reSee.it - Related Video Feed

There's a concerning situation with dead bees everywhere. They were thriving until heavy spraying occurred two days ago. The spraying involved a thick, bluish-gray fog that felt oppressive, similar to being in a fire. Now, I’m finding dead honeybees, and it's alarming. People need to speak up and take action against this. I feel desperate about the situation and don't want to be a part of this ongoing issue.

Speaker 0 describes a situation in New Zealand where they have been instructed to burn a perfectly healthy, strong beehive. The hives are thriving, with new queen cells forming, indicating strong colony health. Despite this, there is a directive to burn the healthy hives because Marco Gonzalez from MPI has told them that the site is abandoned. The speaker contends that Gonzalez “just wants the bee site, boom, to the south,” and asserts there is no disease present, pointing to the visibly healthy colonies. The speaker emphasizes that the hives are perfectly strong and disease-free, noting that last week staff told them to start bringing boxes to the site. They received an email from Marco Gonzalez instructing them to burn the bee hives because they were banned. The speaker insists on the observed health of the hives, showing a “brand new treatment” and stating that it is a perfectly healthy treatment. They argue that, for beekeepers, this treatment is recognized as perfectly healthy, and that the site had been recently worked—“very recently, I mean weeks ago.” The speaker also mentions that an AP2 officer had stated that this site is a perfectly healthy site and it’s great, ready for splitting. Throughout, the speaker repeatedly points to the apparent contradiction between the instruction to burn healthy hives and the evidence of robust health, absence of disease, recent treatment, and professional assessment indicating the site was suitable for splitting. They urge the listener to observe the healthy state of the hives, highlighting the new queen development and the strong, disease-free condition as key indicators of the hives’ vitality.

Our air quality is terrible. Even after rain, fibers fall from the sky. The majority of what we see is not bugs, just particles in the air. We need to address this issue and speak up. It's hard to believe we're still alive.

Speaker 0 describes a Pala Verde plant and its flowers, explaining that the flowers produce pollen. They point out that there are “tons” of bees around them while they are near the plant, and they say you can hear the bees. Speaker 0 presents this scene as an indication of the pollen’s abundance and activity around the plant. Speaker 0 then claims that the pollen can be eaten and that doing so benefits multiple parts of the body. They state that eating the pollen benefits the prostate, benefits the ovaries, and provides energy. They add that it benefits “every part of the body,” describing pollen as an all-encompassing food source. Speaker 0 refers to pollen as “the ultimate superfood,” framing it as uniquely powerful due to what it provides to the body. They also describe the yearly availability of pollen, stating that “nature gives it to you for free every single year.” Speaker 0 emphasizes that all someone has to do is “look for it” to find it, implying that the resource is reliably present and accessible each year. Speaker 0 connects their description of pollen with a further claim about vaccines. They say, “you can understand why they put pollen in vaccines,” and they explain that this is allegedly done so that people “get allergic to the pollen.” They then state a consequence of that alleged sensitization: when a person later goes to eat the pollen, they will have an adverse reaction. Speaker 0 characterizes this chain of events as “crazy,” positioning the explanation as surprising or striking in the way pollen is treated both in nature and in relation to vaccines. Overall, the transcript centers on pollen from Pala Verde flowers—its association with many bees, its claimed health benefits across the body, its described free and yearly availability, and a claim linking pollen to allergic responses and adverse reactions after eating it.

Speaker 0 presents several claims about aluminum exposure and environmental contamination. First, they state that peer‑reviewed studies show bees have aluminum levels in their systems that are 70 times higher than what is necessary to cause Alzheimer's or dementia in humans, and they find this alarming given the health implications for bees. They emphasize that this is “70 times more” and frame it as a concern for survival. They challenge the idea that aluminum presence is normal because it is a very abundant element. They assert that aluminum is not found in the environment in free form; it must be mined, refined, and sprayed in order to be scattered widely in the environment. They claim this process is exactly what is happening, and that the issue affects more than just bees: “Every single one of us is being contaminated.” They argue that these materials are bioavailable and accumulate in human systems. They insist that this is a fact regardless of belief, and assert that lab tests prove it. They assert there will be no hiding this issue much longer and touch on the chemical signature found in rain tests. They claim this signature matches coal fly ash, a substance the EPA has said is not harmful. They state that the EPA has been trying to get rid of coal fly ash and that it seems to serve purposes in geoengineering, with evidence increasingly indicating that toxic coal fly ash may be one of the base materials used for spraying. They suggest this provides “plausible deniability.” Overall, Speaker 0 links aluminum exposure in bees to greater human contamination, arguing that environmental aluminum results from a deliberate process of mining, refining, and spraying, rather than natural occurrence. They point to lab tests as proof and to rain-chemical signatures that match coal fly ash as part of the evidence. They further claim the EPA has downplayed the harm of coal fly ash, yet the data suggest it may be employed in geoengineering, which would allow for plausible deniability.

The speaker explains that since the switch from sodium vapor lights in 2020 to LEDs in 2021, pollen has increased dramatically in Arizona. They attribute this rise to the lighting change, arguing that the warm light from the old sodium vapor lamps created female plants, whereas the LEDs have now caused plants to be male, resulting in “pollen galore” even in hot 102-degree weather. The speaker cites Doctor John Ott as the source of the idea that certain lights influence plants to become female or male. If someone is experiencing pollen issues around their house, the speaker asserts, they should avoid LEDs and instead use incandescent lighting. The speaker repeats the claim and emphasizes that the problem is due to the lighting change. They assert that “they switched all the lights” and that this is the cause of the pollen problem, labeling those affected as “Muppets.” They reference Doctor John Ott as someone whose work supports the notion that lighting can determine plant gender, and they encourage viewers to look into Ott’s work to verify this claim. In closing, the speaker reiterates the main point: pollen galore in Arizona is linked to the transition from sodium vapor to LED lighting. They advocate using incandescent lighting as a remedy and point listeners to a source (10001000bulbs.com) to find incandescent bulbs. The overall message centers on a claimed causal link between the lighting type and plant gender expression, which the speaker ties to a broader pollen issue, urging avoidance of LEDs in favor of incandescent options. Throughout, they express frustration with what they view as a misunderstanding of the pollen problem and label the situation as a consequence of the lighting switch.

Food prices are rising due to climate change, leading to a push for insect-based diets to combat this. Concerns are raised about government control over agriculture, with small farms being shut down. The fear of a food crisis looms, with a call to fight for the future of farming and food security.

I've noticed a lack of insects lately, especially bees and butterflies. Normally, they're all over the place, but this year, they're scarce. The weather has been strange, affecting grass growth and forcing me to use silage. I wonder if it's due to chemicals in the atmosphere or some other reason. It's worrying because it will impact everyone. Have you noticed this too? Let me know your thoughts.

The transcript discusses alarming trends around bees and beehives, starting with symbolic and direct threats and moving through claims about bee health and public perception. - The speaker notes beehives are being set on fire in New Zealand, describing this as part of a broader pattern that began with ostriches in Canada and has now affected healthy beehives in New Zealand. - An Einstein quote is invoked about bees: “all the bees died off, that within four years life would no longer exist on the earth,” presented as a claimed warning, though the context is not elaborated. - The speaker pivots to honey, praising its purported benefits and longevity, calling honey a “miracle substance” with antibacterial qualities that can last for thousands of years and has been used for many things over thousands of years. - The discussion then touches on claims that the honeybee die-off is related to beehive burning and to “frequency” harming bees, referencing “TikTok” as a source of such claims and stating that this is “proven.” - The speaker challenges the assertion that bee populations are increasing, distinguishing between wild populations and managed beehives, and presents a chart showing a massive decline in hive populations—“literally been cut in half over twenty, thirty years.” - It is claimed that despite official statements to the contrary, AI and researchers disagree: AI is said to deem the claims about population stability as false, and researchers at Washington State are projected to lose 60 to 70 percent of commercial honeybee colonies this year. - The message ends by encouraging viewers to catch the show for more information on what’s going on, labeling the topic as a current health and agricultural concern. Overall, the transcript juxtaposes dramatic events affecting beehives (arson in New Zealand, potential factors like frequency) with conflicting claims about bee population trends, emphasizes a significant projected decline by researchers, and ties in anecdotes about honey’s value and public discourse on the topic.

The speaker contrasts GMO sweet corn from the store with heirloom corn, noting the sunflowers turning away from the sun. They claim aluminum levels in the soil are now five to ten times higher than last year. Cucumber and hot pepper plants are not producing as much as in previous years. Normally, the speaker would have excess produce to give away, but this year the garden has suffered the worst. The speaker states they will still be able to maintain operational costs and can enough for their family. However, they claim they won't be able to provide for others as much as in the past.

Active wildfires are shown on Weather Underground through satellite images. The speaker saw a TikTok video of a girl showing the world burning and decided to verify it. The speaker confirms that all the wildfires shown are currently active. They express astonishment at the level of activity in Europe and Africa, questioning if Africa is okay. The speaker plans to move on to South America next and finds the situation abnormal. They ask for the listener's opinion.

The speaker is voicing a concern about a noticeable absence of insects this year. They point to a buddleia plant, which usually attracts butterflies and bees, but this year has seen hardly any insects on it. They note there are a few flies, but nothing like what’s normally expected, and no bees or bumblebees anywhere nearby, not even wasps. They emphasize this lack of insects is unusual and worrying. They describe the surrounding conditions: yesterday was overcast but warm, with a “blanket” of dull weather persisting through the summer, resulting in poor grass growth. They opened the silage clamp because there isn’t enough grass, and they spread slurry as rain approaches, yet they still observe poor growth. They question whether a conspiracy is involved, wondering if chemicals sprayed into the atmosphere are changing the weather. They insist they can’t be the only one to notice the absence of insects and fear the broader impact: if insects are scarce, it will affect everyone. In summary, the speaker reports an unusual year with very few insects (no bees, bumblebees, or wasps; few flies), connects it to poor grass growth and agricultural concerns, and speculates about weather modification or spraying in the atmosphere, describing the situation as worrying and something that will affect people broadly. They invite others to share their thoughts, emphasizing they don’t believe they’re the only observer.

I've been fishing in Alaska for years and have noticed a huge increase in dead trees. It's not beetles causing this, it's something else. The trees are dying, and it's affecting the environment and wildlife. I believe it's due to Geoengineering, not beetles. The earth is being poisoned, and commercial fishermen are witnessing the devastation. There are no chemtrails, which is unusual. I fear they'll start spraying soon. Commercial fisherman out. Translation: The speaker has observed a significant rise in dead trees in Alaska, attributing it to something other than beetles. They suspect Geoengineering is causing the trees to die, impacting the environment and wildlife. The absence of chemtrails is noted, with concerns about potential future spraying.

Two men suspect more are coming to harm bee hives. They accuse the government of destroying hives along the coast to eliminate pollination for profit. Urging others to share this information, they express concern for the bees and criticize the government's actions. One man, with bee tattoos, declares his love for bees and disavows any monetary motivation.

Something's not right. I left a watermelon out, and it didn't attract any bugs or birds. It stayed untouched all day and night. This makes me question if our food is truly natural. What do you think about this? It's mind-blowing.

The speaker observes that sunflowers on their property are not exhibiting heliotropism, the characteristic behavior of facing the sun. The sunflowers are turned away from the sun, which the speaker finds unusual, as other plants like beans and corn are growing normally. The speaker speculates about the cause of this phenomenon, suggesting a possible connection to those who took down their videos, while acknowledging they cannot prove this or point fingers. The speaker, identifying as a farm boy, asks for others' opinions on the matter.

Speaker 0 centers the discussion on the veneration of the honeybee and makes a stark, unsettling assertion: bees are being murdered. The speaker claims that over half of the world’s bees died last year, presenting this as a staggering loss with wide-reaching consequences. They quantify the impact by noting that the United States alone lost $600,000,000 because bees pollinate and are responsible for one third of our food sources. This framing emphasizes the bees’ crucial role in food production and the economic stakes attached to their decline. In addressing the question of what is killing the bees, the speaker rejects the idea that climate change is the primary culprit, suggesting that this notion is being pushed upon the public. Instead, they assert that pesticides are a major contributing factor. Beyond pesticides, the speaker states a more alarmist and conspiratorial view by asserting beliefs that five g and chemtrails are killing the bees, and they insist that this is not an accident. They describe the situation as genocide, framing it as a deliberate or systematic attack rather than a random environmental phenomenon. The speaker further characterizes the situation with apocalyptic language, calling it the “bee apocalypse” and attributing the responsibility to the elite. This framing links the alleged deaths of bees to a broader, conspiratorial elite-driven agenda, suggesting intentional harm or neglect at the highest levels of power and influence. A dramatic consequence is emphasized: when the bees die, humans have four years left. This urgent timeline is presented as a direct result of the bees’ disappearance, underscoring the belief that pollination by bees is indispensable to human survival and global food systems. The speaker also cautions against adopting artificial intelligence as a substitute for bees, arguing that we are at the verge of losing our heritage to the most important creature that’s ever existed on this planet. Throughout, the emphasis remains on the essential, irreplaceable role of bees in the ecosystem and food production, paired with a sense of imminent doom if action or understanding does not align with the speaker’s asserted explanations.

The speaker discusses the impact of chemtrails on society. They recall seeing these trails in the sky as a child and how it was initially fascinating. However, as more trails appeared, people in their neighborhood began fighting and arguing without any apparent reason. The speaker emphasizes the significance of the speaker's comments on chemtrails, which resonated deeply with them. They encourage everyone to listen and understand the speaker's perspective.

Speaker 0 describes higher frequencies as potentially impacting bees and insects because the wave size can resonate with insect size, leading to greater absorption. He shows a study with heat-map images of higher frequencies on the honeybee, noting five insects were examined and bees at different life stages were tested; higher frequencies resonated with the bees and were more highly absorbed, potentially causing biochemical changes that can affect bee behavior. He notes other studies on their website showing impacts to honey production and bee reproduction, including cases where bees did not return to a hive when wireless radiation was near it. Speaker 1 states, “For decades, there has been irrefutable evidence that electromagnetic waves have an influence both thermally and non thermally on living beings, including people.” Speaker 2 adds that five g has triggered irrational fears, but experts are concerned, and Daniel Favre is among hundreds of scientists who think precautionary steps should be taken. Favre signed appeals to the United Nations and European Union asking for the health effects of it to be reassessed. Danielle has been looking into the impact of electromagnetic fields on honeybees for years. Speaker 1 elaborates: in a practical setup, a cell phone emits the waves while another phone receives the waves, and a device records the sound of the colony in the beehive via a microphone under the hive. The waveform thickening indicates greater colony sound intensity; when phones are active, the colony is disturbed, and once the phone is off, the colony returns to normal noise. Speaker 2 emphasizes that implementing five g safely for people and the environment requires more time for independent research and for digesting information from thousands of published papers, citing Enrico Stura, an electronic engineer specializing in molecular biophysics. Speaker 1 adds that “The electromagnetic waves produced by personal telecommunication systems during reasonable periods of time lead to demonstrable and proven DNA damages.” Speaker 0 references a study on radio frequency radiation injuries around mobile phone base stations, conducted as a field study for years, observing trees in line of sight of cell antennas showing damage that led to felled trees over time. He notes photographs showing the antenna and the crown fitting, and mentions studies on impacts to plants, stressing the broader concern about widespread antennas in Montgomery County, the United States, and the world.

There's a drone hovering over a group of trees, and it's not the same one as before. It's strange how it stays in that spot before moving towards my house and farm. I'm filming this to share on Twitter for others to figure out. The drone is very close, hovering silently, and now it's moving slightly to the left. Suddenly, it appears to be circling back to the other drone still over the trees. Now both drones are in view, and the one that was hovering is coming right towards me. It's flying directly over the cornfield, and I can hear its engine now. What is happening?

Speaker 0 expresses concern about farmers, especially those with cattle, sheep, goats, and horses, finding boxes of ticks on their farmland. The central questions are why people would want to spread ticks and make this a problem for farmers. They propose starting research to determine what is happening, noting that this issue is not isolated to a single farmer but affects many farmers. The speaker mentions Pfizer as a company releasing new products to help get rid of Lyme disease, but says this cannot have nothing to do with the situation. They assert a general distrust by saying, “We all know we can trust our government.” The question is raised again: does anyone have ideas about what is going on? The speaker reiterates the concern about “boxes full of ticks in open fields on people’s properties” and concludes that something is really weird.

The speaker says they have “tons of bees” and also a tarantula wasp. They describe the bees as “happy” and highlight the tarantula wasp as “super friendly.” The speaker states that both bees and the tarantula wasp are pollinators, and says that when people say “I gotta get rid of them,” the advice is to “only get rid of your pollinators.” They add that “happy birds, happy bees,” and explain that the buzz sound is an “electrical charge.” They further claim that when a big swarm of bees comes around, it is “a lot of electricity.”

Speaker 0 argues against labeling certain plants as weeds, stating that destroying them would mean destroying the land. They point out that the plants produce flowers, which come from them, and these flowers help butterflies, bees, and all the other pollinators. The speaker notes that “Monsanto wants to sell you some poison to get rid of the bees, the pollinators, and then Walmart will sell you, guess what, robotic bees.” They question whether viewers are watching the same video. The speaker concludes by asserting that “Monsanto says destroy the weeds because it destroys the beets.”