Night of the Living Environmentalists

Living_DeadBy James F. Tracy

The earth’s climate is changing. Sea levels are rising. We are all at risk. The role of humans in climate change is undeniable. Capitalism is to blame. Governments must fix the problem.

These are the mantras of the environmental movement on display at the People’s Climate March being held on September 21.

[Image Credit:]

The talking points of foundation-funded doomsayers reverberate in unison because their financing is dependent on publicizing a specific message and agenda. The otherwise critical minds supporting what passes for rebelliousness overlook the sponsorship and tacit control wielded by powerful private interests.

Scratching the surface, one finds that the most salient proponents of the carbon-centric global warming worldview are largely dependent on such funding. For example, Bill McKibben, a principal organizer of the People’s Climate March, has built a career around the false notion that minuscule increases in carbon dioxide are a principal cause of “extreme weather” events.

[Image Credit:]

mad_billAs this author has noted,

McKibben’s project is the public face of his 501(c)(3) 1Sky Education Fund, which between its founding in 2007 and 2009 took in close to $5,000,000 in foundation money and “public contributions.” In 2010 the Rockefeller Brothers Fund gave 1Sky $200,000. The key “scientific” paper McKibben points to as support for his dire warnings on climate change, “Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim,” coauthored by NASA scientist James Hansen, was partially funded through Rockefeller Foundation money.[1]

A seemingly radical, anti-establishment veneer is helpful in lending the environmental movement some degree of legitimacy. Canadian journalist and author Naomi Klein is the most recent voice of climate alarmism. Klein’s previous works, No Logo (2000) and The Shock Doctrine (2007), have afforded her with considerable notoriety and some degree of credibility, particularly among those on the progressive-left.

Klein’s most recent book, This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate, suggests that drastic measures must be taken to save the environment from destructive human activities. This Changes Everything is published by Simon & Schuster, a subsidiary of the publicly-traded CBS Corporation, which boasted revenues of $15.284 billion in 2013 alone.[2] Like McKibben’s Rockefeller sponsors, Simon & Schuster and CBS are typically uninclined toward promoting genuinely anti-establishment thought and discourse.

Klein is one of the few in the progressive-left cavalcade to recognize that geoengineering and weather manipulation pose extreme threats to the environment. “Well, so, one of the geoengineering methods that gets taken most seriously is called ‘solar radiation management,'” Klein remarks on the foundation-funded Democracy Now! news hour,[3] another promoter of the People’s Climate March.

Solar radiation management, managing the sun. So, what you—so the idea [sic] is that you would spray sulfur aerosols into the stratosphere, then they would reflect some of the sun’s rays back to space and dim the sun and cool the Earth. So, climate change is caused by pollution in the lower atmosphere, and so they’re saying that the solution to that pollution is pollution in the stratosphere. And, you know, it’s really frightening when you look at some of the modeling that is being done about what the possible downsides of this could be [sic].[4]

In fact, there is substantial evidence–patents, government documents, and scientific papers–that such organized contamination projects have been underway since at least the late 1990s and are almost certainly a major factor in the “extreme weather events” pointed to with such alarm by figures like McKibDN_Kleinben.

Yet Klein deceptively suggests that geoengineering is still in the planning stages and has not begun. Indeed, to acknowledge that such plans are well-advanced and now fully operational would call into question the anthropogenic climate change hypothesis she and her adherents proclaim as the rationale for opposing “capitalism.” It would also likely jeopardize a lucrative publishing contract with a global media conglomerate.

[Image Credit:]

Foundation-funded and corporate-promoted environmentalism is notable not only for its hypocrisy, but also for what it leaves obscure to its well-intentioned devotees.

With this in mind, the purpose of such artificial dissent is arguably to repackage the threat of extreme weather that has been manufactured by military and government programs over the years as the basis for strategic socio-political and economic changes to which the public would never freely submit.

To curb humankind’s environmental excesses, today’s state-backed corporatism mistakenly decried as capitalism must further expand into the everyday lives of individuals, where an “internet of things” will inevitably catalog, regulate and control all consumable resources and biological entities.

“A really efficient totalitarian state,” Aldous Huxley once observed, “would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude.”[5]

Along these lines, establishment environmentalism’s continued feigned urgency and spectacle of protest ingeniously disguises the deeper belief that humanity’s salvation lies in its own subservience to technocratic control.


[1] James F. Tracy, “Chemtrails: The Realities of Geoengineering and Weather Modification,” Global Research, November 8, 2012.

[2] “CBS CORP 2013 Annual Report Form (10-K)” (XBRL). United States Securities and Exchange Commission. February 14, 2014.

[3] James F. Tracy, “Manufactured Dissent: The Financial Bearings of the Progressive-Left Media,” Global Research, August 3, 2012.

[4] Amy Goodman, “Naomi Klein on Motherhood, Geoengineering, Climate Debt & the Fossil Fuel Divestment Movement,” Democracy Now! September 18, 2014.

[5] Aldous Huxley, Brave New World and Brave New World Revisited, Harper Perennial, 2005.

40 thoughts on “Night of the Living Environmentalists”

  1. Take look at how anthropocentric climate change enthusiasm by the true believers mirrors the language of Orwell’s true believers in the Party in 1984. Right up until the time they were led wailing into Room 101 in the book, they believed with all their heart the blatant lies, corruptions and rewriting of history…they lived with eyes wide shut.

    The same is going on today and another instance of Orwell’s prescience. Once indoctrinated so deeply, it is very difficult for most humans to extricate themselves from the pit of lies they have allowed themselves to sink into.

    Human psychological depravity and perverseness is an amazing thing to behold. Too bad it’s the instrument that is well along in the process to enslave and annihilate our better selves.

    1. Science is not belief based, it’s evidence based.

      As far as your data, let’s just say you cited yourself twice in your non peer reviewed articles. Fluff

  2. we MUST stop the spraying, the geonegineering of the weather is the CAUSE of the man made ‘global warming’ we are having the planet blanketed in a heavy metal BLANKET of chemicals every single day , the California drought is MAN MADE, if we stop the spraying of heavy metals into our atmosphere,if we don’t stop the spraying we are doomed. please do the research.they are spraying the storms into exsistance & they are spraying the storms out of exsistance, they use haarp ( heating up the ionisphere , the heavy metal blanket to create or kill storms), please i implore you to seek Dane Wigingtons science & observation and what exactly is the cause. we MUST stop the spraying it is our only hope .


    “So many have bought the lie that climate scientists are paid more or rewarded for stating the dangers of climate change. The fact of the matter is that climate scientists in many cases have been dealt with very harshly if they dare to state the facts as they really are in regard to the severely damaged climate. WIth this consideration in mind, there is absolutely no chance that any reputable climate scientist can openly address the climate engineering nightmare without being subjected to very real threats and potential dangers (this is clearly documented in the article below). Unfortunately, as already mentioned, many have chosen to believe a completely false narrative put out by the power structure, the fossil fuel industry, and the geoengineers. First, that the planet is cooling or not warming. Second, that climate scientists are promoted or rewarded by stating alarming conclusions about the state of the climate. What I hope readers of the article below consider most is that climate scientists and other related academicians are most certainly under threat if they dare to speak out about the ongoing climate engineering in any way, shape, or form. It’s up to all of us to raise awareness of the global geoengineering programs to the point where there is cover enough for the scientists to stand out from the shadows. We are in a race against time in regard to this task, all are needed to join this most critical fight.
    Dane Wigington ”


  4. This is an openly socialist organization and it is certain no msm would bother to report on any of that. Their facebook page will not allow any discussion on geo-engineering.

    One of their pro-socialist’s signs.×348.png

    You would think with a gathering of the reported hundreds of thousands of protesters, we might see some video coverage. Did see a clip on and it very well could have been of the occupy wallstreet stoned ‘musicians.’

    All the photos reviewed seemed quite bizarre and perhaps Fox sums up what is happening without really being able to call it outright, there is so much wrong with the ap photo they display.

    “To calculate the attendance, organizers used a crowd density analysis formula developed by a professor of game theory and complex systems at Carnegie Mellon University. The formula calculated average crowd density over specific intervals, factoring in the surface area covered by the crowd and the speed and duration of the march.”

    Overall would guess this ‘huge’ event received minimal press coverage. Perhaps their success is measured in all the poor saps who made contributions to the cause to save the earth and further make the green movement rolling in the green!

    1. This photo in skirts comment says it all. You will never be able to stop people from running to the banner of despots like Stalin, Hitler, and Mao. The powers that be know this, and love it. The only difference this time is they have actually given up on themselves, and march in defense of the “planet”. Onward workers! into the ovens, that will be wind and solar powered, of course.

    2. Actually, the corporate media is promoting the “Climate Change” protests world wide, and heavily. The prestigious New York Times has covered the run-up to the NY “People’s Climate March” in some detail, and also the march itself on Sunday – with feature-length articles, numerous color photos, slide shows, and even videos.

      In the latter article, published in the print version today (Monday), the term “climate change” is mentioned 12 times, without any indication of what the term actually signifies.

      It should be noted that the NY Times rarely covers demonstrations. So why, one might ask, is it going all-out to broadcast this one?

      We can look forward to more MSM coverage of the UN summit meeting on “Climate Change” to take place this week, although even the NY Times concedes that this will be meaningless:

      “Like the march, the summit meeting on Tuesday at the United Nations will be flush with speeches intended to build support for addressing climate change. But the gathering of world leaders is not meant to be a formal negotiating session for a potential 2015 agreement.”

      What is this all about, then? It is about diverting our attention – through pseudo-intellectual infotainment, by the mainstream and alternative media – from the geo-engineering going on right in front of our faces.

      Thank you, Professor Tracy.

  5. I am perplexed by the number of people that buy into global warming as an environmental problem to be solved. No one seems to agree on what is specifically being effected, to what degree, or how to stop it. The phenomenon appears to be a mass hysteria driven by propaganda.

    I believe it is the goal of the military-industrial complex to control the weather and it is likely that experiments have been ongoing for decades. They obviously cannot seperate the experiments from public exposure so public findings of evidence that supports a conspiracy must be ignored or discredited (not unlike JFK, 9-11, SHE, Boston). Public harm from weather experiments does not outweigh the potential advantage of having the ability to control the weather. The public suffers, knows it is suffering, cries out but continuously misses the target.

  6. How about we put all these “climate scientists” and Mckibben up against the wall and force them to tell us what they know about CHEM TRAILS….What are they and Why is the spraying being done. THEY KNOW! So let’s tell em we don’t want to hear another word about man-created CO2 in the atmosphere UNTIL THEY EXPLAIN TO US WHAT THE MAN-CREATED WORLD-WIDE ARIAL SPRAYING IS ABOUT????

    D Morrisseau 802 645 9727

  7. Great article.

    I am a life-long political dissident and chose a career as a small traditionalist family farmer; a tiny dairy, in effect, a Luddite, opposing much/most modern technological development and control; to express that dissidence. I fought with my wife, not to have this computer! (20 years ago, when our kids ‘needed it’ for school….)

    I can only very sadly and bitterly express the fact that technocracy has insidiously and arrogantly consumed and transformed virtually all the iconic voices of, local agriculture, including Wendell Berry, a man I once admired. These voices (that of Berry and his fellow elder ‘statesmen’ of agriculture) are now inept and/or corrupt, in my opinion and also in my personal experience, having dealt with them. Empty shells. Castrated cowards and illegitimate posers, tools of the authoritarian regime, afraid to truly oppose and defy the power structure.

    USDA certified organic (thanks to such cowardice and ‘posing/posturing’ by so-called ‘men’) is a blatant bureaucratic expression of totalitarian statist control and has nothing to do with sustainable methods of agriculture.

    Individual famers have no rights, only orders, regulations, rules and mandates by which they are to ‘proceed’.

    Aldous Huxley was correct.

    I really hate this.

    Ned Lud

  8. Good info about the funding for the pro-AGW camp. They like to throw around ‘Big Oil Shill’ at anyone who questions the idea, and what I find very interesting, is that the Hadley Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia gets funding from Royal Dutch Shell. That institution (HADCRU) was at the heart of the ‘Climate Gate’ scandal, and one of its most prominent scientists, Phil Jones, is a lead author of the IPCC assessment reports. I know without doubt that fossil fuel companies privately funded climate research back in the early days of the CO2 scare. They wanted to know for themselves what the reality of the situation was. But then, they switched it up~ they found that the AGW scare could be a benefit for A) Attacking coal, which is an oil and gas competitor, and B) To politically mitigate ‘Peak Oil’. Essentially, its far better to scare everyone into using less energy, than tell them that the energy responsible for modern civilization has reached a production peak. Energy is the foundation of the modern economy. If production rates don’t continuously increase, wealth cannot increase. Financial systems based upon more wealth available tomorrow than today will falter (and are doing so now). A debt-based financial system can only operate if the resource base grows continuously. C) The owners of the oil majors are fully in line with ‘New World Order’ thinking (the Rockefellers being one, as illustrated in this article). They work to promote a global socialist regime, in which people are too stupid to not destroy the planet, so a strong central government needs to step in handle the stewardship of the earth. ‘Big Oil’ is most certainly on the side of climate alarmism.

    One quibble I have with this article, is the reference to ‘extreme weather’ (and that it may be caused by some kind of geo-engineering project). The fact of the matter, is that there has not been any meaningful trend in extreme weather events. There has been a trend in how the media depicts them, of course. I have yet to come across any credible evidence that geo-engineering or weather modification projects are being pursued by any government. The idea truly defies simple logic. If the AGW scare is a hoax, why would the perpetrators of that hoax put immense amounts of capital into preventing it? If projects like the spraying of aerosols from aircraft is for a more nefarious purpose, like poisoning people to reduce population, how would the perpetrators of the act be somehow immune to the effects such a project would have on the entire ecosystem and food chain? Not buying it.

  9. Ned – you have a working PC from 20 years ago?

    That’s fantastic. I have a similar PC running an older OS, and it still works great. If I require access to newer tech, I just switch.

    You’re dead-on about our voices being co-opted. The real shame is that there isn’t anyone out there with the one-two punch of resources and balls. That’s how we beat the scumbags.

    John Costella was mentioned in the last piece, regarding his research into the altered Zapruder film…but did you know that he also complied the best Climategate document available?

    Save and redistribute.

  10. I know almost nothing about global warming and climate engineering, but if you think that is going to stop me from critiquing James irrationality, you are mistaken. I was in San Francisco the past week and there was a lone protester on the Embarkadero protesting chemtrails. He was quite together and articulate, but he seemed to feel he was in competition with the movement of the carbon explanation for global warming.

    I stated the obvious, that both phenomena could be true; that the military was experimenting with climate change as a military weapon and that carbon particles could be at least partially responsible for global warming. But the two movements are apparently in competition for support, and are completion against each other rather than against anti-people power.

    That scientists and others are being bribed by corporations and government to support global warming is unlikely; the movement against global warming is against corporate and Washington’s power interests. And unflattering pictures are not an argument.

    It is quite horrifying that children are being poisoned by these metals used in changing the climate, but our children are suffering from both tendencies if they are real. The two explanations are not incompatible.

    And even if scientists were being bribed to support global warming, which I find, as a general tendency, perhaps the opposite of the truth, since they appear to be punished for speaking out, that does not mean that what they are saying is untrue. Rightists who are usually anti-people often state arguments and critiques that are true and relevant.
    The arguments must be analyzed on their own merits, and since they are complicated and involved and time consuming, I haven’t done it. But industry created global warming cannot be dismissed simply because climate engineering is true.

  11. James, are you saying that carbon dioxide and methane do not cause global warming? The calculation was done back in the 1800’s that doubling carbon dioxide would lead to a 3 deg increase in global temperatures. How do you explain the rising ocean levels? How do you explain the disappearing glaciers and the disappearing ice in the arctic. Have you read James Hansen’s book “Storms of My Grandchildren”?

  12. It’s not an oxygen tax — don’t be silly. It’s merely a breathing fee.

    The oligarchs love the threat of global warming. It gives them one more justification for imposing austerity. The concentration camp prisoner is the new model citizen: doesn’t travel, barely consumes, and leaves behind a tiny carbon footprint.

  13. Just watched a debate! With Neal Cavuto and guests debating whether or not climate change really exists. Seems this has become a topic of interest, perhaps climate gate will soon be exposed for all of its fraud.

    In answer to Marks criticism, the fraudsters absolutely refuse to acknowledge or discuss the possibility of weather geo-engineering. That would just blow the whole assault on our earth and their livelihoods wide open. Think you are in CA and need to take the time to understand what is devastating your state. Vincent Nunes link above provides abundant proof of how evil the money grabbers are.

    Probably will take some time to publish the above mentioned piece on the internet, but this expose of media biased reporting is exquisite.

    Not to be left out in the cold, CBS offers this on a real meteorologist disagreeing with climate change.

  14. In my little corner of the world, it does seem as if there is some kind of climate change going on, and I don’t know why. Perhaps it is our fossil fuels, the methane from cows, urbanization or chemical engineering and government control. I’m 55 years old and the woods have changed, there are fewer tree frogs, less diversity of wildlife, snow caps are fading. To really know it and understand it, you need to unplug and go into the wild.

    1. It can seem that way, especially when the media is telling you something like “climate change” is happening. Animal populations are usually a little more cyclic. Their populations go up, then something happens to keep them in balance. Predator populations go up, disease, starvation. Humans are good at avoiding these cycles as long as buffet is being replenished.

      As for those other commenters arguing over whether climate change actually exists: If the MSM is peddling it, it is probably BS. If it was real, they would most likely be getting paid to ignore the problem, help hide it, or discredit anyone sounding the alarm. Instead, they ladle it on heavier every day. Chemtrails phenomena has caught my attention due to the fact that believers are labeled as fringe crazies. Most of these “crazies” most likely don’t believe the official 911 story, Sandy Hook, Aurora, or most of the other mass shootings of late. These people come up with compelling arguments that no one “important” seems to want to debate. One need look no farther than our esteemed host who has laid out many a challenge on Sandy Hook with no takers.

      Put me down with the crazies. There is something very wrong with the world.

  15. Ralphie

    Will have to start a new thread, as I believe and we have seen reports, the likes of you are actually paid by the number of replies you generate.

    You asked “Where is the evidence that climatogists are paid? Certainly you have some sort of documentation”

    Whoops that was a big misspelling, but we don’t sweat the small stuff, understand your question.

    I replied, see the link provided by Vincent Nunes above. As you are unwilling to do that, here it is again.

    Never did state news outlets are being paid off, those are your words. But if you are paid for reporting untruths. suppose that is a reasonable assumption.

    Peace and love.

    1. How can you assert that I’m getting paid unsubstantiated???

      You can’t because this is the fairy tale your mind has conjured and desperately wishes to be true

      Think about it. Do you think the government gives two hoots about a random website out of millions? That winning over YOUR mind is of such consequence that they would pay for “replies”. Get over yourself.

  16. Professor Tracy, I whole heatedly apologize for engaging this new commenter, as no doubt it is fruitless.with the current open slather master. .HE IS NOT SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE!!

    Vincent Nunes, however posted a critical link to the important emails of the climate gate scam “scientists” , and it deserves reposting here again.

    It is a long read and you do not have to go far into it to realize all the corruption. It is totally disgusting and the opposite of what we thought real science is about.

    1. Pendantic Skirt, While I commend your efforts to enlighten “Ralphie Boy”, I perceive he is crawling around under the table biting dust bunnies, while the rest of us are attempting to have productive, grown up discussion…just ignore him for the troll he is. I appreciate all of your input,btw.

      1. Climate Engineering – NOT climate ‘change’ – the climate is being man made – the jets are flying 24/7 spraying the atmosphere with heavy metals that arer blanketing the earth & causing the temperatures & inducing bizarre weather with these metals & other means ( Haarp)

  17. There is no evidence whatever in his assertions that Ralph is getting paid to state his views. His objections appear reasonable to me. This is the kind of thing that is common on Fox news, Breithart, or Russ Limberger. Ad hominem accusations are no substitute for honest inquiry.

  18. I’m on the email list for Organizing for Action (OFA), the organization I think used to be run under the name ACORN. I do NOT receive it because I support their work; nothing could be further from the truth. Here’s the message I received today:


    President Obama just took the stage at the U.N. Climate Summit to show the world how the United States is leading in the fight against climate change — and to continue to build momentum for global action.

    The New York Times called the President’s signature action for cutting carbon pollution “the strongest action taken by an American president to tackle climate change.”

    It should come as no surprise that it’s facing steep opposition right here at home from polluters, dirty special interests, and climate change deniers in Congress. They think they can derail this plan before it even gets started.

    Recynd, as President Obama speaks on the world stage, OFA supporters are stepping up to the plate.

    Add your name to stand with the President’s aggressive climate plan — and we’ll make sure your voice is among the public comments collected by the EPA.

    This weekend, hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets in New York City and across the world to send a clear message to the world. It was inspiring — and a reminder that change fueled by organizing is as undeniable as the science of the climate crisis.

    We can’t punt on this.

    Between droughts, wildfires, and increasingly dangerous storms, climate change is already threatening people’s lives and livelihoods all across the country.

    The President’s Clean Power Plan — which would reduce carbon emissions from power plants 30 percent by the end of the next decade — puts the United States in a position to lead the world in the fight against climate change. But this Clean Power Plan has been just one of many steps the administration is taking — all across government and with the private sector — to take on this crisis. Along with dramatically cutting climate pollution from cars, historic investments in clean energy, and making strides in international climate cooperation, we are making progress.

    Now the question is whether the President’s plan can beat back a powerful, well-funded opposition.

    It’s going to come down to who steps up to fight for it.

    Add your name today to stand with President Obama and his plan to fight climate change:



    Jon Carson
    Executive Director
    Organizing for Action

Comments are closed.