DERRICK BROZE: “#ExposeBillGates 2 International Day of Action — August 8, 2020”

 

 

~via The Conscious Resistance

SPIRO SKOURAS: “A Disturbing Glimpse Into The Future: Bill Gates, Elon Musk & The 4th Industrial Revolution”

Welcome everyone, thanks for tuning in and congratulations! If you are reading or watching this, that means you have officially survived the first half of 2020. Something tells me, the second half will be just as crazy, if not more crazy than the first half was.

In this report we will be taking a glimpse of what the not too distant future may look like. Yes some of this will be speculation, but it is speculation projecting forward based on the facts we have today.

To be clear, the road humanity is being led down does not look very human at all according to the social engineers AKA technocrats who are deciding and dictating what the future of humanity looks like for us, we have no say according to the elite.

Watch this report and decide for yourself, will humanity benefit from this projected future? or will this digitalized system of control be the final nail in the coffin of free will and expression of individuality.

 

Self-Proclaimed “Genius” Donald Trump praises Elon Musk — January 22, 2020:

 

“You have to give him credit. I spoke to him very recently, and he’s also doing the rockets. And — he does good at rockets too, by the way. I never saw where the engines come down with no wings, no anything, and they’re landing. And I was worried about him, because he’s one of our great geniuses, and we have to protect our genius. You know, we have to protect Thomas Edison and we have to protect all of these people that — came up with originally the light bulb and — the wheel and all of these things. And he’s one of our very smart people and we want to — we want to cherish those people.”

 

😳

 

 

~via Spiro Skouras

‘FRANKENBITE’: MONSTER MOSQUITOES FROM THE GATES OF HELL ~ Whitney Webb: “Eco-Genocide and the Genetically Engineered Mosquito Army”

The enemies of life are breeding their own agents of ecological destruction aided and abetted by an incompetent EPA and a rubber-stamp government in Florida, which just gave unanimous approval for the release of hundreds of millions of genetically modified mosquitoes by a company with deep ties to Bill Gates, the US military, and Big Ag.

 

In a move sure to stun future generations — should we survive long enough to have any — seven Florida government agencies, including those charged with protecting its health, agriculture and environment, made a complete mockery of the trust afforded to them by the people of the state to oversee these vital matters and may have just pulled the trigger on a catastrophic environmental collapse.

The unanimous approval to allow the deployment starting this summer of over 1.2 billion genetically modified mosquitoes in Key Haven, Monroe County, Florida over a period of two years could very well decimate a substantial part of Florida’s natural flora and fauna, taking dozens of endangered species to the brink of extinction and irrevocably changing the habitat of the thousands of local birds, plants, amphibians and insects that make up Florida’s ecology.

The go-ahead comes on the heels of a decision by Trump’s EPA to green-light previously thwarted plans to release these airborne frankensteins in our environment without the slightest regard for the possible consequences. Ignoring the agency’s own lukewarm assessments admitting some of the dangers, the EPA nonetheless violated mandated requirements of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to approve the first-ever GE mosquito experiment in the United States.

Despite the EPA’s criminal negligence in failing to follow mandated procedures, it was ultimately left to authorities in Florida to give their consent for this plan, which they gave in spades despite overwhelming opposition. A public forum held on this issue returned an incontrovertible verdict of 31,174 comments opposing the release and only 56 supporting it. This, however, seemed not to sway a single state agency when it came time to allow the deliberate invasion of a new, man-made mosquito into what is already one of the nation’s most imperiled ecosystems.

Frankenbite

The proposition had been made and withdrawn twice before. Once in 2016, when Oxitec Ltd. applied for an investigational new animal drug (INAD) with the FDA for its GE Aedes aegypti mosquito strain OX513A, a.k.a. “Friendly Aedes aegypti,” the first of three strains of the so-called “Yellow Fever Mosquito.” The UK-based company claimed that the mosquito release was “unlikely to impact the physical, biological, and human environment” and “that no cumulative impacts are anticipated.” The application was withdrawn. The same fate befell their second application two years later when jurisdiction over the application had been switched over to the EPA.

Opposition from groups like the Center for Food Safety may only have been partially responsible for the application withdrawals, as a third one was submitted soon after the last one with a new strain denominated GE Aedes aegypti OX5034, which is differentiated from the prior strain by the characteristic that it only kills the female GE mosquitoes leaving the GE males to survive for multiple generations, according to Oxitec.

The stated purpose of the program is to “evaluate the efficacy of Oxitec’s alternative second-generation OX5034 GE mosquitoes as a tool for suppression of wild Aedes aegypti mosquito populations.” But, serious questions surrounding its effectiveness have already proliferated after the results of Oxitec’s mosquito experiments in other countries.

In a 2015 press release, Oxitec claimed its trials in Brazil, Panama, Grand Cayman and Malaysia had resulted in a “90% reduction of the Aedes aegypti pest population.” The same claim was made in a 2016 U.S. Congressional Hearing of the Science, Space and Technology Committee. But in fact, efficacy trials in Malaysia were abandoned and “major problems” were reported over how Oxitec interprets its data. In addition, no direct evidence has ever been produced to prove that the Oxitec GE mosquitoes caused a fall in the population of disease-carrying mosquitoes in any of these countries. In the Cayman Islands, female mosquito populations went up rather than down — a fact discovered only after Oxitec’s results were obtained through FOIA requests.

The same year of Oxitec’s first application for release in the U.S., the company carried out its first large-scale trials in Piracicaba, Brazil and reported an “81% suppression of wild Aedes aegypti” in the second year of the trial. But, the same problems and fudged data that plagued the Grand Cayman reports were also identified and discredited many of the company’s claims of success. Oxitec’s claims for its earlier trials in Panama made claims similar to all others, but also failed to convince experts.

Target Florida

Florida has been in Oxitec’s sights since 2011 when the company approached the Florida Keys Mosquito Control District after an outbreak of dengue fever a year earlier. Resistance to the idea of releasing genetically engineered insects into the wild was just as strong then. Nevertheless, Oxitec was touting false trial results in other countries to get the right government agencies involved. But, it didn’t prosper at that time.

Fast-forward five years and Zika makes it first appearance, a new mosquito-borne disease that spread rapidly in Miami-Dade County, in particular, and coincided with Oxitec’s first federal-level application. Opposition, however, remained strong and Oxitec would have to wait for an administration that was willing to overlook troublesome scientific concerns and regulations to give them a chance. Trump and his Koch-led EPA transition team provided just the right atmosphere for the UK biotech to finally achieve its horrific dreams.

Among the most immediate effects of this summer’s scheduled release of Oxitec’s GE mosquitoes will be a huge increase in the use of toxic, traditional mosquito control methods like adulticides and larvicides, which will place undue strain on the environment. But, the greatest danger is faced by the vast members of Florida’s ecosystem from dozens of species of protected birds, reptiles, mammals and plants.

The Cape Sable seaside sparrow is a non-migratory bird whose native Florida habitat has been decimated by conversion of land to agricultural uses. The bird forages for insects and, like many other bird and animal species of the state, are opportunistic in their feeding habits, meaning that a large influx of new insects will most definitely end up in their digestive systems.

Another potential consequence is what is called “competitive displacement,” which occurs when a large influx of a new species drives an existing one to population levels low enough that another invasive species, like the aforementioned dengue-carrying mosquito Aedes albopictus (Asian Tiger) or the West Nile virus-carrying mosquito Aedes albopictus, can proliferate in the region and pose even greater threats to both human and animal health.

To make matters worse, this hurricane season is projected to be very active, considerably increasing the probability that these GE mosquitoes will end up threatening many other ecosystems besides Florida’s.

To all these concerns and more, Florida lawmakers simply thumbed their noses at the people of their state and the environment; choosing to go along with the irresponsible dictates of an EPA on a mission to self-destruct and the unsubstantiated claims of a biotechnology firm with old ties to the USDA dating back to 2009 when another of their GE insects — a modified pink bollworm released (and later discontinued) as part of the agency’s plant pest control program, DARPA’s “gene drive” technology research and a CEO with a belligerent past.

Oxitec’s Origins and the Man in the Trenches

Oxitec was first founded in 2002 in the United Kingdom as Oxford Insect Technologies, a vehicle for commercializing technology that had been developed by Oxford University scientists. It remained relatively obscure until it was acquired for $160 million by the U.S.-based biotechnology firm Precigen (then called Intrexon) in 2015, a firm that “applies engineering to biological systems to enable DNA-based control over the function and output of living cells.”

Notably, Precigen has since turned its focus entirely to human gene-editing using a patented approach called “Better DNA”, while Oxitec was sold to Third Security, a venture capital firm headed by Precigen’s former executive chairman, earlier this year.

Shortly after its acquisition by Precigen, Grey Frandsen became Oxitec’s CEO, an alumnus of the U.S. State Department who worked closely in connecting non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the military, as well as developing the State Department’s “post-conflict response” policy in a variety of conflict zones abroad.

Frandsen’s career in this orbit began during the NATO invasion of the Balkans in the late 1990s when he went on a “humanitarian relief trip” during the war. That trip spurred him to co-found PICnet, a technology consulting firm for NGOs, and he was quickly made the director of post-conflict “reconstruction” efforts in the Balkans for Relief International, a close partner of USAID, the World Bank, Google, the UN and the State Department.

He then joined the State Department a year after founding PICnet as Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs. At the State Department he first focused on “the development of post-conflict response policy, continuity of operations planning, contingency planning coordination, and general policy coordination.”

While at the State Department, Frandsen would concurrently serve as a fellow at the International Crisis Group, a NGO initially created in 1995 to “serve as the world’s eyes and ears for impending conflicts.” Immediately after it was created, ICG was focused almost exclusively on the Balkans region in the immediate lead-up to the NATO-led invasion of the former Yugoslavia. During this period, ICG was principally involved in manufacturing international consent for a “humanitarian” regime change operation and the balkanization of the region. ICG has since repeated that same playbook in Sudan (via the Darfur conflict) and (unsuccessfully) in Syria.

Upon concluding his fellowship at ICG, Frandsen became an advisor to the U.S. Navy on Civilian-Military Affairs in Conflict and Non-Permissive Environments, in addition to his continued work at the State Department. In 2002, Frandsen would author the first “Guide to Non-governmental Organizations for the Military,” and would subsequently become the special assistant to the State Department’s Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization, specifically on matters pertaining to NGO-military relations, a post he held until the end of the George W. Bush administration.

Frandsen’s jump into the “life sciences” industry would also result from his ties to the public sector, as he was appointed president of a company called Olfactor Laboratories that develops “novel technologies and systems for combatting mosquitoes that transmit disease” based on research financed by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the U.S. government’s National Institutes of Health (NIH).

As president of Olfactor, Frandsen signed agreements with the U.S. military’s Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR) to employ the company’s technology at U.S. military bases around the world. The WRAIR is a subordinate of the U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command (USAMRDC), which oversees the U.S.’ controversial “biodefense” lab in Fort Detrick, Maryland that once conducted a series of covert biowarfare tests on U.S. civilians that sought to examine the feasibility of mosquitoes as vectors for bioweapons.

Wartime CEO

Upon leaving Olfactor, Frandsen immediately became an advisor to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to “combat Zika and dengue in Puerto Rico” and subsequently replaced Hyden Parry as CEO of Oxitec. Soon after joining Oxitec in 2017, Frandsen began courting high-powered investors for the company’s gene drive or “genetic extinction” technologies using insect vectors, ultimately securing the support of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2018.

That year, the Gates Foundation provided Oxitec with a $4.1 million grant (later expanded to $5.8 million) to engineer mosquitoes of the Anopheles genus endemic to regions of the Americas, eastern Africa and Southern Asia with the goal of “dramatically reducing” the wild population of mosquitoes, officially as a means of reducing the incidence of malaria.

In addition to Oxitec’s genetically modified mosquitoes, Frandsen has also overseen the company’s development of a slew of other genetically modified insects for use in agriculture, including olive flies, Mediterranean fruit flies, soybean loopers, armyworms and diamondback moths. This more recent addition to Oxitec’s product portfolio would allow the introduction of genetically-modified insect to a wider range of geographical regions, including Australia and cooler regions of the United States, where Oxitec’s “anti-malaria” mosquitoes would not be eligible for use. It is worth noting that several current and former Oxitec executives, including its former CEO Hadyn Parry, were previously employees of the agrochemical company Syngenta, which also has interests in genetically-modified insects for agricultural purposes.

In addition to expanding the company’s product portfolio, Frandsen has also taken charge of “charities” that serve to lobby governments in Africa to adopt the very technologies developed and patented by Oxitec. Frandsen serves as chairman of the board of Pilgrim Africa, a Seattle-based NGO partnered with the former lead investor of Olfactor Laboratories (ieCrowd) and backed by the Gates Foundation as well as USAID. Pilgrim Africa promotes the eradication of malaria by “dramatically reducing” the mosquito population through unspecified “technologies” and the use of genetically modified crop pests (such as those produced by Oxitec) as a form of integrated pest management in agriculture. Pilgrim Africa focuses much of its attention and “services” on the area inhabited by more than 1.5 million refugees in conflict-ridden Northern Uganda and is directly partnered with Uganda’s Health Ministry. In other words, Frandsen is using his decades-long expertise in using NGOs to exploit conflict zones for the U.S. military to instead benefit the company he currently heads and its “philanthropic” partners.

Weaponizing Life

Given Frandsen’s extensive background in the murky nexus between the military, “humanitarian” NGOs and “diplomacy” in conflict zones, some may find his foray into the realm of biotechnology odd. However, Frandsen’s approach towards biotechnology, specifically Oxitec’s “gene drive” technology, is much in keeping with the steady militarization of that industry, thanks to the work of the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and its biotechnology office as well as the growth of a “revolving door” between the Pentagon and the biotechnology/pharmaceutical industries in recent decades.

Frandsen’s “conflict zone” mentality can be clearly seen in his use of militaristic rhetoric regarding how Oxitec’s genetically modified mosquitoes can be used to fight disease. For instance, during the Zika virus scare, Frandsen argued in an Op-Ed in Reuters that “we need to fight Zika the way governments fight terror,” stating that “the same sort of well-crafted U.S. government-led strategy that was designed to combat transnational terrorism is needed to blunt this deadly mosquito-transmitted illness.”

Frandsen’s militaristic rhetoric with respect to the “life sciences” and big push for Oxitec to enter the public health and agribusiness sectors mirror the pivot made by the U.S. military, specifically DARPA, in recent years. Indeed, though Oxitec is the best-known private sector vehicle for “gene drive” technologies, DARPA is actually among the top funders of gene drive technologies worldwide, having poured $100 million into the research of the technology by the end of 2017.

DARPA’s considerable funding of “gene drive” research was uncovered via a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the ETC group, an agro-ecological advocacy group. “Gene drives are a powerful and dangerous new technology and potential biological weapons could have disastrous impacts on peace, food security and the environment, especially if misused,” Jim Thomas, co-director of ETC Group said at the time. “The fact that gene drive development is now being primarily funded and structured by the US military raises alarming questions about this entire field.”

In addition, DARPA has also been pouring money into the use of genetically-modified insects for crop “defense” through its controversial “Insect Allies” program. That program, announced in 2016, utilizes controversial gene-editing techniques like CRISPR to genetically modify insects so that they carry a contagious virus that then infects plants (or whatever organism on which they feed). The insertion of the virus into the target organism, e.g. a particular crop, then imposes genetic changes onto that organism, a process known as “horizontal genetic alteration.”

Though DARPA has long claimed that the program is merely “defensive” in nature, independent scientists alleged in the prestigious journal Science that the program is actually a bioweapons program. It is also worth mentioning that DARPA’s Insect Allies program was announced the same year that Oxitec first applied to have its genetically-modified mosquitoes released in Florida.

Also noteworthy is DARPA’s funding of “Target Malaria,” which describes itself as “a not-for-profit research consortium that aims to develop and share new, cost-effective and sustainable genetic technologies to modify mosquitoes and reduce malaria transmission” by releasing genetically modified mosquitoes throughout Africa. Notably, the genetically modified mosquitoes being developed for “Target Malaria” are being created at the Imperial College — London, the very same institution that has received much of DARPA’s “gene drive” research funds in recent years.

In addition, Target Malaria is partnered with Uganda’s Ministry of Health (much like Frandsen’s Pilgrim Africa) and is mostly funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as well as Open Philanthropy, a fund backed by Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz. Open Philanthropy’s involvement is notable as they are also a major funder of the “biodefense” think tank first created by HHS’ Assistant Secretary of Preparedness and Response Robert Kadlec as well as of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, which has deep ties to the 2001 biowarfare exercise Dark Winter as well as last year’s Event 201.

With Frandsen’s ties to the U.S. military, the State Department and covert regime change networks of both the public and non-profit sectors, it is worth considering that the implementation of Oxitec’s gene drive technology for a variety of insects serves as a private sector vehicle for the propagation of this “weaponization” of life that has been a focus of the military and a cadre of political operatives and “philanthropists” in recent decades.

While weaponizing crop pests and insect borne disease vectors has its military applications, it has also been viewed for decades by the establishment as a means of subduing populations, not just in conflict zones — where Frandsen’s expertise lies — but on a much broader and global scale. For instance, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is well-known for having said that “who controls the food supply controls the people” and for calling overseas food aid an “instrument of national power.” This mentality still reigns in Washington, yet is now empowered with a mix of high-powered gene-editing technologies that have the ability to drastically alter the very building blocks of life in whatever ways that suit their agenda, whether in agricultural ecosystems or natural ones.

Perhaps even more alarming, however, is the fact that many of the most prominent funders and promoters of insect “gene drive” technologies — DARPA and Bill Gates — are also the most ardent backers of the mRNA and DNA vaccine candidates for coronavirus as well as coronavirus “treatments” that directly edit human genes in vivo. Given that Oxitec’s longtime owner, Precigen, has become laser focused on gene-editing technologies for use in humans, as opposed to insects, it increasingly seems that the use of these experimental and untested technologies are intended to be much more far-reaching than many realize.

 

Question Everything, Come To Your Own Conclusions.

 

~via The Last American Vagabond

DERRICK BROZE: “Another New Study Points to the Dangers of Geoengineering the Climate”

“Geoengineering is a field of research investigating methods to deliberately manipulate the climate in an attempt to fight climate change. Coincidentally, this dangerous science has been funded in part by none other than Bill Gates. Prominent geoengineering researcher Ken Caldeira says he receives $375,000 a year from Gates and works for Intellectual Ventures, a private geoengineering research company part-owned by Gates and run by Nathan Myhrvold, former head of technology at Microsoft. If this field of research poses such a grave danger to the planet why are technocrats like Bill Gates funding these efforts? Are these efforts related to Gates’ eugenics agenda? We leave that determination up to the reader.”

~Derrick Broze

 

A new study from Massachusetts Institute of Technology is adding to the growing list of concerns around the controversial science of geoengineering. Researchers have found that geoengineering techniques could significantly change extratropical storms and introduce changes to the climate.

Geoengineering is a field of research investigating methods to deliberately manipulate the climate in an attempt to fight climate change. One of these methods is known as solar radiation management (SRM). Proposals for SRM suggest that scientists might be able to replicate the results seen from volcano eruptions. MIT reports:

“How can the world combat the continued rise in global temperatures? How about shading the Earth from a portion of the sun’s heat by injecting the stratosphere with reflective aerosols? After all, volcanoes do essentially the same thing, albeit in short, dramatic bursts: When a Vesuvius erupts, it blasts fine ash into the atmosphere, where the particles can linger as a kind of cloud cover, reflecting solar radiation back into space and temporarily cooling the planet.”

Researchers have proposed using planes, balloons, or blimps to spray various aerosols into the atmosphere in the hopes of reflecting sunlight and cooling the planet. This type of geoengineering is extremely controversial and previous studies have linked the technology to potentially dangerous outcomes for various parts of the planet.

Now a research team lead by Charles Gertler, a graduate student in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences (EAPS), has found that “solar geoengineering will not simply reverse climate change. Instead, it has the potential itself to induce novel changes in climate.” Gertler and his team have published the results in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.

Specifically, Gertler’s team found that solar geoengineering could alter what are known as extratropical storm tracks. MIT describes storm tracks as “the zones in the middle and high latitudes where storms form year-round and are steered by the jet stream across the oceans and land.” These storm tracks help create extratropical cyclones, and the strength of the storm tracks determine the severity and frequency of storms known as “nor’easters.” A nor’easter is a storm along the East Coast of North America in which the winds over the coastal area are typically from the northeast.

The researchers used a scenario of solar geoengineering known to climate scientists as experiment G1 of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP). This project provides various geoengineering scenarios for scientists to run to determine various climate effects. G1 assumes an ideal scenario in which geoengineering blocks enough solar radiation to act as a counterbalance with the warming that would occur if carbon dioxide concentration quadruples.

The team found that the strength of storm tracks in both the northern and southern hemispheres weakened significantly in response to geoengineering. This would mean less powerful storms in the winter, but the researchers say the weaker storm tracks could “lead to stagnant conditions, particularly in summer, and less wind to clear away air pollution.” These changes in wind could also affect circulation of ocean water and the stability of ice sheets.

“A weakened storm track, in both hemispheres, would mean weaker winter storms but also lead to more stagnant weather, which could affect heat waves,” Gertler says. “Across all seasons, this could affect ventilation of air pollution. It also may contribute to a weakening of the hydrological cycle, with regional reductions in rainfall. These are not good changes, compared to a baseline climate that we are used to.”

Gertler further stated that his work indicates that “solar geoengineering is not reversing climate change, but is substituting one unprecedented climate state for another.” In the conclusion to their study the researchers note that “there likely exist other consequences of solar geoengineering that the simulations studied here are unable to simulate.”

Previous Studies Also Show Danger

The concerns surrounding geoengineering are widely known to anyone following the research. Claims that geoengineering could be employed without significantly altering the planet or without making things worse were rebuffed by a number of experts.

Alan Robock, a climate and aerosols expert at Rutgers University who previously conducted research for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has said that researchers claiming that there will be no significant effect do not take into account the reality that geoengineering may have additional side effects, like warming certain parts of the atmosphere, changing atmospheric circulation, or affecting the ozone layer.

“I do not agree that ’no area will be significantly worse off under a solar geo-engineering scenario’,” Robock has said. “Worse as compared to what? If we rapidly begin mitigation now, that is rapidly reduce our CO2 emissions to zero by switching our power to wind and solar, we will be much better off than a business-as-usual future, or one with geoengineering.”

Interestingly, Robock has previously stated that he believes the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) may already be using geoengineering techniques as a weapon of war. In 2015, while speaking at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Jose, California, Robock stated he was phoned by two men claiming to be from the CIA, asking whether or not it was possible for hostile governments to use geoengineering, or mass manipulation of the weather, against the United States.

The public and scientific community should examine all of the available evidence which currently shows geoengineering might lead to potential loss of blue skies, lower crop yields, and increases in land and water temperature.

According to a study published in Nature, geoengineering could lead to lower crop yields. This study is not the first to point out the dangers of beginning geoengineering programs. According to a 2013 study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, if geoengineering programs were started and then suddenly halted, the planet could see an immediate rise in temperatures, particularly over land.

Another study published in February 2015 by an international committee of scientists stated that geoengineering techniques are not a viable alternative to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to combat the effects of climate change. The committee report called for further research and understanding of various geoengineering techniques, including carbon dioxide removal schemes and solar-radiation management (SRM), before implementation. The scientists found that SRM techniques are likely to present “serious known and possible unknown environmental, social, and political risks, including the possibility of being deployed unilaterally.”

In October 2018, the United Nations IPCC issued a report that essentially called for climate engineering as the “last ditch” option to save humanity from environmental disaster. This option is one step closer to reality now that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is scheduled to receive $4 million in funding. The more geoengineering becomes a reality the more that calls are being made for a global governance framework to guide these programs. It’s becoming apparent that calls for geoengineering will serve as a gateway to global government.

Coincidentally, this dangerous science has been funded in part by none other than Bill Gates. As TLAV previously reported, since 2007 Gates had given $4.5 million to study geoengineering methods for altering the stratosphere to reflect solar energy, techniques to filter carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere, and brightening ocean clouds. Geoengineering is the deliberate mass scale manipulation of the weather for the stated purpose of reducing heating on the planet.

The Guardian previously noted that Gates gives “an undisclosed sum” to geoengineering proponent and Harvard professor David Keith. Gates also owns majority stake in Keith’s geoengineering company, Carbon Engineering. Prominent geoengineering researcher Ken Caldeira says he receives $375,000 a year from Gates and works for Intellectual Ventures, a private geoengineering research company part-owned by Gates and run by Nathan Myhrvold, former head of technology at Microsoft.

If this field of research poses such a grave danger to the planet why are technocrats like Bill Gates funding these efforts? Are these efforts related to Gates’ eugenics agenda? We leave that determination up to the reader.

 

Question Everything, Come To Your Own Conclusions.

 

See source article for reference links

 

~via The Last American Vagabond

DERRICK BROZE: “#ExposeBillGates Houston — June 13, 2020”

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Announcing #ExposeBillGates Global Day of Action on June 13, 2020

WHAT: A non-partisan coalition of alternative media organizations and activist groups are calling for a Global Day of Action to #ExposeBillGates and his control agenda.

In the first few months of 2020, billionaire Bill Gates has been promoted as the savior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although he is lauded as a hero Gates has been a force of disruption and shaky science. The truth is Bill Gates hides a darker agenda.

Gates has made numerous media appearances calling for extended lock downs, contact tracing surveillance, digital certificates to travel and work, and announced his intention to vaccinate 7 billion people. Gates’ family also has ties to discredited eugenics science and believes billionaires like him should help reduce the world’s population.

It’s time to #ExposeBillGates and expose his agenda. Together we can shine the light on Gates’ true intentions and change the course of humanity.

WHEN: Join us on Saturday June 13, 2020 as we spread the word about Bill Gates’ agenda. We encourage everyone interested to organize and host documentary screenings, share articles, pass out flyers, drop banners, and share on social media using the hashtag #ExposeBillGates. We encourage everyone to share accurate and credible information about Gates’ goals. This is a non-partisan event and activists from all sides of the political spectrum are welcome.

To help spread the word about #ExposeBillGates Day please make this image your profile pic on all social media accounts. You can also download these flyers for sharing, editing, etc (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

CONTACT: Derrick Broze / intothelight@protonmail.com

 

 

~via The ConsciousResistance