All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 7, 2019 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
11:37
Should 11,000 climate scientists ELIMINATE THEMSELVES to save the planet?
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Allow me to point out a huge gaping contradiction in the climate change arguments being put forth by climate change scientists, i.e.
lunatics.
They say, well, if we don't stop what we're doing, the climate's going to be out of our control.
It's going to be a runaway climate catastrophe out of our control.
And then you ask them, well, how did we get to this point?
And then they answer, because we controlled the climate.
Wait a minute.
I thought you just said we can't control the climate.
No, we can't control it if it gets bad, but we did control it to get here.
We'll pick one.
Which is it?
Do we control the climate or do we not control the climate?
Because if we control the climate, then if something bad happens, can't we change it back?
I mean, they say that New York City is going to be under 20 meters of ocean water.
Oh my God!
Statue of Liberty, just the very tippy top of the torch will appear above the ocean.
It'll just be under ocean water.
And I'm thinking, and so far the ocean has only risen like three millimeters in a century or something.
So I tell you what, how about when we get to one centimeter of Then we'll be concerned because your little scenario of 100 feet of seawater, 60 feet, whatever it is...
That's not going to happen just like that.
And by the way, who says that the oceans should be at the current level anyway?
Maybe the oceans should be higher.
You ever thought about that?
Maybe more warmth for the planet would be a good thing, because back in the age of the dinosaurs, the oceans were higher, and there was less ice on the planet, and all of the areas of America that are now deserts were more lush and green, you know, like Nevada and, what, Wyoming and Utah, Arizona, parts of California.
You know why they find dinosaur bones all over those places?
You think the dinosaurs roamed the deserts?
No, they didn't.
They roamed lush rainforests and marshes and places like that.
Well, how are those areas more lush?
Oh, because the oceans were higher.
The planet was warmer.
And there was more water, which caused more rainfall.
I mean, warmer oceans, more evaporation, more rainfall.
Yeah.
So you have lush green rainforests all across North America, or what is modern-day North America.
That's how you achieve that.
So don't tell me that oceans rising a little bit is a bad thing.
I think we need more oceans.
Why not expand the ocean ecosystem?
Why not have more liquid water instead of frozen water?
But anyway, I digress.
Their argument, the scientist's argument, is that humans either do control the climate or don't control the climate, depending on what they want you to believe in that moment.
But it's absurd.
It's completely absurd.
CO2 emissions of humans are tiny compared to the CO2 emissions of marine ecosystems, living creatures that live in the ocean.
They emit far more carbon dioxide.
I mean, it's like a couple of orders of magnitude more than what humans emit, by the way.
Why?
Because there's a large biomass of living creatures in the ocean that produce carbon dioxide.
Well, gosh, what do they want to do?
Kill the oceans?
To stop the carbon dioxide from being produced by the ocean creatures?
Maybe that's the next mad science idea from these climate lunatics.
Kill the oceans!
Oceans are bad!
I wouldn't be surprised.
Because they're saying the same thing about humans now.
They're saying there's too many people.
They say that we've got to get rid of billions of people.
People are bad.
And when people engage in transportation, they're really bad.
You know, flying on an airplane, whatever.
Carbon dioxide footprint is going to destroy the world.
Say the people flying around in their private jets, right?
Like Leonardo DiCaprio and Al Gore and these climate lunatics.
But here's the thing.
Here's a real contradiction.
They say that the globalists should kill off about 6 billion humans.
And now you have 11,000 scientists who have signed on to this paper.
Paper that says depopulation is urgent.
We're going to have a climate catastrophe if we don't depopulate the planet.
I'm thinking, why don't they start with themselves?
You know, why don't the 11,000 scientists line up and just jump off a bridge or something to demonstrate the laws of gravity?
And in that way, wouldn't they be, by their own logic, contributing to saving the planet by removing themselves?
And they'd also win the Darwin Award, which is very appropriate for scientists, of course.
Darwin Awards for all of you!
Yeah, some of you can win the Uber Darwin Award by leaping from extra high bridges onto dry riverbeds, by the way, without a bungee cord.
That's the Uber Darwin Award.
No, but seriously, their argument is that they should eliminate you, but not them.
I mean, you even ask them, you're like, well, can we start by you eliminating yourself?
And they say, oh, no, not me.
No, I'm a scientist.
I know better than you.
You should eliminate you.
Really?
Isn't that just you, the scientist, just advocating for the murder of other people?
Because that's what it sounds like.
If you're going to do that, why don't you take responsibility and just take yourself out first?
And by the way, you take yourself out and according to your own logic, the CO2 footprint, the carrying capacity of the planet will be eased slightly by 11,000 scientists removing themselves from And then, wouldn't that give us more time to survive the rest of human society?
So why don't you just sacrifice yourself for the greater good if you believe so strongly that that's the way to do it?
And by the way, while you 11,000 scientists are jumping off bridges, I'm going to be idling my diesel tractor because I would like plants to grow and I would like extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
How about that?
You leap off bridges, I'll idle my John Deere.
You know, that's my contribution to the planet, is helping plants grow, because I like rainforests, I like food crops, and they all need carbon dioxide, by the way, because, of course, we believe in photosynthesis, because I'm a real scientist, and I understand that photosynthesis has three inputs, carbon dioxide, sunlight, and water.
And the globalists hate two out of the three.
They think sunlight is bad.
Oh my God, the sun is bad.
It's warming the planet.
We have to block the sun.
And then they also think that, of course, carbon dioxide.
But we have to sequester the carbon dioxide.
Bury it in the ground.
Hide it under rocks.
I'm just thinking it would be easier.
Why don't we just sequester you, 11,000 scientists?
Why don't you bury yourself in the rocks?
That's it.
The sequestration of climate science lunatics.
Self-sequestration.
I'm not saying anybody else should do it to them.
They should do it to themselves.
Aren't they the ones calling for all this stuff?
They should be those who initiate these brave, courageous...
I tell you what, we'll write a book about them.
We'll have the heroes of science winning the Darwin Award with the self-sequestration of 11,000 scientists burying themselves under tons of rock.
There we go.
And that would be amazing.
Wouldn't that be them just I mean, how exactly do they plan to eliminate 6 billion people on the planet, by the way?
I mean, in their minds, how do they plan to do it?
What is their plan?
Because they talk about, oh, they want to achieve diversity and social justice and integrity.
Really?
What's your diversity?
Having humans of different skin colors all bulldozed together into the same death pits as you carry out your mass extermination of the planet?
Is that your definition of diversity?
Because that's what it sounds like.
I mean, if you collapse the food supply and you kill off the food crops And you take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and you block the sun and you shut down photosynthesis, you're going to cause mass starvation and famine and pestilence and human suffering, outbreaks of disease, the collapse of human society.
You call that diversity?
I tell you what, there are lunatics on this earth who probably don't belong here and it is 11,000 scientists who should take themselves out if they really want to save the planet.
That's what they should do.
They're insane.
And, you know, look, I don't mind some insane person that wants to go take themselves out so much.
They want to jump off a bridge.
As long as they're not landing on somebody else, go for it.
You want to leap off a tall building because you lost your little stock options on Wall Street?
Go for it.
Try to fly.
I don't care.
But when you are saying kill everybody else...
So that you can survive, you elite scientists, so that you can inherit the planet after you exterminate 6 billion people, which is a thousand times larger than the Holocaust of World War II. That's insane.
In fact, what these 11,000 scientists are calling for is a crime of genocide against humanity.
They are the genocidal maniacs, and they make Adolf Hitler look like a Boy Scout.
Because they, the scientists, they want to have, again, a thousand times more fatalities.
On this planet, six billion people.
Yes, a billion is a thousand times larger than a million.
The Holocaust is six million Jews.
Scientists want to kill six billion humans, everybody.
Well, not themselves.
Not themselves.
Isn't it amazing?
How about this?
Why don't we not embrace a scientific establishment that is calling for genocide?
How about that?
How about we take the scientists that are calling for mass murder and we subject them to the Nuremberg trials?
Crimes against humanity.
How about that?
Because that's what these climate scientists are pushing is advocacy for crimes against humanity.
That's what they want to see.
Mass death, execution, starvation, die-off.
That's their goal.
That's who they are.
And I think that those people are not welcome in a civil society.
What do you think?
What do you think these 11,000 scientists should do to themselves or perhaps each other that would be just and fair since they want to kill 6 billion humans?
Right?
I'll leave it up to you to decide what you think should happen to these people.
You can post your comments below this video on brighteon.com.
Thank you for listening.
Mike Adams here, the Health Ranger.
You can hear more of my videos at brighteon.com and read about real climate science at climate.news.
Thank you for listening.
Most of the vitamin C available on the market today is made from genetically modified corn.
If you want non-GMO vitamin C, get it from the Health Ranger store.
We are certified non-GMO, lab tested for heavy metals, glyphosate, microbiology, and a lot more.
check out our non-GMO vitamin C at HealthRangerStore.com.
Thank you for watching.
If you want to support our mission, visit us at healthrangersstore.com for the world's largest selection of lab-verified superfood and nutritional products for healthy living.
▲
Export Selection