The Climate Change revolution began with a focus on chemicals that some ethically challenged scientists proclaimed to be a global problem that required a global collective action. To coordinate and lead a global collective action requires a global governing system. Cross-border chemicals is a logical extension of atomic weapons research with fallout being the starting point. It doesn’t matter that the science on Climate Change was wrong because the objective was political.
This stage of building global governance began with scientists determining that CFCs in aerosols were destroying the ozone layer of the atmosphere. (The hole in the ozone is naturally occurring and it gets bigger and then shrinks at different times and has done so forever. That fact is in the geologic record of rocks).
The following is from an article about the scientists who supposedly demonstrated that CFCs reduce the ozone layer. You will also find their names in the UN Environmental Programme’s timeline, 1977 World Plan of Action for the Ozone Layer.
Short history of the Montreal Protocol and holes in the ozone layer
Frank Sherwood Rowland, a US scientist, and his collaborator Mario Molina, a Mexican scientist, demonstrated that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) reduce the ozone layer. CFCs are gases used in refrigerators, air conditioners and atomizer thrusters. The National Academy of Sciences of the United States, in 1976 granted credibility to this hypothesis. As a result of this, Canada, Sweden, Norway and the United States took the first initiatives for the elimination of CFCs in aerosols.
The two scientists – one being an American and one being a Mexican is significant. As the history of international agreements is followed, we find that the La Paz treaty with Mexico signed in 1983 was for the purpose of creating an international zone on the border with the objective being cooperative environmental clean-up and management of the border region led by the EPA and overseen by the State Department. It was the first step towards disintegration of the United States government (borders and authority) in favor of international scientific management of a regional economic and social governing structure (i.e. North American Union aka North American Community.)
In 1985, the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer was signed and came into force in 1988.
To the right, are excerpts from the Convention that show that the convention was the beginning of a set-up. It had a political objective of movement towards science-based, regional governing system.
The timeline of “trade agreements” signed by the U.S. supports that thesis. The full timeline can be viewed HERE.
Protocols contain the details for the implementation of a Convention. In 1987, the U.S. agreed to the Montreal Protocol of the Vienna Convention on Ozone. The video at the top right of this article explains the significance of the Montreal Protocol. The protocol defines the amount of allowable production of different chemicals, the percentage of use reduction by given target dates and it includes references to cross border trade in chemical substances.
In 1972, the United States and the Soviet Union signed a treaty for environmental cooperation and an agreement was signed in London to establish the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. The IIASA was for the purpose of Soviet scientists and U.S. scientists to work together on environmental issues with the initial focus being on carbon dioxide. While that might sound nice, it serves to remember that we were still in a Cold War with the Soviets and the discussions with the Soviets to establish the IIASA began in secrecy in the 1960s with funding for it hidden. The following is from Article 2 of the treaty:
This cooperation will be aimed at solving the most important aspects of the problems of the environment and will be devoted to working out measures to prevent pollution, to study pollution and its effect on the environment, and to develop the basis for controlling the impact of human activities on nature.
It will be implemented, in particular, in the following areas:
- air pollution;
- water pollution;
- environmental pollution associated with agricultural production;
- enhancement of the urban environment;
- preservation of nature and the organization of preserves;
- marine pollution;
- biological and genetic consequences of environmental pollution;
- influence of environmental changes on climate;
- earthquake prediction;
- arctic and subarctic ecological systems;
- legal and administrative measures for protecting environmental quality.
In the years before the planned demolition of the Soviet Union, George Shultz was working with Mikhail Gorbachev. According to Shultz, the Soviets would not be able to maintain control through isolation because satellites, telecommunications and information systems wouldn’t allow it. Gorbachev understood.
In the late 80s, with the threat of nuclear war ending, a new vehicle of terror was needed by the globalists. Climate Change as a function of cross-border pollution filled the bill. It became the marketing approach for selling an environmental holocaust as the new global terror.
In 1987, the World Commission on Environment and Development submitted their report on the global problematique to the year 2000 and beyond including strategies for sustainable development to the United Nations. The title of the report, Our Common Future which described: Our common concerns, our common challenges, and our common endeavors to manage the commons and implicitly, the commoners using a new paradigm of “anticipate and prevent“. Sustainable Development became the concept label for anticipating and preventing (controlling) humans from destroying the “global habitat” supposedly to preserve the resources for future generations.
The World Commission on Environment and Development was led by Gro Harlem Brundtland, Prime Minister of Norway. Brundtland was also a physician and she became the Director General (1998-2003) of the World Health Organization (WHO). Her focus at WHO was on Public Health and the Environment.
When Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio announced the Green New Deal in February along with Edward Markey, it rejuvenated the radical environmental agenda of the left. In April of 2019, the House Oversight, Environment Subcommittee led by Congressman Harley Rouda (D-CA) initiated a series of hearings on Climate Change. The first hearing was on April 9, 2019, titled Climate Change, Part I: The History of a Consensus and the Causes of Inaction. In the hearing, Congressman Rouda said that Reagan was the principal force behind the establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. One of the witnesses at the hearing was Michael J. Oppenheimer, Ph.D, Princeton. It was found that Oppenheimer wrote a blog post on the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) website in 2007 titled, How the IPCC Got Started and it turns out that Oppenheimer was the Chief Scientist for EDF. Oppenheimer named Ronald Reagan as being behind the establishment of the IPCC. EDF is a pseudo environmental group of parasitic predatory lawyers who figured out a way to rob and ultimately control utility customers using the utility companies as a proxy. See Fred Krupp, Market-Based Economics. Back door man.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established by agreement between the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in 1988. The objective of the IPCC is to provide governments at all levels with scientific information that they can use to develop climate policies. IPCC reports are a key input into international climate change negotiations.
The UN General Assembly endorsed the IPCC in General Assembly Resolution 43/53 of 6 December 1988 with the purpose being to prepare a comprehensive review and recommendations with respect to the state of knowledge of the science of climate change; the social and economic impact of climate change, and potential response strategies and elements for inclusion in a possible future international convention on climate.
70th plenary meeting
6 December 1988
Protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind
The General Assembly,
Welcoming with appreciation the initiative taken by the Government of Malta in proposing for consideration by the Assembly the item entitled “Conservation of climate as part of the common heritage of mankind“,
Concerned that certain human activities could change global climate patterns, threatening present and future generations with potentially severe economic and social consequences,
Noting with concern that the emerging evidence indicates that continued growth in atmospheric concentrations of “greenhouse” gases could produce global warming with an eventual rise in sea levels, the effects of which could be disastrous for mankind if timely steps are not taken at all levels,
Notice that the objective of the global initiative is to SAVE THE CLIMATE FROM MANKIND. That’s literally what the resolution says. One might be tempted to think that it was just a mistake in wording but it isn’t. The entire epoch is really that insane.
IPCC produced three reports – third report being Response Strategies
Report 1 – FAR Climate Change: Scientific Assessment of Climate Change
Report 2 – FAR Climate Change: Impacts Assessment of Climate Change
Report 3 – FAR Climate Change: The IPCC Response Strategies
Here is the weasel statement otherwise known as the Disclaimer in the Policymaker’s Summary:
There are many uncertainties in our predictions particularly with regard to the timing, magnitude, and regional patterns of climate change.
In 1989, UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher gave a speech at the United Nations focused entirely on environmental issues. Thatcher proposed making the IPCC a permanent UN body and that they be based in London for the purpose of prediction of climate change impact by modeling (how great was that for British business?). She also mentioned that the British Empire (Commonwealth) was behind the idea. Interestingly, she talks about Darwin. If you listen carefully, you can hear population reduction between the lines. The full speech can be viewed on C-Span. The following is an excerpt with comments.
In July of 1990, Houston, Texas hosted the annual meeting of the leaders of the G7 countries. The leaders meet to put their stamp of approval on the collectivist plans put together by lower level officials in each of the member countries. The outputs of the meetings describe the plans for the coming year. The Economic Declaration in 1990 had a section on the Environment. The following are excerpts (emphasis added):
- +Excerpts from Environment Section of the Houston Declaration -
- 62. One of our most important responsibilities is to pass on to future generations an environment whose health, beauty, and economic potential are not threatened. Environmental challenges such as climate change, ozone depletion, deforestation, marine pollution, and loss of biological diversity require closer and more effective international cooperation and concrete action. We as industrialized countries have an obligation to be leaders in meeting these challenges. We agree that, in the face of threats of irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty is no excuse to postpone actions which are justified in their own right. We recognize that strong, growing, market-oriented economies provide the best means for successful environmental protection.
63. Climate change is of key importance. We are committed to undertake common efforts to limit emissions of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide. We strongly support the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and look forward to the release of its full report in August . . .
72. We recognize that developing countries will benefit from increased financial and technological assistance to help them resolve environmental problems, which are aggravated by poverty and underdevelopment. Multilateral development bank programs should be strengthened to provide greater protection for the environment, including environmental impact assessments and action plans, and to promote energy efficiency. We recognize that debt-for-nature swaps can play a useful role in protecting the environment. We will examine how the World Bank can provide a coordinating role for measures to promote environmental protection.
73. In order to integrate successfully environmental and economic goals . . . We recognize the importance of coordinating and sharing the collection of satellite data on earth and its atmosphere. We welcome and encourage the ongoing discussions for the establishment of an International Network. It is also important to involve the private sector, which has a key role in developing solutions to environmental problems. We encourage the OECD to accelerate its very useful work on environment and the economy. Of particular importance are the early development of environmental indicators and the design of market-oriented approaches that can be used to achieve environmental objectives. . .
Pollution Prevention Act of 1990
On October 25, 1990, H.R. 5931, the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 was introduced in the House of Representatives by Howard Wolpe (D-MI).
The legislation was referred to Committee. It was never voted on by Congress as legislation. It was put into an Appropriations bill (H.R. 5835) by Leon Panetta. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 became Public Law 101-508 on November 5, 1990.
The following are a few excerpts from the Vienna Convention to show that the objective was movement towards a science-based, regional governing structure.
Significant Excerpts from the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone, 1985
Aware of the potentially harmful impact on human health and the environment through modification of the ozone layer,
Recalling the pertinent provisions of the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, and in particular principle 21, which provides that “States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental policies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction,”
Mindful of the work and studies proceeding within both international and national organizations and, in particular, of the World Plan of Action on the Ozone Layer of the United Nations Environment Programme,
For the purposes of this Convention:
1. “The ozone layer” means the layer of atmospheric ozone above the planetary boundary layer.
2. “Adverse effects” means changes in the physical environment or biota, including changes in climate, which have significant deleterious effects on human health or on the composition, resilience and productivity of natural and managed ecosystems, or on materials useful to mankind.
6. “Regional economic integration organization” means an organization constituted by sovereign States of a given region which has competence in respect of matters governed by this Convention or its protocols and has been duly authorized, in accordance with its internal procedures, to sign, ratify, accept, approve or accede to the instruments concerned.
(a) Co-operate by means of systematic observations, research and information exchange in order to better understand and assess the effects of human activities on the ozone layer and the effects on human health and the environment from modification of the ozone layer
(b) Adopt appropriate legislative or administrative measures and co-operate in harmonizing appropriate policies to control, limit, reduce or prevent human activities under their jurisdiction or control should it be found that these activities have or are likely to have adverse effects resulting from modification or likely modification of the ozone layer;
Research and Systematic Observations
(a) The physical and chemical processes that may affect the ozone layer;
(c) Climatic effects deriving from any modifications of the ozone layer;
(d) Effects deriving from any modifications of the ozone layer and any consequent change in UV-B radiation on natural and synthetic materials useful to mankind;
(e) Substances, practices, processes and activities that may affect the ozone layer, and their cumulative effects;
(f) Alternative substances and technologies;
(g) Related socio-economic matters; and as further elaborated in annexes I and II.
Research and Systematic Observations
(a) Research into the physics and chemistry of the atmosphere
(i) Comprehensive theoretical models: further development of models which consider the interaction between radiative, dynamic and chemical processes; studies of the simultaneous effects of various man-made and naturally occurring species upon atmospheric ozone; interpretation of satellite and non-satellite measurement data sets; evaluation of trends in atmospheric and geophysical parameters, and the development of methods for attributing changes in these parameters to specific causes;
The UN Environment Programme established a Secretariat for Ozone. If their website says when the Secretariat was created, I didn’t find it. A guess would be the year was 1990 because that was the year the funding mechanism was defined. The bureaucratic organizational structure and the mission can be found on the Secretariat’s website.
Putting policy into practice
The Vienna Convention, Montreal Protocol and Kigali Amendment create a global policy framework for protecting the ozone layer and the climate. Implementing those policies has required profound changes in many commercial and technological sectors.
In 1990, the conference in London added a financing mechanism for implementation of the Ozone policy.
Article 10 – Financial Mechanism
1. The Parties shall establish a mechanism for the purposes of providing financial and technical cooperation, including the transfer of technologies, to Parties operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 of this Protocol to enable their compliance with the control measures set out in Articles 2A to 2E of the Protocol.
The mechanism, contributions to which shall be additional to other financial transfers to Parties operating under that paragraph, shall meet all agreed incremental costs of such Parties in order to enable their compliance with the control measures of the Protocol. An indicative list of the categories of incremental costs shall be decided by the meeting of the Parties.
2. The mechanism established under paragraph 1 shall include a Multilateral Fund. It may also include other means of multilateral, regional and bilateral cooperation.
The U.S. EPA has an Ozone Information Page that can be viewed.
In 2016, the Kigali Amendment was added to the Montreal Protocol. On the State Department website, this is what was said about the Amendment.
This amendment creates market certainty and opens international markets to new technology that is better for the environment, without compromising performance. It calls on all countries to gradually phase down their production and consumption of HFCs in the coming decades using the flexible, innovative, and effective approaches the Montreal Protocol has used for three decades. Global stakeholders endorsed adoption of the Kigali amendment, including most of the major U.S. companies working in related sectors.
It has always been about power and politics, corporations like DuPont losing patents on refrigerant r-12 made that refrigerant dirt cheap, a thirty pound can was 25 dollars, by the time the government was done , that 25 dollar can of R-12 was near a thousand dollars, most of it taxes, the government can only guarantee misery.
You are quite right about that. You’ll see how they solidified their power in the next article that I’m starting today.