Forwarded from 𝖨𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖡𝗈𝗋𝖾𝖽 𝗈𝖿 𝖯𝖾𝖺𝖼𝖾 (Bryan)
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
44 hour BLITZKRIEG retreat! That’s a new record.
Official US State of Greenland Public Information Channel
Official US State of Greenland Public Information Channel
Forwarded from The Vigilant Fox 🦊
O’Keefe Sneaks Into Davos: WEF Climate Insiders Brag About Weather Manipulation
What they boast about in private—when they think no one’s listening—is chilling.
https://www.vigilantfox.com/p/okeefe-sneaks-into-davos-wef-climate
Follow @VigilantFox 🦊
More Stories: VigilantFox.com
What they boast about in private—when they think no one’s listening—is chilling.
https://www.vigilantfox.com/p/okeefe-sneaks-into-davos-wef-climate
Follow @VigilantFox 🦊
More Stories: VigilantFox.com
Vigilantfox
O’Keefe Sneaks Into Davos: WEF Climate Insiders Brag About Weather Manipulation
What they boast about in private—when they think no one’s listening—is chilling.
Forwarded from Andrew Bridgen
These are the words of the first 16 scientists of 46 that have left the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) due to the corruption of science within the organisation.
Dr Robert Balling: The IPCC notes that “No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected.” This did not appear in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers.
Dr Lucka Bogataj: “Rising levels of airborne carbon dioxide don’t cause global temperatures to rise…. temperature changed first and some 700 years later a change in aerial content of carbon dioxide followed.”
Dr John Christy: “Little known to the public is the fact that most of the scientists involved with the IPCC do not agree that global warming is occurring. Its findings have been consistently misrepresented and/or politicized with each succeeding report.”
Dr Rosa Compagnucci: “Humans have only contributed a few tenths of a degree to warming on Earth. Solar activity is a key driver of climate.”
Dr Richard Courtney: “The empirical evidence strongly indicates that the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis is wrong.”
Dr Judith Curry: “I’m not going to just spout off and endorse the IPCC because I don’t have confidence in the process.”
Dr Robert Davis: “Global temperatures have not been changing as state of the art climate models predicted they would. Not a single mention of satellite temperature observations appears in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers.”
Dr Willem de Lange: “In 1996 the IPCC listed me as one of approximately 3000 “scientists” who agreed that there was a discernible human influence on climate. I didn’t. There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that runaway catastrophic climate change is due to human activities.”
Dr Chris de Freitas: “Government decision-makers should have heard by now that the basis for the long-standing claim that carbon dioxide is a major driver of global climate is being questioned; along with it the hitherto assumed need for costly measures to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. If they have not heard, it is because of the din of global warming hysteria that relies on the logical fallacy of ‘argument from ignorance’ and predictions of computer models.”
Dr Oliver Frauenfeld: “Much more progress is necessary regarding our current understanding of climate and our abilities to model it.”
Dr Peter Dietze: “Using a flawed eddy diffusion model, the IPCC has grossly underestimated the future oceanic carbon dioxide uptake.”
Dr John Everett: “It is time for a reality check. The oceans and coastal zones have been far warmer and colder than is projected in the present scenarios of climate change. I have reviewed the IPCC and more recent scientific literature and believe that there is not a problem with increased acidification, even up to the unlikely levels in the most-used IPCC scenarios.”
Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen: “The IPCC refused to consider the sun’s effect on the Earth’s climate as a topic worthy of investigation. The IPCC conceived its task only as investigating potential human causes of climate change.”
Dr Lee Gerhard: “I never fully accepted or denied the anthropogenic global warming concept until the furore started after NASA’s James Hansen’s wild claims in the late 1980s. I went to the [scientific] literature to study the basis of the claim, starting with first principles. My studies then led me to believe that the claims were false.”
Dr Indur Goklany: “Climate change is unlikely to be the world’s most important environmental problem of the 21st century. There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.”
Dr Vincent Gray: “The [IPCC] climate change statement is an orchestrated litany of lies.”
https://news.1rj.ru/str/ABridgen
Dr Robert Balling: The IPCC notes that “No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected.” This did not appear in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers.
Dr Lucka Bogataj: “Rising levels of airborne carbon dioxide don’t cause global temperatures to rise…. temperature changed first and some 700 years later a change in aerial content of carbon dioxide followed.”
Dr John Christy: “Little known to the public is the fact that most of the scientists involved with the IPCC do not agree that global warming is occurring. Its findings have been consistently misrepresented and/or politicized with each succeeding report.”
Dr Rosa Compagnucci: “Humans have only contributed a few tenths of a degree to warming on Earth. Solar activity is a key driver of climate.”
Dr Richard Courtney: “The empirical evidence strongly indicates that the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis is wrong.”
Dr Judith Curry: “I’m not going to just spout off and endorse the IPCC because I don’t have confidence in the process.”
Dr Robert Davis: “Global temperatures have not been changing as state of the art climate models predicted they would. Not a single mention of satellite temperature observations appears in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers.”
Dr Willem de Lange: “In 1996 the IPCC listed me as one of approximately 3000 “scientists” who agreed that there was a discernible human influence on climate. I didn’t. There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that runaway catastrophic climate change is due to human activities.”
Dr Chris de Freitas: “Government decision-makers should have heard by now that the basis for the long-standing claim that carbon dioxide is a major driver of global climate is being questioned; along with it the hitherto assumed need for costly measures to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. If they have not heard, it is because of the din of global warming hysteria that relies on the logical fallacy of ‘argument from ignorance’ and predictions of computer models.”
Dr Oliver Frauenfeld: “Much more progress is necessary regarding our current understanding of climate and our abilities to model it.”
Dr Peter Dietze: “Using a flawed eddy diffusion model, the IPCC has grossly underestimated the future oceanic carbon dioxide uptake.”
Dr John Everett: “It is time for a reality check. The oceans and coastal zones have been far warmer and colder than is projected in the present scenarios of climate change. I have reviewed the IPCC and more recent scientific literature and believe that there is not a problem with increased acidification, even up to the unlikely levels in the most-used IPCC scenarios.”
Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen: “The IPCC refused to consider the sun’s effect on the Earth’s climate as a topic worthy of investigation. The IPCC conceived its task only as investigating potential human causes of climate change.”
Dr Lee Gerhard: “I never fully accepted or denied the anthropogenic global warming concept until the furore started after NASA’s James Hansen’s wild claims in the late 1980s. I went to the [scientific] literature to study the basis of the claim, starting with first principles. My studies then led me to believe that the claims were false.”
Dr Indur Goklany: “Climate change is unlikely to be the world’s most important environmental problem of the 21st century. There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.”
Dr Vincent Gray: “The [IPCC] climate change statement is an orchestrated litany of lies.”
https://news.1rj.ru/str/ABridgen
Telegram
Andrew Bridgen
Independent minded. abridgen.uk
Forwarded from LauraAboli (Laura Aboli)
The evidence is now undeniable:
1. First Study Finds COVID-19 "Vaccines" Increase Risk of Multiple Cancers: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12…
2. Second Study Finds COVID-19 "Vaccines" Increase Risk of Multiple Cancers: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12…
3. Systematic Review Documents 300+ Peer-Reviewed COVID Shot Turbo Cancer Cases Across 27 Countries: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41498242/
4. mRNA "Vaccine" Genomic integration Demonstrated: ijirms.in/index.php/ijir…
5. 17 Ways mRNA Shots Induce Cancer, According to 100 Studies: thefocalpoints.com/p/17-ways-mrna…
6. mRNA Injections Induce Severe, Long-Lasting Genetic Disruption Linked to Cancer and Chronic Disease: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12…
7. mRNA "Vaccine" Spike Protein Detected in Both the Cytoplasm and Nuclei of Metastatic Breast Cancer Cells: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41076388/
8. First Peer-Reviewed Paper Defines COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced Turbo Cancer: journalofindependentmedicine.org/articles/v01n0…
1. First Study Finds COVID-19 "Vaccines" Increase Risk of Multiple Cancers: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12…
2. Second Study Finds COVID-19 "Vaccines" Increase Risk of Multiple Cancers: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12…
3. Systematic Review Documents 300+ Peer-Reviewed COVID Shot Turbo Cancer Cases Across 27 Countries: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41498242/
4. mRNA "Vaccine" Genomic integration Demonstrated: ijirms.in/index.php/ijir…
5. 17 Ways mRNA Shots Induce Cancer, According to 100 Studies: thefocalpoints.com/p/17-ways-mrna…
6. mRNA Injections Induce Severe, Long-Lasting Genetic Disruption Linked to Cancer and Chronic Disease: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12…
7. mRNA "Vaccine" Spike Protein Detected in Both the Cytoplasm and Nuclei of Metastatic Breast Cancer Cells: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41076388/
8. First Peer-Reviewed Paper Defines COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced Turbo Cancer: journalofindependentmedicine.org/articles/v01n0…
PubMed
COVID vaccination and post-infection cancer signals: Evaluating patterns and potential biological mechanisms - PubMed
A growing number of peer-reviewed publications have reported diverse cancer types appearing in temporal association with COVID-19 vaccination or infection. To characterize the nature and scope of these reports, a systematic literature search from January…
Forwarded from 𝖨𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖡𝗈𝗋𝖾𝖽 𝗈𝖿 𝖯𝖾𝖺𝖼𝖾 (Bryan)
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
“The situation in Minnesota reminds us that the west cannot mass import foreign cultures, which have failed to ever build a successful society of their own”
US Sᴛᴀᴛᴇ ᴏғ Gʀᴇᴇɴʟᴀɴᴅ Tᴏᴜʀɪsᴛ Iɴғᴏʀᴍᴀᴛɪᴏɴ Kɪᴏsᴋ
US Sᴛᴀᴛᴇ ᴏғ Gʀᴇᴇɴʟᴀɴᴅ Tᴏᴜʀɪsᴛ Iɴғᴏʀᴍᴀᴛɪᴏɴ Kɪᴏsᴋ
Forwarded from Foreign Agent Intel
The UK Accidentally Created Its Own Dissident Icon
In an attempt at crude propaganda, the British government rolled out an AI “educational” character called Amelia, designed to represent a so-called far-right extremist. The plan was to scare, stigmatise, and instruct the public on what not to think.
It failed spectacularly.
Instead of exposing extremism, Amelia came across as calm, rational, and grounded. She voiced views that millions of ordinary Britons already hold: opposition to mass immigration, anger at grooming gangs being protected by the state, frustration with a political class that has abandoned the public, and a desire to take Britain back from unaccountable elites.
Rather than being rejected, Amelia was embraced.
Clips went viral. Parodies exploded across social media. Quotes like “Amelia will lead the revolution” became memes. The character meant to demonise dissent instead gave it a face, a voice, and a unifying symbol. The state didn’t just lose control of the narrative — it handed the opposition a ready-made figurehead.
This is late-stage Western governance in action. Elites so disconnected from the public mood that they no longer recognise normality when they see it. A government so arrogant it believed it could manufacture fear, only to manufacture legitimacy instead.
When propaganda backfires this badly, it reveals something deeper: the system no longer understands the people it claims to rule.
t.me/ForeignAgentIntel
In an attempt at crude propaganda, the British government rolled out an AI “educational” character called Amelia, designed to represent a so-called far-right extremist. The plan was to scare, stigmatise, and instruct the public on what not to think.
It failed spectacularly.
Instead of exposing extremism, Amelia came across as calm, rational, and grounded. She voiced views that millions of ordinary Britons already hold: opposition to mass immigration, anger at grooming gangs being protected by the state, frustration with a political class that has abandoned the public, and a desire to take Britain back from unaccountable elites.
Rather than being rejected, Amelia was embraced.
Clips went viral. Parodies exploded across social media. Quotes like “Amelia will lead the revolution” became memes. The character meant to demonise dissent instead gave it a face, a voice, and a unifying symbol. The state didn’t just lose control of the narrative — it handed the opposition a ready-made figurehead.
This is late-stage Western governance in action. Elites so disconnected from the public mood that they no longer recognise normality when they see it. A government so arrogant it believed it could manufacture fear, only to manufacture legitimacy instead.
When propaganda backfires this badly, it reveals something deeper: the system no longer understands the people it claims to rule.
t.me/ForeignAgentIntel
Forwarded from 𝖨𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖡𝗈𝗋𝖾𝖽 𝗈𝖿 𝖯𝖾𝖺𝖼𝖾 (torti)
Forwarded from 𝖨𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖡𝗈𝗋𝖾𝖽 𝗈𝖿 𝖯𝖾𝖺𝖼𝖾 (Bryan)
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Fmr. CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield Now Says the COVID Jab Should Not Have Been Called a Vaccine
“It was never meant to prevent transmission … It probably was a misnomer to call it a vaccine. It's really more like a medicine. It doesn't stop infection.”
US Sᴛᴀᴛᴇ ᴏғ Gʀᴇᴇɴʟᴀɴᴅ Tᴏᴜʀɪsᴛ Iɴғᴏʀᴍᴀᴛɪᴏɴ Kɪᴏsᴋ
“It was never meant to prevent transmission … It probably was a misnomer to call it a vaccine. It's really more like a medicine. It doesn't stop infection.”
US Sᴛᴀᴛᴇ ᴏғ Gʀᴇᴇɴʟᴀɴᴅ Tᴏᴜʀɪsᴛ Iɴғᴏʀᴍᴀᴛɪᴏɴ Kɪᴏsᴋ
Commence the Rubio memes for his next job! https://news.1rj.ru/str/volmemes/66253
Telegram
Official US State of Greenland Public Information Channel
Somebody got a new job.
US Sᴛᴀᴛᴇ ᴏғ Gʀᴇᴇɴʟᴀɴᴅ Tᴏᴜʀɪsᴛ Iɴғᴏʀᴍᴀᴛɪᴏɴ Kɪᴏsᴋ
US Sᴛᴀᴛᴇ ᴏғ Gʀᴇᴇɴʟᴀɴᴅ Tᴏᴜʀɪsᴛ Iɴғᴏʀᴍᴀᴛɪᴏɴ Kɪᴏsᴋ
Forwarded from 𝖨𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖡𝗈𝗋𝖾𝖽 𝗈𝖿 𝖯𝖾𝖺𝖼𝖾 (torti)