Green ‘Science’ Is Out To Cut Food Production, Kill People
7 April 2014
(EIR)—The Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange (IPCC), like the British monarchy and its Greenmovement, has stated its genocidal premises in clearlanguage. Its 2007 Assessment claimed that “GDP/capita and population growth were the main drivers ofthe increase in global emissions during the last threedecades of the 20th Century.” Thus the goal, as enunciated in the 2012 “People and the Planet” report of the British Royal Society, among other places: Cut consumption and reduce the number of people.
The late March releases of the latest “global warming” reports by the IPCC and the Obama Administration base themselves on exactly the same premises. After outright lying that the Earth is overheating due to mankind’s activity—honest statistics show no warming for more than 17 years—the reports recommend measures to curb the very productive human activities required to sustain life—including the production of food.
What the attack on agriculture purports to be targeting is methane gas, alleged, like plant-nourishing carbon dioxide, to be a major cause of “human-related” global warming. According to the Obama “A Strategy to Cut Methane Emissions,” issued on March 28, “thirty-six percent of human- related methane emissions come from the agricultural sector in the United States,” by which they are referring to accumulations of animal waste, and animal farts, among other things. In June, the Obama Administration intends to release a new “bio-gas road map,” which would detail ways to speed up the adoption of “methane digesters”—machines that curb cattle farts—with the goal of cutting dairy-sector emissions of greenhouse gases by 25% by 2020.
Where this program is headed was signaled by another report which came out in late March, from researchers at the Chalmer University of Technology in Sweden. On March 30, researchers Fredrik Hedenus,Stefan Wirsenius, and Daniel Johannsson released a report entitled “The importance of reduced meat and dairy consumption for meeting stringent climate change targets,” which received prominent coverage in the New York Times and other media. The article analyzed the efficacy of three methods to meet the arbitrary “climate target” of limiting global warming in agriculture: productivity increases, mitigation measures, and reduction in consumption of meat and dairy.
According to a review on phys.org, the Swedish authors argue that, unless curtailed, beef and lamb production will account for half of all agriculture greenhouse gas emissions by 2070. Cheese and other dairy foods will account for about 25% of total agricultural “pollution.”
The solution? According to them, people should stop eating dairy, lamb, and beef!
We have shown,” it says, “that reducing meat and dairy consumption is key to bringing agricultural climate pollution down to safe levels,” wrote Hedenus. The study warns against the “delusion” that there is any other way to cut back on pollution from livestock. “These [polluting] emissions can be reduced with efficient gains in meat and dairy production, as well as with the aid of new technology. But the potential reductions from these measures are fairly limited and will probably not suffice to keep us within the climate limit, if meat and dairy consumption continue to grow."
Te authors claim that, because beef and lamb only contribute an estimated 3% of human caloric intake, it will be no loss to cut back their production.
In fact, even without such so-called “climate change” measures, meat consumption is on the rapid decline—as government policies such as fracking, biofuels, and austerity destroy the water supply, bankrupt farmers, and raise prices. The U.S. cattle herd has shrunk to 87 million head (the lowest in 61 years), and per-capita consumption of beef is falling.
Where We’re Headed
In July 2013, Tim Benton of Leeds University, the head of the British government’s Global Food Security group, told the Telegraph that it’s no longer sufficient for governments to think of ways of producing more food. Rather, the government should concentrate on cutting “demand”—eat less! According to the Telegraph reporter, Benton’s proposal was to cut calorie intake by one-third.
Benton, a professor of “population ecology,” is following the British imperial line, which treats the human population as so many cattle to be culled. His Global Food Security group has a Strategy Advisory Board which, until the Spring of 2013, included UK chief scientific officer Sir John Beddington, also a specialist in “population biology.” These population “experts” all agree with the monarchy that the world is overpopulated, and that therefore, its numbers must be reduced. One way to do that, of course, is to reduce the amount of food available.
The Ulterior Motive
As 21st Century Science & Technology and a vast number of reputable scientists and scientific institutions have demonstrated, there is no excuse for any honest scientist or institution to believe in “man-made global warming,” or the idea that any actual warming would lead to a catastrophe for mankind. The only thing to fear is the continuation of the British financial system of empire, which demands the reduction of the human population—in numbers, living standard, and intelligence—in order to make the world “safe” for its own dominance.
Even as these recent ludicrous reports on containing carbon and methane emissions are published, the Remote Sensing Surface (RSS) satellite lower-troposphere temperature anomaly for March shows, according to an April 5 report, that there has been no global warming at all for 17 years and 8 months. This, despite the fact that recent measurements apparently accurately show that CO2 concentrations have increased considerably.
But was any of this—the lack of global warming, and/or the increase of CO 2 concentrations—the result of human activity? There have been other periods in human history, pre-industrial periods, when CO2 was far more abundant in the atmosphere, and global temperatures were a lot cooler. Well-documented scientific studies correlate the changes in temperature with phenomena in the galaxy and the Solar System, not mankind.
But the British Empire needs the fraud of global warming, as an excuse for pushing its depopulation agenda. And they need their stooge Barack Obama to push it through in the United States. If you want to eat, it’s time to remove them both from power.