to 45% across the economy by 2030.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We are proposing to set the cap level at 35% to 38%, below 2019 levels in 2030. This is an important part of Canada achieving its goal of a 40% to 45% reduction across the economy by 2030
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - December 6, 2023 at 6:29 PM
Saved - December 6, 2023 at 7:18 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

"A doctor in B.C. has lost an appeal that would have allowed her to keep her hospital privileges despite not taking the COVID-19 vaccine." BC has a desperate shortage of doctors, but they still won't allow staff who refuse the harmful jab. Insanity. https://www.theepochtimes.com/world/bc-doctor-loses-appeal-to-retain-hospital-privileges-lost-over-refusal-of-covid-19-vaccine-5541809

BC Doctor Loses Appeal to Retain Hospital Privileges Lost Over Refusal of COVID-19 Vaccine The appeal board says although Dr. Theresa Szezepaniak has the right to refuse the shot, it doesn’t mean she is 'immune from the consequences of her decision.' theepochtimes.com
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - December 5, 2023 at 6:27 PM
Saved - December 5, 2023 at 7:09 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

According to Liberal Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, importing millions of migrants in the middle of the worst housing crisis in Canadian history is “a great thing” and “a huge advantage.” How delusional can Freeland be? Does she seriously think people will believe her? https://t.co/9TN9J2Vq92

Video Transcript AI Summary
As Canada's finance minister, I believe our country has a significant advantage due to our growth. Unlike other wealthy nations, we don't face the same demographic challenge because we are open to immigration. This sets us apart and is a positive aspect for Canada.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: As finance minister, I see as a huge advantage for Canada. We're a growing country. That's a good thing. Every other wealthy industrialized nation in the world, when they look at their economy, one of the first problems they see is a demographic challenge. Because Canada is one of the few countries that is open to immigration, that is less of a challenge for us. That's a great thing.
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - December 1, 2023 at 4:59 PM
Saved - December 1, 2023 at 9:42 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith plans to assert the province's jurisdiction and advance its interests against the Trudeau Liberals. Smith emphasizes that Alberta is an equal level of government and will not tolerate unlawful legislation that violates the Constitution. Instead of being forced into lengthy court battles, Alberta aims to turn the tables and hold the Trudeau government accountable. This strategy aims to prevent economic uncertainty and ensure that victories in court are acknowledged.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is going “turn the tables” on the Trudeau Liberals. Smith: “The Constitution matters. We are not a lower level of government…. We are an equal level of government…. We’re going to continue advance our interests. We’re going to continue to assert our areas of jurisdiction, and if all of these issues end up in the courts, it’ll be them taking us to court for a change…. They pass unlawful legislation… because it violates the Constitution, which is the highest law in the land. Then they force us to go to court for years, creating all the economic uncertainty… and then we win and they act like it didn’t happen. Well, we’re not going to let that happen this time. We’re turning the tables on them.” Good strategy. 👍

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker emphasizes the importance of the constitution and clarifies that provinces are equal to the federal government, not subordinate. They express the need for collaboration in areas of overlap and mention their efforts to work together. The speaker criticizes the federal government for viewing their legislation as automatically legal and disregarding the court's perspective. They assert their intention to protect their jurisdiction and if necessary, take the federal government to court. The speaker highlights the economic uncertainty caused by these legal battles and vows not to let it happen again. They conclude by stating their determination to turn the tables on the federal government.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The constitution matters. We are not a lower level of government as one journalist asked me this week. We are an equal level of government. They have certain powers. We have certain powers. And in the areas where we overlap, we've got to work together. I've I've been asking to work together right from the the moment I got elected leader when in my very first conversation with prime minister. But I think they're caught in this paradigm where they do look at the provinces as a subordinate level of government. They do think that just because they've passed something in the parliament, that it's legal and they can do whatever they want. And I'm telling you that that's not how the court sees it. So we're gonna continue to advance our interests. We're gonna continue to assert our areas of jurisdiction. And if all of these issues end up in the courts, it'll be them taking us to court for a Because what I've observed about they what they do is they pass unlawful legislation, unlawful being that, because it's violates the constitution, which is the highest law on the land, then they force us to go to court for years, creating all the economic uncertainty, all of the investment that plays. And then we win, and they act like it didn't happen. Well, we're not gonna let that happen this time. We're turning the tables on
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 29, 2023 at 5:30 PM
Saved - December 1, 2023 at 2:20 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The Canadian government, under the Liberals, is facing accusations of corruption and the normalization of spying by government agencies. Thirteen federal departments and agencies are reportedly using spyware tools to recover and analyze data from devices, including encrypted and password-protected information. This includes text messages, contacts, photos, travel history, cloud-based data, internet search history, deleted content, and social media activity. Recent polls show a decline in support for the Trudeau Liberals, with only 22% support, now on par with the NDP. Critics argue that this government is the worst and most authoritarian in Canadian history. Source: CBC News.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

The Liberals government is the most corrupt in Canadian history, and now we learn they have also normalized spying by government agencies. "Spyware normally associated with the intelligence world is being used by 13 federal departments and agencies.... The tools in question can be used to recover and analyze data found on computers, tablets and mobile phones, including information that has been encrypted and password-protected. This can include text messages, contacts, photos and travel history. Certain software can also be used to access a user's cloud-based data, reveal their internet search history, deleted content and social media activity." In new polls the pathetic Trudeau Liberals have dropped to 22% support and are now even with the NDP. They deserve to keep dropping. No sane and informed person should support the worst and most authoritarian government we have ever had. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/spyware-federal-canada-government-department-privacy-1.7041255

Tools capable of extracting personal data from phones being used by 13 federal departments, documents show | CBC News Tools capable of extracting personal data from phones or computers are being used by 13 federal departments and agencies, according to contracts obtained under access to information legislation and shared with Radio-Canada.  cbc.ca
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 30, 2023 at 9:16 PM
Saved - December 1, 2023 at 12:21 AM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking… Unlike the disastrous Liberal budget deficits that are projected out to infinity, Alberta’s economic report shows it is “now forecasting a surplus of $5.5 billion for the current fiscal year, which is a 3.2 billion dollar increase from our forecast in budget 2023.” 👍 https://t.co/1t31dM6IMF

Video Transcript AI Summary
Today's midyear economic report reveals that Alberta's economy is resilient and our finances are on track. We are forecasting a surplus of $5.5 billion for this fiscal year, which is a $3.2 billion increase from our previous forecast. We are using our current strength to benefit Alberta's future.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Today's midyear economic report shows that we're on the right path with our fiscal priorities. Alberta's economy is resilient, and our finances are on track. We continue to use our strength today to the benefit of Alberta's tomorrow. We're now forecasting a surplus of 5,500,000,000 for the current fiscal year, which is a $3,200,000,000 increase from our forecast to budget 2023. We're projecting that increase even as expense
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 27, 2023 at 3:32 AM
Saved - November 27, 2023 at 4:37 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Alberta is ready to rumble… As soon as tomorrow, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s government will invoke the Sovereignty Act for the first time to declare Liberal Climate Fraud Minister Steven Guilbeault’s electricity regulations unenforceable in Alberta. Let’s go. 🤠🍿 https://t.co/IvA4HJR4bh

Video Transcript AI Summary
Legislating and regulating electricity falls solely under provincial jurisdiction according to our constitution. Overstepping legal boundaries cannot be justified by good intentions. The proposed federal electricity regulations are highly affordable but come with significant risks of unreliability and unconstitutionality.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Legislating and regulating the development of electricity is exclusively a provincial responsibility under our constitution. And no good intentions can make up for overstepping the limits of the law. The federal electricity regulations will create a system that is massively Affordable, dangerously unreliable, and utterly unconstitutional.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

"The Danielle Smith government intends to put its Sovereignty Act into action next week to shield Alberta power companies from the proposed federal clean electricity regulations" Sounds great. I look forward to Liberal Climate Fraud Minister Steven Guilbeault's tantrum. 😆 https://t.co/qHEW9Ocw0W

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 24, 2023 at 8:36 PM
Saved - November 25, 2023 at 11:45 AM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

"Alberta’s 44 wind farms operated at 0.3% capacity on Wednesday" If we actually needed to depend on "renewables" to supply us power in the winter, we would all freeze to death. On the other hand, oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear actually work. https://tnc.news/2023/11/24/albertas-44-wind-farms-capacity/

Alberta’s 44 wind farms operated at 0.3% capacity on Wednesday An analysis of wind power generation in Alberta found that despite the province’s 44 wind farms, they managed to only produce 0.3% of their total capacity on Wednesday night. tnc.news
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 15, 2023 at 11:27 PM
Saved - November 23, 2023 at 2:55 AM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

The Liberal government signed an agreement with Pfizer acknowledging "that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and there my be adverse effect of the vaccine that are not currently known" and then shoved it down Canadians' throats. Criminal. https://t.co/8n76S1bCFX

@canindependent - The Canadian Independent

LOOK: Access to Information Request Reveals Pfizer's COVID-19 Vaccine Contract with Canada. Within the contract dated October 26, 2020, on page 18, it states that the "Purchaser further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known. Furthermore, to the extent applicable, the Purchaser acknowledges that the Product shall not be serialized." You can review the contract at the link below. Give the link 10-15 seconds to load. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DGIxi2gS95nt5F1fZdCnKuaMSC_Xlc-h/view?usp=sharing

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 22, 2023 at 11:39 PM
Saved - November 22, 2023 at 11:53 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Here is the footage from the US Customs and Border Protection 👇 https://t.co/NH73CSSiR0

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 16, 2023 at 8:30 PM
Saved - November 17, 2023 at 1:04 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

After cutting the Canadian military… As millions of Canadians struggle to pay bills and buy food… As the housing and high-rent crisis rages across Canada… Liberal Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland announces that Ottawa is spending $4.2 billion on refugees. Thoughts? 🤔 https://t.co/MiIcZsW89i

Video Transcript AI Summary
The federal government is investing over $4.2 billion this year to support refugees and asylum seekers.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The federal government this year is investing more than 4,000,000,000, 4,200,000,000 dollars in supporting refugees and asylum seekers.
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 15, 2023 at 6:16 PM
Saved - November 16, 2023 at 2:02 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking… NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh: “The Netanyahu government is an extremist government. This is an extremist himself with very dangerous policies — dangerous to democracy, dangerous for the people of Israel.” Whoa! 😳 The comments section is open. Thoughts? https://t.co/m2GCpLBuet

Video Transcript AI Summary
The Netanyahu government is considered extremist, with dangerous policies that pose a threat to democracy and the people of Israel.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The Netanyahu government is an extremist government. This is this is an extremist himself with with very dangerous policies, dangerous to democracy, dangerous to the people of Israel.
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 15, 2023 at 4:43 PM
Saved - November 15, 2023 at 7:12 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

"An estimated 700 Iranian regime agents covertly operating in Canada" Who thinks the Trudeau Liberal government knew these Iranian regime agents have been operating in Canada and did nothing? 🙋‍♂️ https://tnc.news/2023/11/15/iranian-agents-operating-in-canada/

An estimated 700 Iranian regime agents covertly operating in Canada Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre has demanded an immediate response to the recent discovery that Iranian regime agents are operating within Canada and interfering with national affairs.  tnc.news
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 9, 2023 at 7:59 PM
Saved - November 10, 2023 at 12:04 AM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Is Liberal Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland on drugs? If not, what the heck is going on with her? 🤔 https://t.co/oBwGuUf36c

Video Transcript AI Summary
Minister Freeland and the speaker discussed shared priorities between the federal and provincial governments. The speaker emphasized the importance of working together to address issues such as healthcare, affordability, and homelessness. They highlighted healthcare and affordability as top priorities. The speaker also mentioned that a clean and healthy environment is crucial for economic growth.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Minister Freeland discussed or mentioned the shared priorities that the 2 governments have. I'm wondering would you describe a carbon tax exemption on natural gas for Manitoba as one of your priorities? Speaker 1: I think our priority today is to share the news with Manitobans that your federal government, your provincial government are working together to put people to work. I think Manitobans in every region want to see the people that they send to elected office work together To improve things like health care, like making life more affordable, like tackling the humanitarian crisis that is homelessness, And that is no longer just confined to downtown Winnipeg, but actually permeates the entirety of our province. And so you will know from the recent election that our top priority is always healthcare And making life more affordable. And I think that, the other big thing that we've articulated over our Recent campaign and time in office is that the economic horse pulls the social carton. And I think where the priorities align for the government Of Canada and the government of Manitoba is that, yes, the economic horse pulls the social cart, but a clean, safe, healthy environment Is the path on which that economic horse walks?
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 7, 2023 at 7:36 PM
Saved - November 7, 2023 at 11:34 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Trudeau's government faces backlash as provincial premiers aim to pass laws banning their unconstitutional interference. Chrystia Freeland's discomfort reveals Ottawa's reluctance to relinquish their illegal meddling activities.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Watch Chrystia Freeland squirm. 😂 The Trudeau Libs have been breaking the Constitution and wrongly interfering in Provincial jurisdictions. Now the Premiers all want to pass laws to ban this unconstitutional federal behaviour. Freeland is visibly caught off guard by this. 😆👍 Of course, she gives a non-answer to deflect, but it’s clear that Ottawa doesn’t want to give up their illegal meddling activities.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Yesterday's premiers meeting concluded with a proposal to pass legislation nationwide, preventing the federal government from directly funding municipalities. This raises questions about how we reached this point. If the legislation is enacted, the federal government may consider dealing with provinces individually instead of municipalities, including initiatives like the National Housing Accelerator Fund. It would be beneficial for provinces to support municipalities in this scenario.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In the final communicate, from yesterday's premiers meeting, they came together and said that they would like to enact legislation across the country that would prevent the federal government from giving money directly to the municipalities. So my question is, how has it gotten to this point? And if that legislation was passed in provinces across the country, would the federal government be willing to deal, with things like the National Housing Accelerator Fund with each province individually instead of with municipalities. I think that It would be great for provinces to support municipalities
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - November 1, 2023 at 6:05 PM
Saved - November 3, 2023 at 4:13 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Breaking: major Liberal scandal… Opposition Conservatives have obtained leaked secret recordings concerning a billion dollar Liberal “green” slush-fund that was used to funnel “free money” to “well connected Liberals.” Will this take down the corrupt Trudeau Liberals? https://t.co/jPy0M1bQvm

Video Transcript AI Summary
A top bureaucrat in the Liberal government was secretly recorded admitting that a green fund was essentially giving away free money. He compared it to the sponsorship scandal that affected John Krechan's liberal government in the 2000s, calling it a level of giveaway similar to that scandal. Essentially, the green fund was a way to benefit well-connected Liberals, with a whopping $1 billion fund.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Secret recordings from, a top bureaucrat in the Liberal government admit that a green fund was giving out, quote, free money. Get this. I'm gonna quote from the recording. It was free money, he said, before making an analogy with the controversy that affected John Krechan's liberal government in the 2000s, that is almost sponsor sponsorship scandal level giveaway. Wow. So when they said green fund, what they meant is putting green in the pockets of well connected Liberals, a $1,000,000,000 fund
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - October 24, 2023 at 8:05 PM
Saved - October 30, 2023 at 5:16 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Alberta is a “distinct society” and from this day forward the federal government should refer to us as “The Alberta Nation”. It’s what they do for Quebec when they’re speaking in French and buttering them up, so why not Alberta, Saskatchewan and BC? Fair is fair, right? https://t.co/fusDkZ4PD0

Video Transcript AI Summary
We have a strong partnership with the Quebec government, working closely to meet the needs of Quebecers. We take pride in our investments in Quebec, which serve the interests of the Quebec nation.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We have an excellent relationship with the government of Quebec. We are working very closely with them to fulfill the interests of Quebecers, and we are very proud of that. And we are Proud of the investments that we've made in Quebec. They are in the interest of the Quebec nation
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - October 20, 2023 at 7:08 PM
Saved - October 21, 2023 at 3:16 AM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

Lest we forget! https://t.co/P9MZIzmwHA

Video Transcript AI Summary
Actions speak louder than words. If you choose not to get vaccinated, that's your decision. However, you shouldn't be allowed to travel with vaccinated individuals and put them in danger. We must stand firm in the choices we make.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Speaker, talk is cheap, but actions speak louder Speaker 1: than words. You know what? If you don't wanna get vaccinated, that's your choice. But don't think you can get on a plane or a train besides vaccinated people and put them at risk. We need to be strong in the decisions we're taking.
PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - October 20, 2023 at 3:13 AM
Saved - October 20, 2023 at 2:40 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Health Canada has confirmed the presence of Simian Virus 40 (SV40) DNA in the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, which was not disclosed by the manufacturer. SV40, a cancer-causing virus, was previously removed from polio vaccines. Dr. Janci Lindsay, director of toxicology, warns that these DNA sequences could contribute to cancer. The intentional hiding of this information raises concerns. Criminal prosecutions should be considered. People were deceived, coerced, and discriminated against, undermining the "safe and effective" narrative. No amnesty should be granted.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

"Health Canada has confirmed the presence of a Simian Virus 40 (SV40) DNA sequence in the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, which the manufacturer had not previously disclosed" "The polyomavirus Simian Virus 40, an oncogenic DNA virus, was previously removed from polio vaccines due to concerns about a link to cancers." "Dr. Janci Lindsay, the director of toxicology and molecular biology for Toxicology Support Services, said plasmid DNA sequences, such as the SV40 enhancer, could be oncogenic and contribute to causing cancers." "They hid them. So it's not just the fact that they're there, it's the fact that they were purposefully hidden from the regulators" Full article is here 👇 https://theepochtimes.com/world/exclusive-health-canada-confirms-undisclosed-presence-of-dna-sequence-in-pfizer-shot-5513277

EXCLUSIVE: Health Canada Confirms Undisclosed Presence of DNA Sequence in Pfizer Shot The health regulator says Pfizer did not disclose the presence of the Simian Virus 40 (SV40) DNA sequence in its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine at the time of filing. theepochtimes.com

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

So, when do the criminal prosecutions begin? People were lied to, they were coerced, they were discriminated against and now it turn out that the whole "safe and effective" narrative was utter bullshit. No amnesty.

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

https://x.com/Matt_HorwoodET/status/1715034729429238208?s=20

@Matt_HorwoodET - Matthew Horwood

For those of you asking for a source for the SV40 sequence claim, Health Canada emailed us this response to our question on July 28, 2023.

PaulMitchell_AB
Posted - June 7, 2023 at 8:51 AM
Saved - June 8, 2023 at 7:29 PM

@PaulMitchell_AB - Paul Mitchell

By 2050 the WEF wants to see "a reduction of the number of cars by over 75%". They don't want us peasants being mobile, or we might choose to leave their proposed 15-minute surveillance and control cities. Abolish the WEF! https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/wef-document-calls-for-limiting-private-car-use-drastic-reduction-in-the-number-of-cars-by-2050/?utm_source=top_news&utm_campaign=usa

WEF document calls for limiting 'private car use,' drastic reduction in the number of cars by 2050 - LifeSite The World Economic Forum is urging cities to 'contain growth of private car use' in a new white paper published with Visa. lifesitenews.com
View Full Interactive Feed