Who Wants To Be A Carbon Trillionaire?

09/26/201645 Comments

Eat your heart out, Al Gore. Being a carbon billionaire is so passé now that we're in the age of the $100 trillion climate swindle. So the real question is who (or at least which corporate front) will be the first carbon trillionaire? Will it be a carbon eugenics-promoting Rockefeller or a global government-promoting Rothschild, or a carbon-divesting Saudi government, or one of the shady hedge funds that are spearheading weather derivatives and other Enron-developed financial instruments to try to cash in on the carbon fraud?

Whatever the answer, one thing is for certain: You won't see this question asked (let alone answered) in the establishment gatekeeping press. Instead, you will see endless iterations of the accusation that anyone who disbelieves in the woo woo pseudoscience of climate catastrophism is funded by the very Big Oil oiligarchs who stand to benefit from the debunked climate scare.

To continue reading this editorial and for full access to the subscriber newsletter, please become a member.

For free access to this editorial, please CLICK HERE.

This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register here.

Existing Users Log In

Filed in: Newsletter
Tagged with:

Comments (45)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. peace.froggs says:

    Although I’m a skeptic when it comes to “climate change” because lets face it, climate does change, and I also do not believe in carbon induced “global warming” because again lets face it, the amount of carbon that cars produce represent but a tiny fraction of carbon in our atmosphere.

    What I do know however, is that Big Oil has been responsible for almost every major war in the 20th century and were also the ones backing the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi.

    That said, even though I’m a skeptic, I do support cleaner alternative, because one thing is for sure, is that major cities world wide suffer from Smog, and only electric cars can clean up our polluted air.

    So, if the Rockefeller’s and the Rothschild’s are tempting to use “climate change” in order to move us away from Oil dependence and towards a cleaner alternative all the while reducing wars for Oil, then you what…I’m all for it.

    • pbirdstheword says:

      Don’t let propaganda prevail. The air coming out of a huge coal powered plant in Delta Utah is cleaner than the air going in.

      Los Angeles Basin had smog before cars.

      Great Smoky mountains had smog when settlers entered the area.

      Cleaner air means what, elimination of CO2? We all would be dead.

      Without the major sandstorms in the Sahara the rainforests of South America would suffer from lack of nutrients.

      We have been sold a bill of goods as a means to control we the simpletons or we the carbon emitters.

      • peace.froggs says:

        Like I said in my post, when it comes to climate change I’m a skeptic, but what you just enumerated in your post just ends up supporting Big Oil even more.

        You like major wars for Oil? No? Then why do you support them? At least the “climate change” pushers are trying to provide us with an alternative.

        Also, whether or not the Great Smoky mountains had smog when settlers entered that area or not is irrelevant, gas guzzling cars pollute our air and major cities world wide suffer from poor air quality and that’s a fact.

        • m.clare says:


          6CO2 + 6H2O + light energy = C6H12O6 + 6O2.

          This is the formula for photosynthesis. If you go the opposite direction, it is the formula for the combustion of hydrocarbons (the stored energy is released). These chemical reactions have been occurring for billions of years.

          Neither carbon dioxide nor water vapour are pollutants. A political agenda has demonized one of the two fundamental building blocks of life on this planet; CO2. There is no Greener molecule on earth than carbon dioxide for without it there would be no green plants. Pot heads and Tomato farmers have been pumping carbon dioxide into their greenhouses for years to increase their yields; apparently, [400] ppm isn’t nearly enough to maximize plant growth.

          Be suspicious of words like “clean” and “dirty” when they are applied to scientific words like “energy”. Energy is neither black nor green, dirty nor clean. These are the words of propaganda which are designed to bypass your logical mind and resonate instead in the emotional limbic system where they are nearly impossible to dislodge.

          It is hard work but, sadly, we need to revisit ALL of our assumptions as we have been thoroughly brainwashed since the day we were born. Settled science is an oxymoron. Humanity needs to abandon entertainments, step off the path of least resistance and put their powerful minds to use.

          I’m certain somebody is working on a scheme to collect sin taxes for the other molecules we need to live here. They found a way to tax the air we breath. Our descendants will pay a water tithe, an oxygen tax and a methane penalty for flatulence.


          This is a time limited offer; don’t miss out, act now!

          Join Carbon Based Lifeforms Against Carbon; Before it is Too Late!

          Think Green: If you aren’t terrified, you’re in denial

          97% of scientists agree, Climate Crisis is a threat to life on the planet

          4 out of 5 dentists recommend brushing twice daily with Crest toothpaste to prevent gingivitis

          There are 2 scoops of raisins in each package of Kellogg’s Raisin Bran

          Two Scoops!

          • peace.froggs says:

            m.clare, I get it, however with 7 billion people on this earth and counting we cannot all use wood stoves to heat our homes, there be no more trees left. Same thing applies to coal and Oil.

            I’m sick and tired of all this death and destruction just so OPEC, Dick Cheney’s Haliburton and Big Oil can make even more money, while the rest of us have to send our children off to war just they can control the oil wells in Iraq and Libya to prop up the US Petro-dollar.

            You can thank Nixon for the Petro-dollar when he decoupled the US dollar from convertibility to gold in 1971.

            Furthermore, you cannot tell me that cities like Hong Kong and Mexico wouldn’t benefit from electric cars in order to improve the air quality in those cities.

            We’re at a crossroad, are we going to keep being slaves to Big Oil and Saudi Arabia which control Daesh btw, or are we going to start using alternate sources of energy?

            In other words, if the sales pitch propaganda of the Rockefeller’s and the Rothschild’s is to use “climate change” as a way to move us away from Oil dependence then I’m all for it.

            The choice seems pretty clear to me.

            • m.clare says:


              Imagine the population of Mexico City returning from work and simultaneously recharging their cars. A LOT of burning hydrocarbons and / or decaying isotopes would be required to produce sufficient steam to turn the turbines that send electrons through wires to feed these cars.

              Ahhh… what about hydroelectric? Gravity can spin the turbines. No combustion required.

              Have you seen the documentary, “Up the Yangtze”? Abruptly relocating millions of people, covering a green valley with murky brown water thereby causing species like the Yangtze Dolphin to go extinct….is “Green” according to Green Logic. They follow a poor farming family that wind up living in a tiny concrete apartment with an electric light bulb.



              The Yangtze Dolphin could be the Polar Bear of the Great Green Revolution…. except that the dolphin actually went extinct and the polar bears are doing great.

              What about giant mirrors focussing on a tub of water? We could boil water that way and it would be “Green”…right?

              These things are set up in deserts. Flocks of birds burst into flame in mid air as they attempt to migrate over top of them.

              What about spinning propellers?

              Never mind that they club birds to death. To supply the energy requirements of the United Kingdom, you would have to erect windmills 5 miles deep around the entire UK coast.

              Our thirst for energy at the flick of a switch or the turn of a key WILL leave a footprint somewhere. If not under the hood of our car than somewhere else, NIMBY. It’s like trying to push a beach ball under water.

              We would have a very difficult time supporting a population of 7 billion people if not for the benefits of combustion.

              Consider this: whales would have become extinct long ago if not for petroleum. The whaling industry quickly disappeared because a cheaper and more abundant & reliable source of energy came along. That is NOT the case today with “alternatives”. If an alternative was able to take the place of fossil fuels it would do so and the usual suspects would profit.

              Let’s consider your population argument for it is a good one:

              The first commandment of the Georgia Guidestones suggests our population should be reduced to a sustainable half a billion. 6.5 billion of us would have to be made to go away today to “achieve” that goal.

              Let’s pretend our population was allowed to double over the next century. 13.5 billion of us would have to be eliminated. One could make the argument that “the sooner the better” would be more humane…. 7 billion fewer eliminations required.

              Peak oil is inevitable, like you say. Do we allow the PTSB decide what we are to do about it without involving us?

              We’re on the same team, Froggy. I look forward to seeing the holes you poke in my arguments. Thanks for the discussion…I gotta run…. happy to get back to it if you are. gotta run.

            • Mohawk Man says:

              Peace frogg:

              Yeah, how do you charge those electric cars? Good intentions? No. Coal, generally. Hydrogen seems like the better solution and the discharge is H2O. They have the technology now but will not use it. Then of course you have to dispose of those batteries and lithium-ion batteries are a major disposal nightmare and they have a tendency to spontaneously explode. See Tesla’s experience which is being downplayed.

              Then you have procurement of lithium. It’s not that common and is almost a rare earth element. The largest deposits seem to be in South America-Chile, Argentina and Brazil and those in the know would surely go to war to get it just like they did in the ME for oil. Those people have been through enough.

              Elon Musk is one of the biggest scam artists of all time. He sucks on the tit of Big Government and they fund his toys. He’s in the same league as Al Gore/Jeff Bezos and the other fascists scamming the public for $150,000 cars they will never own. A billionaire in his own right yet gets “grants” to launch rockets and build elitist automobiles. Most high profile owners just have one parked in their driveway to impress others but are chauffeured around in a big black Escalade with tinted windows.

              This is about eugenics and not climate change or global cooling or global warming or whatever week and mood that they fancy that day. It’s about power and the elimination of a good portion of the population. This is about evil.

              The Mohawk

              • m.clare says:

                Hydrogen isn’t the silver bullet. Accidents happen:


                It’s one thing to have us filling our cars with liquid gasoline; it’s quite another to move 25 million barrels of Hydrogen around the globe each day.

                Yes, Hydrogen and Oxygen combine to make water. Very clean where it is used. Where do you suppose we get Hydrogen? Persuading Hydrogen to give up its bond with Oxygen in water molecules takes more energy than would be returned when they reunited. (unless you believe in perpetual energy). Electricity can be used to break these bonds.

                Hmmm…. Where does the electricity come from?

                Hydrogen is not a source of energy…it is just a vehicle to transmit the stored potential energy that was “invested” in harvesting it from bigger molecules. There are no Hydrogen Wells that we can tap into. Not on Earth, at least….

                No. The source of Hydrogen is…. (wait for it….drum roll…..)

                Fossil Fuels.

              • peace.froggs says:

                I can’t believe how so many of you are so short sighted and support Big Oil.

                Google “India launches world’s first solar powered airport”

                In addition to that marvelous achievement, instead of spreading out solar panels covering wide areas, scientists in India invented a compact solar grid that is portable and the size of a small car.

                Furthermore, Solar, Wind, Hydro are technologies that already exist that can easily power electric cars no problem, and lets not forget nuclear as well. Plus, there are technologies that haven’t even been invented yet!

                Don’t you guys get it? Not only does Big Oil have a monopoly on energy and our politicians, they’re the ones responsible for most wars, and the only way to break up that monopoly is for governments to fund alternatives.

                If you’re against this then you are directly supporting Big Oil and future wars, whether you like it or not.

      • Greg Bacon says:

        I’m dead set against the phony ‘carbon trading scheme’ which Dear Leader has said will make our electrical bills skyrocket.

        Carbon swaps have already been tried in Europe and found to be a great way for crooks to swindle billions of Euros while doing nothing to protect our planet.

        But I’m curious about the weather in N. America that has California in the sixth year of drought, Utah getting so little rain/snow that the Great Salt Lake is drying up while here in the Midwest, we’re getting rains of Biblical proportions, like the 10 inches N. Iowa received Thursday and the 8+” south Texas got Saturday.

        I was raised on a Central Missouri grain farm, and the weather played a prominent role in our lives, so I remember well the events from the 1960’s and ’70’s and we had no such rains like the ones we get now, where 4-9″ of rain comes thundering down in a couple of hours.

        Something screwy is going on with the climate and I don’t think it’s just carbon dioxide.

        • m.clare says:

          What’s screwy is that every unusual weather event that occurs today is having the limelight shined upon it and held up as irrefutable evidence of Mankind’s Greatest Sin.

          Hotter than average = Climate Crisis
          Colder than average = polar vortex caused by Climate Crisis
          Wetter than average = Climate Crisis
          Drier than average = Climate Crisis
          Forest Fire = Climate Crisis
          Melting snow = Climate Crisis
          Male Pattern Baldness (sorry James) = Climate Crisis

          The trick is to turn off the mainstream so you are not inundated with propaganda.
          The only thing that is constant is change. This applies to weather and climate.

          If you look at anything long enough, carefully enough and closely enough It Will Change.
          The media deals with all change by 1) informing us that the change is bad and 2) blaming human beings.

          Please find some examples in the mainstream media of the benefits of a warmer planet. Good luck.

          Last time I checked, life on this planet is most abundant where water is in the Liquid state.

          We are to make the planet more Green by:

          – reducing the concentration of plant food in the atmosphere
          – reducing the temperature
          – shortening the growing season (India rotates 3 crops per year, Canada has 1….why?)
          – extending the polar ice caps
          – covering green land with murky brown water to generate hydroelectricity

          They should be waving a White flag to promote the extension of the ice and snow…or perhaps a Brown flag as the concentration of plant food is capped.

          Am I the only one who appreciates the irony of GREEN for the colour of a movement that strives to make the planet LESS green?

          6CO2 + 6H2O + light energy = C6H12O6 + 6O2

    • russ says:

      Froggie –

      Think you’re onto something! You might also want to check into who owns/controls BigOil, BigChem, BigPharma, BigAgra, BigMed, the BioTech and Energy Industries, all media, the governments within 150 nations –including the U.S. (Hint: It involves the owners of the 150 central banks being the only banks authorized to print the world’s paper money for the cost of paper, ink, and press-time, and who funded both sides during WWI and WWII).

      The boys behind the curtain attempting to move us toward clean energy? Perish the thought. Right people. Wrong goal. Find out who funded the Bolshevik takeover of Russia and subsequent slaughter of 60 million mostly white Christians Russians and your home free. Would you believe a world socialist/communist style central government?

      Keep digging. You’ll find the horse. It’s been deliberately buried beneath the horse apples!

  2. Mohawk Man says:

    If I may suggest a guest to interview on this subject it would be Mark Steyn. He’s been knee deep in a lawsuit against Michael Mann and the other frauds of this big scam. He does possess a hell of a good sense of humor. He subs for Limbaugh occasionally and if I hear he will be on I will listen to the show. Not a Limbaugh fan by any stretch but this guy is hilarious and very intelligent. His dry sarcastic wit and knowledge base are outstanding. One smart dude.



    The Mohawk

    ps–James, you have a gift for writing. Always perfect sentence structure and articulate without seeming haughty. Modest, respectful and passionate when it is required. Your command of the english language is rarely seen today. A low, commanding voice and an intellect that is impressive. Keep up the great work and thank you.

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      So true!

      “ps–James, you have a gift for writing. Always perfect sentence structure and articulate without seeming haughty. Modest, respectful and passionate when it is required. Your command of the english language is rarely seen today. A low, commanding voice and an intellect that is impressive. Keep up the great work and thank you.” – Mohawk Man

  3. VoiceOfArabi says:

    When it comes to “climate change”… I am blank. I am not a scientist, and i can’t prove it one way or the other.

    So, let us focus on what i know…

    – Monsanto proved that scientist can and will lie for money, so, it is safe to say that they have no credibility now. (i know not all scientist are liers, but even if half are, that leaves big doubt.)

    – Governments lie, and especially the United States of A. (AKA, The Evil Empire), and the list is long starting with WWII all the way until (we killed 83 and wounded over 100 Syrian soldiers “by mistake”)

    – The “Elite” have been trying to enslave us for over 4000 years, and no doubt they will continue to do so..

    The above is all the research i need to do to know that something about climate change does not smell right!

    That said.. I agree with @peace.froggs. I would love to see the day when all the electricity that i am consuming comes from the sun, the wind or the oceans… I love recycling.

    • m.clare says:

      You have been programmed to feel love and affection for a form of energy that “comes from the sun, wind and oceans”. We all have.

      You love recycling. Carbon dioxide is recycled through combustion and photosynthesis.

      There is no middle ground for me. We are being suckered. Climate Crisis is b.s.

      Human beings are becoming significantly less God fearing. We have a pretty good handle on birth control. Fornication has lost its mystique. A new and improved Original Sin was required; the Original Sin of the New Millennium is the dreaded Carbon Footprint.

      Let he who is without combustion cast the first stone.

    • ad says:

      hi voa,

      for a quick update on climate change, i found this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Mx0_8YEtg rather convincing. it is called ‘the great global warming swindle’ and takes just an hour and a quarter to watch.
      it doesn’t even mention the effect of the saturation level yet, i think around 200ppm, above which more co2 has hardly any effect on temperature. but there are lots of other important effects and factual data.

      we should indeed never forget that co2 is essential for life as we know it. there is this beautiful symbiotic cycle between plants and animals, in which the oxygen is as important to the animals as the co2 is to the plants.
      without the occurrence of the animals somewhere in history, the earth would ultimately turn into a dead oxygen planet as the plants would not survive total co2 depletion of the atmosphere.

      there is one question that i cannot find the answer to, perhaps because it is a stupid question, but if so, somebody tell me. it is about balance and quantification. how does global vegetable mass and animal mass relate to one another. does a balanced and thus sustainable situation even exist for any number, ie. biomasses that keep the atmospheric content of o2 and co2 constant and at an optimum value over time. and of course, to know the upper limit, what would be the maximum sustainable biomass mix that the earth could support.

      somewhere i read that nasa has found a considerable increase of vegetation over the past decades of which 70% is attributed to an increase of co2 in the atmosphere. it may well be that the extra co2 is actually needed, to stabilize life on earth. if that were the case, imagine what these 195 governments of the paris agreement are about to destroy with their absurd paranoia against co2. i am just an old technician and i know very little of all the sciences involved, but these thoughts worry me.

      a very important point is the technology mix. there are many reasons to abandon fossil fuels in the developed world and replace them with renewables. but for developing countries, fossil fuels may be the only reasonable bootstrap into the world of energy. with the above questions in mind, they might even help the world as a whole to survive, thanks to their extra co2 production. ok, start laughing if you like, but i want my questions answered before i discard such scenarios. there are many others thinkable, but nobody seems to be talking about this. all i find are these stupid discussions about who is the criminal here! where is science?


  4. Hsaive says:

    Am I the only researcher who has revealed to 140 year history of geoengineering efforts to warm the climate? Nothing has changed. The climate engineering weapons are producing catostrophic floods, tornadoes and chemicals are altering surface temps when drought isn’t enough to do the job.

    The globalists make sure that efforts to control carbon emissions don’t work in order to come up with a solution of “owning” the weather….just like Monsanto wanted to own the food supply. Before it’s over the air we breather will be modified and patented.

    Here’s the link to my research and working on an update: 1966 NASA Document Reveals Goal of Engineered “Climate Modification” – http://wp.me/p2FjTj-4uj

  5. Sonex says:

    Isn’t a long term solution the implementation of technologies, which ultimately reduce our consumption of oil? Here are two I like to advocate for:

    The MSM is not in the business of bringing about solutions, now are they? Maybe the readership of the Corbettreport will be different.

  6. nosoapradio says:

    Damn, I don’t have 3 seconds today to read the article or participate in this interesting discussion so I’ll just slip in two word phrases as partial explanations for climate swindle:

    Smart cities

    Ambiant intelligence

    Imminent cooling

    Detectors everywhere

    Big brother

    uninterrupted surveillance

    Aldous Huxley

    Social credit

    Totalitarian technocracy

    Gotta run.

    Damned hamsterwheel!

  7. nosoapradio says:

    (hamster wheel temporarily broken!)

    Love this sort of highly cathartic Corbett article.

    What I meant above is simply that the best pretext for easily shoving billions of guilt-ridden people into total surveillance cages is

    in the name of healing the biosphere.

    The reasoning goes:

    that even though alternative energies have not yet been perfected (and carbon credit scams are making indecent people even more indecently rich)

    we can limit our catastrophic human effect on the environment

    by accepting to live in semantically tyrannical “smart green housing”

    with meters and detectors installed everywhere under the pretext of recording energy use

    but in truth primarily as a population control mechanism as we the people

    paradoxically and furiously demand to be closely and constantly montitored in the name of the planet and our own conscience

    suffering from the profound and exacerbated guilt of existing.

  8. HomeRemedySupply says:

    Beautiful article! Spot on!

  9. dgm says:

    I`m glad the discussion has included geoengineering. I`ve been trying make up my mind as to planet warming vs. planet cooling for at least the last 10 years, and from the info gleaned from Dane Wigington http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/ (What in the World/Why in the World are they Spraying documentaries), it`s both, selectively, or at least as much as they can control it at this point.

    The basic gist of it is that at least 70 years of climate control and manipulation has been used as corporate/military weather warfare, with the side effect being radical weather deviations, ozone destruction, and a whole array plant, animal, and habitat destruction, with the promotion of the for-profit CO2 “Climate Change” scam fitting perfectly into the paradigm.

    So while there is some contribution by us peons driving SUVs with AC cranked out, the truth seems to be that upper atmospheric bombardment of heavy metals, since at least the mid 90s, has not only made warming much worse, but it is reigning these toxins down on us and every living thing on the planet with devastating consequences.

    One point Wigington makes is that for instance this year the Gulf off of Miami was at one point this summer 93F. The Gulf has been VERY warm. It stand to reason that it should be a caldron of major hurricanes. And yet very few storms. Even the recent minor hurricane to hit FL may have been “allowed” to develop so the climate engineers don’t have folks wondering too much about why so few major land strikes since Katerina with very warm Gulf waters.

    So essentially my own take is that the stark raving mad, insane power elite may have a tiger by the tale. If they stop planetary geoengineering, the planet is likely to respond with some even more radical weather, if they continue I would imagine they know the science, and understand how environmentally destructive geoengineering is.

    I would very much recommend checking out Dane Wigington`s weekly radio show on Geo Engineering Watch;

  10. mik says:

    Another excellent argument that co2 cannot be such a terrible greenhouse gas. Prof. William Happer says that dependency between co2 levels and its greenhouse effect is logarithmic, or in other words, co2 level must rise exponentially to yield linear temperature growth.

    Climate Science for the Layman – Professor Happer (6:40)

    There is pretty wide discussion from co2 fallacy, to Tesla quasi-solutions, geoengineering….

    What I’m so often missing in debunking climate scams and climate-profiteering-schemes is acknowledgment that nevertheless, something has to be done regarding pollution, hyper-consumption….

    Infamous carbon footprint goes hand in hand with hyper-consumption and I’m assuming that their dependency is linear.

    Pointing out co2 fallacy doesn’t make oil and coal ecologically acceptable. There is not just co2 and h2o as a result of using oil and coal. So2, no-x, traces of heavy metals are also present. Coal produces huge amounts of ash which is quite often radioactive.
    Every production brings waste, more productions brings more. Production just for sake of satisfying consumerist needs, brings unnecessary waste.

    Although main resources probably won’t be depleted very soon, still – the World is finite. And human ingenuity is not infinite, some are arguing. Just look at Fukushima.

    • m.clare says:

      Great pains are taken to scrub SO2 and NO-x and they are seldom mentioned in the Mainstream Media. The devil’s gas is Carbon Dioxide and, therefore, the molecule has earned a special place in this argument.

      What is a life form? It is a bundle of chemicals that compete for finite resources of space, energy and time with the other life forms.

      “Greed” and “competition” are neither peculiar to humans nor are they inherently evil. They are absolutely necessary to the health of the planet.

      Evolution: Adaptations of a species in an ever changing environment.
      Survival of the fittest.

      Several Billion years ago, Cynaobacteria took over the planet due to an evolved advantage. Imagine if a David Suzuki amongst the Cyanobacteria demanded they stop polluting the environment with their toxic Oxygen exhalations….we wouldn’t be here having this conversation.

      Nature is extremely cruel. Human beings are by far the most altruistic species.

      This new Carbon Communism is challenging not just human nature but the nature of all living things. An uphill battle, certainly.

      • mik says:

        I’m not sure which road took you to the Evolution. When we are talking about human society in the present times and consequences of its activity I see no place for Evolution.
        One might say that Carbon Communism (haven’t heard of this monster) is the next stage of Evolution (spiced with “good” Greed) and you will have to adapt. Since you are probably not so high on “food chain” in this case, I absolutely understand you dislike such a possibility. 🙂

        Mentioning of Evolution in the context of human beings should be reserved for prehistory. Cooperation, the opposite of Competition, was the most important then and, as far as I know, was the basis for survival. I think, even today humanity gets more from cooperation then from competition.

        • m.clare says:

          Richard Dawkins – The Selfish Gene:


          What is evolution? Whatever it is, to suggest it has stopped is absurd.

          • mik says:

            I’m not suggesting evolution has stopped, just that its applicability to human species, particularly human society, nowadays is very limited, almost zero.
            We have self-awareness, we have a choice, we can/could change a lot, probably most of the things we truly want.

            Richard Dawkins you say. Well, check his documentary ‘Nice guys finish first'(1986) where he explains that Selfish gene should not be used as justification for Social Darwinism. He is also talking about: altruism, tragedy of the commons, and most important: game theory. Must see documentary.

            • m.clare says:

              The human species has not removed itself from the forces of evolution. The book covers game theory, altruism, tragedy of the commons and social Darwinism but I’ll check out his documentary…sounds interesting,… thanks for the heads up.

              (tit for tat with forgiveness trumps game theory)

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      I hear you about the pollution of toxic chemicals and metals.

      Even my Texas A&M Agricultural Professors would roll their eyes and laugh at the global warming hoax.
      Greenhouses often buy CO2 generators to feed the plants.

      …there has been a lot of push on electric cars, but there certainly could be some health problems associated with the EMF exposure.

      — David Blume —
      With alcohol, the exhaust on a car is cleaner than the air going in. Alcohol actually cleans pollutants out of the air.

      David Blume is probably the leading expert on alcohol fuel production and forming a local coop.
      He has been at it since the 70’s, despite being crushed by Big Oil on a few occasions.

      During the production of alcohol, there are byproducts. These byproducts can be used to accelerate plant growth, feed fish or crawfish, used as pesticide, used as fertilizer, …and the list goes on. There are many exchangeable products which are intertwined with alcohol production.
      In an alcohol co-op, a scrip or coupon could be devised to exchange raw materials or finally produced products such as food or gas or fertilizer. The scrip could be based on the value of a gallon of alcohol.

      — Agorism —
      Here David Blume gives an agoristic approach to ending the petro-dollar.

  11. mik says:

    Just want to share with you something unrelated

    MSM or WTF, how low can you go
    the latest J.Oliver- Scandals

    • nosoapradio says:

      Gosh Mik!

      Just gatekeeping at it’s finest! Remember, “there’s nothing wrong with voting for the lesser of two evils” as the nearly-late great forefather of all modern gatekeepers reminds his disciples, I am of course referring to none other than professional public-myth proponent and propagator Noam Chomsky.

      Incidentally, I haven’t met a single French person (or American for that matter) who would say they prefer Trump. We all just love to hate him here in Europe!

      And back to the topic at hand, here’s another recent J.Oliver jewel:
      (For those who haven’t seen it, at 15 minutes and 15 seconds the politically correct booster-shot style propaganda gets shoved down your throat):


      • Mohawk Man says:

        Sure, some of us “Americans” get it too. I’ve been studying Hillary’s 5 year plan and their affects for the last 30 years and I am most impressed. I can’t wait to vote for someone who has another 5 year plan which will take 30 years to watch unfold…..Totalitarianism unspoken, 5 year plans. Unspoken, but the obvious “plan”. Brilliant. And God Created Woman is one of my favorite films–thats why I love the French (we have a history). Seems like a nice young lady. “Mother, I’d like to introduce….the future Mrs. Outlaw” Shoulda seen “Plucking The Daisy” whoo haaaa. Took an extra nitro glycerine for that one, but what a film. An “artsy” type film so you may not understand. “It’s The Arts” and stuff like that (only smart, artsy people get it, you know, pretend smart people..girls? non-sense). Art is what counts there. And that art did not include the introduction of the brazier into our wardrobe. So be it.

        My girlfriend at the time (and fiancee’) was a stunningly beautiful Vietnamese woman (MiMi) and her best friend was French..a Bridgette Bardot look alike but a little taller. I was a nice, respectful boy. To my chagrin to this day. Man oh man.

        Love One Another…and have a little fun on a debate night.

        The Mohawk

  12. HomeRemedySupply says:

    Ha!… — March 2016 —
    Rockefeller Foundation publicly divorces EXXON & Oil for…

    Here is the full Rockefeller Family Fund statement: http://www.rffund.org/divestment
    “The Rockefeller Family Fund is proud to announce its intent to divest from fossil fuels. The process will be completed as quickly as possible, as we work around the complications of modern finance, which is increasingly dominated by alternative investments and hedge funds….”



    A short list of news articles…

    CBS – http://www.cbsnews.com/news/rockefeller-family-is-exiting-the-oil-business/
    Reuters – Business Insider – http://www.businessinsider.com/r-rockefeller-fund-dumping-fossil-fuels-hits-exxon-on-climate-issues-2016-3
    Rockefeller Family Fund – http://www.rffund.org/divestment
    Zero Hedge – http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-23/peak-hypocrisy-rockefeller-fund-divests-fossil-fuels-finds-standard-oil-successor-ex

    FuelFix – http://fuelfix.com/blog/2016/03/24/rockefeller-family-fund-selling-fossil-fuel-stocks/
    …“It’s not surprising that they’re divesting from the company since they’re already funding a conspiracy against us,” Alan Jeffers, a spokesman for Irving, Texas-based Exxon, said in an emailed statement on Wednesday.”

    Peak Oil – News and Message Board – http://peakoil.com/business/rockefeller-fund-divests-fossil-fuels-says-exxon-is-morally-reprehensible
    “…Here is the best part: this whole “divestment” is nothing more than theater. This specific endowment runs a tiny $130 million in total assets. As for Exxon, its shares were down 0.4% on the day, less than the drop of the broader market. So here is the real question: will the Rockefellers divest of their full energy holdings, kept in blind, family, and various other (offshore of course – nobody wants to pay taxes, not even green liberals) unknown trusts, due to their disgust with the “morally reprehensible” company created by their ancestor? The answer: of course not.”

    • m.clare says:

      Timing was pretty cool. Summer of 2014 there were a BUNCH of black car motorcades racing through Calgary. Helicopters over Fort Mac (Gates, Buffet and pals having a look…so we were told). Rockefeller Brothers Fund announced their divestment from “tar sands” that fall while oil was $112 / bbl. Oil prices plummeted. Timing.

      Hind sight is 20/20. Sigh.

      Same old tricks. False flag reverse psychology bait and switch bafflegab. Drive the price down…. wait patiently for the competition to panic ….buy them for pennies on the dollar and then jack the price back up with a vengeance. I have been keeping a watchful eye on who has bought who in the past and who is buying who today.

      You are hitting the nail on the head, HomeRemedySupply. Well struck. Nice to see people paying attention. I am grateful to Mr. Corbett for giving us a place to speak freely and for sharing his many discoveries.

      Speaking of helicopters…. in the last few years there has been a remarkable increase in the number and frequency of police helicopters circling my city. On the ground, blue and white police cars with “Serve & Protect” are rapidly being replaced with Black cars c/w cowcatcher bumpers and a new and improved logo: “Pride, Courage, Vigilance”.

      Proud and courageous vigilantes. An army. Us and them. Service and protection are so “last millennium”.

  13. HomeRemedySupply says:

    ? …very interesting timing…

    — OIL NEWS – last week of Sept 2016 —

    OPEC agreement causes oil prices to surge in day of trading

    “9/11 Bill Crashes Saudi Stock Exchange, Bond Market Ambitions”

    “…Saudi Arabia’s currency plunged to its lowest level in four months, and its stock market “lost the most in the world for a second straight day,” Bloomberg reported. Bloomberg follows 90 stock indices, and Saudi Arabia’s Tadawal All Share Index was the worst performer in recent days, falling to its lowest point since the beginning of this year (a time when oil prices dropped to below $30 per barrel). This could complicate or delay Saudi Arabia’s bond sale, sources told Bloomberg….”

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top