I’m about to bring out a revised edition of Watermelons, a book I wrote over a decade ago exposing the man-made global warming industry as a gigantic lie machine advancing the agenda of super-rich Malthusian psychopaths who want to turn the world into a giant slave economy.
But there was one key detail I got wrong which I now intend to correct. In the original version, I claimed that man-made climate change wasn’t real. Of course it is, though. Look at Valencia…
Or, indeed, look at North Carolina after Hurricane Helene. Or Florida after Hurricane Milton. Or, come to that, look out of your window right now, if it’s daylight, and admire all those white lines criss-crossing your skies and marvel at the gobsmacking fact that even now, even after all this evidence so blatant they might have got one of those skywriting aeroplanes to scrawl in rainbow smoke “This is what chemtrails look like, you morons!”, most people in the world still think this is normal.
My own view is that none of us, anywhere, save possibly at outposts like Rothschild Island in Antarctica, has seen what normal weather looks like for a very, very long time - possibly not even since we were born.
Perhaps I’m exaggerating a bit: for example, I definitely don’t remember in my childhood seeing airliners that produced vapour trails which didn’t quickly disappear but which rather lingered in the skies, slowly spreading, before forming a blanket of impenetrable and dispiriting gray cloud.
On the other hand, they’ve had this weather altering technology for a very long time, probably since at least the Second World War, so I think it’s unlikely that they wouldn’t have been experimenting on us with it ever since.
One of the earliest reported examples of this weather manipulation is the Lynmouth Flood disaster of 1952 which claimed the lives of 32 people in Devon, England. This, it was later admitted, was the result of a cloud-seeding experiment by the Royal Air Force.
I think after Lynmouth The Powers That Be learned their lesson: if you’re going to carry on spraying the clouds, flooding towns and killing members of the public - and you are - don’t let on that you’re doing it; instead, let the message slowly seep out that anyone who believes their government would do crazy stuff like cloud-seeding, geoengineering, weather manipulation and so on is a paranoid conspiracy theorist.
This strategy has worked, clearly. Even though universities now offer courses in geo-engineering, and even though expert witnesses have testified in Congress about the reality - and ongoing menace - of weather manipulation, and even though whistleblowers have confirmed that chemtrails are definitely a thing, most people still labour under the cognitive dissonance of thinking that none of this stuff is true.
What I find particularly interesting, as a veteran combatant of the climate wars, is the reluctance of my old, climate sceptical comrades to acknowledge the role of chemtrails, the use of Directed Energy Weapons and such like in generating extreme weather events.
These are not the kind of people who normally back down from a fight. We’re talking about scientists and journalists who’ve been vilified, marginalised, defunded, even had their careers destroyed because they dared stand up to the Climate Industrial Complex and refused to accept the fake science of Man Made Global Warming.
Unfortunately, one of the greatest weapons in their armoury is being used against them.
Let me explain. It is an article of faith among climate sceptics that dramatic fluctuations in climate are nothing new - and that they certainly pre-date so-called ‘man-made’ global warming. They are, of course, perfectly correct on this point and I have made it many times myself, including in Watermelons. Whenever climate alarmists shriek “B-b-but catastrophically rising temperatures in the post industrial era”, we climate sceptics like to remind them of the balmy era when the Romans were growing grapes as far north as Hadrian’s Wall; and of the Medieval Warming Period (which alarmists have tried hard to claim never existed), whose fruitful benignity coincided with an explosion in scholarship and artistic expression (because when people aren’t starving or freezing to death culture flourishes).
The same goes for floods, hurricanes, wildfires and all the other extreme weather events that alarmists - and the compliant MSM - like to tell us are the result of climate change, climate chaos or, as they once tried desperately to brand it, ‘global weirding.’ What climate sceptics usually point out in response is that extreme weather events will always be happening somewhere in the world and have done since time immemorial.
So it has been with the Valencia floods, which have now claimed hundreds of lives. The alarmists - of course - have been busy trying to pin the floods on man-made ‘climate change’. And various sceptics on social media, as you’d expect, have been fighting back by pointing out that in 1957 Valencia suffered floods at least as bad caused by a day of even heavier precipitation. Indeed, Valencia has reportedly experienced as many as 75 such floods since 1257.
This, then, is the nub of the climate sceptic argument: climate has always been changing; extreme weather events have always happened; therefore the notion that there is anything unusual or worrying or man-made about climate change or extreme weather events since the industrial age is dishonest and misleading.
It’s a good argument. A strong argument. In fact it’s so well supported - by history, geography, the temperature record, the rainfall record, the archives, eye-witness testimony and, for what it’s worth, ‘the science’ - you might say it was a position as impregnable as the Maginot Line.
But we all know what happened to the Maginot Line, don’t we? This is the problem when your position becomes too entrenched: you become complacent; even cocky; and you render yourself vulnerable to outflanking movements.
That’s probably why I no longer talk to climate sceptics. They are brave, decent, principled people but they are doomed by a fatal flaw: their dogged integrity. They believe that this is a debate which will ultimately won on facts - which it won’t be because the game is rigged and always has been by an enemy far, far more evil, cunning and manipulative than they realise.
Nowhere is this naivety more pronounced than on the issue of man-made weather. Deep state whistleblowers tell us that the technology at the disposal of the world’s elites is at least 70 years more advanced than anything they will admit to in public. I suspect that this is the case with almost all the weather atrocity porn you see in the newspapers, in TV documentaries and so on. The wildfires, the floods, the hurricanes, the ice storms are sold to us as further evidence of the chaos caused by anthropogenic CO2 emissions. But the truth is that this stuff is man-made, only in a completely different way: generated by the secretive, usually military-linked institutions behind HAARP, NEXRAD, the worldwide Chemtrailing programme and - a speciality of Trump’s Space Force, this one - Directed Energy Weapons.
This artificial weather serves a number of nefarious purposes. It keeps the ‘climate change’ issue in the public eye; it escalates the Cabal’s war on farmers and the food supply; it contributes to the population cull; it enables the Cabal to carry out semi-legitimised land grabs on territory - eg Lahaina, Hawaii - that would otherwise be protected by private property rights; it can be used as a weapon of war (the torrential rain in Vietnam’s Central Highlands during the war, gruellingly chronicled in the excellent novel Matterhorn, was likely geo-engineered); it enforces geopolitical blackmail: countries that won’t play ball with the desired agenda can find themselves suffering unexpected earthquakes or tsunamis or, as in Valencia, floods.
That last detail, especially, is exactly the kind of thing that gives mainstream climate sceptics conniptions and has them muttering: “Get me away from this madman!” Climate sceptics, remember, are already outsiders who have been punished greatly for standing up against the official narrative. The last thing they want is to have what remains of their credibility shredded by association with the kind of bat-shit-crazy loons who actually believe that there are people in the world so evil and powerful that they can actually create earthquakes and use them as a weapon of terror.
But what if such people and such technologies exist? (Spoiler alert: they do!) What you then have is the rather unfortunate situation we’re in today. You have climate sceptics who pride themselves on their honesty and integrity yet choosing convenience and social acceptability over the truth. In other words, they’ve started to act like their much less scrupulous opponents have always done.
This is sad but also kind of inevitable. The tiny, tiny minority of people who run the world - just the scions and associates of a few super evil families, basically - do so on the basis of divide and rule. So long as they can keep the masses distracted with pointless squabbles which ultimately go nowhere, the Cabal are never going to have deal with any serious opposition.
The debate between climate sceptics and climate alarmists is just another example of this.They’re so busy arguing over almost immeasurably trivial issues like whether or not human CO2 emissions are changing the climate (answer: NO) that they’ve no time to look up at all those white lines criss-crossing the sky, or the truly bizarre behaviour of the weather fronts gathering around those HAARP and NEXRAD facilities, and go: “Wait! This is what REAL man-made climate change looks like. And it’s absolutely bloody terrifying!”
