Truth About Carbon Sequestration
The past few years have seen one of the most insidious projects in history take shape. Disguised in an assortment of feigned concern initiatives for the climate, and humanity and the world’s wellbeing in general, it’s a scheme born of the same globalist conniving which brought us the ‘pandemic’, cultural engineering movements of LGBT/Trans, and much more. And though many of its attendant instruments are known, or slowly becoming evident, the true, ultimate telos of their design is something still shrouded in innumerable deflections, which I intend to dispel here.
If you’ve casually perused the ‘conspiracy sphere’ in recent years, you’ve likely come across the term carbon sequester, likely read about the Gates Foundation purchasing up America’s farm land, watched the news reels about Dutch farmer protests and various other related stories, which all instinctively felt connected, but for which the connection was not immediately apparent. Operating under the adage of where there’s smoke there’s fire, you’ve likely sensed the deeper underlying motives that enmeshed these developments.
One of the key driving narratives from the globalist central authorities in recent years has been that humanity is utilizing too many resources. But to simplify it for the masses, they’ve reduced this down to a concept of carbon offset, with the intended goal being the reduction of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (amongst other greenhouse gases). Recall that carbon dioxide is the claimed agent behind the entire ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ charades, so everything stems from this one base fundamental.
The concept of ‘carbon credits’ is now becoming institutionalized into the very fabric of society at every level. The main gist of it is, if every human’s expenditure of CO2 (carbon dioxide) can be tracked and measured, then a system of guilt-tripping and coercion under the guise of “incentive” towards CO2 reduction can be implemented.
Cities like New York are already planning to begin tracking the food purchases of their residents as part of a plan to reduce each citizen’s carbon footprint by 33%.
About a fifth of New York’s greenhouse gas emissions come from household food consumption, Adams told reporters, blaming much of that total on meat and dairy. Household food consumption is supposedly the third largest contributor to city emissions totals, trailing only buildings and transportation.
The Mayor’s Office of Food Policy has ordered city agencies to reduce their food consumption by 33% by 2030, and Adams has asked private corporations to cut their own emissions by 25% by 2030, insisting New Yorkers’ wasteful eating habits cannot continue without imperiling the planet.
“It is easy to talk about emissions that are coming from vehicles and how it impacts our carbon footprint,” he said. “But now we have to talk about beef.” City officials urged New Yorkers to put down the burgers and pick up vegetables and beans.
Not surprisingly, these efforts are being funded and fast-tracked by major corporations like Amex, which is “supporting consumption-based initiatives” in cities like London and New York by ‘pioneering new ways’ by which these cities can “calculate to reduce their emissions.” In fact, New York City and London are two of 13 other major cities that are part of one such declaration.
If you’re wondering how exactly they plan to do this, the plan calls for—initially at least—New York City to first reduce consumption of certain unfavorable foods in the institutions which they control, which includes the public hospital and school network, agencies “which feed New Yorkers”, and also asking and incentivizing private companies to alter the consumption habits of their employees as well. That’s just the first step, after this will come more coercive actions for the remainder of regular residents that don’t fall into these categories.
The most obvious of which will likely include the timely tying in of carbon taxes and the carbon credit system into CBDCs. We’ve already seen top global financial leaders (like Christine Lagarde) admit to the true purpose of CBDCs being a ‘programmable money’ with conditions attached to it. This will create a natural symbiotic relationship with carbon credits, allowing cities, initially, to program UBI handouts with provisions attached, i.e. you can only use your CBDC allowance to purchase carbon-friendly foods—you know, the soylent green made from synth-meat and cockroach milk.
Eventually, however, as ‘cashless’ becomes the byword in society, it won’t be just the UBI programs but all of our money unavoidably converted to CBDCs and gradually tied to the conditions of maintaining increasingly draconian carbon footprints; carbon ‘neutrality’ at first, then a net carbon deficit, and so on, until they ‘boil the frog’ to the point where we’re left subsisting on a bare minimum weekly paste of synth-nutrients.
An endless array of techniques will be utilized, and already are—including Nudge Theory, a series of deceptive adaptations of the environment which subtly ‘nudge’ the individual towards making desired choices. Such ‘nudges’ are being rushed into our lives as we speak. Almost every modern device or appliance you can purchase is now filled with increasingly intrusive warnings or ‘suggestions’ which try to push you into some form of dystopian ‘conservation’. The latest cars, computers, gadgets, etc., come stock with this. For instance, anyone who’s purchased a newer computer with the latest Windows operating system has likely seen these dreaded new icons and Orwellian urges to “lower your carbon footprint”, as can be seen below:
But that’s still not enough for them. In order to wean people off natural foods to the point of actualizing this system, an artificial scarcity must first be created. This is the real reason the corporations, elites, shadow groups, et al, are buying up our farm land. But how can they create such a scarcity right under our noses?
Enter the insidious concept known as ‘carbon sequestration’. You might have seen the videos and posts from farmers in America, showing letters they’ve received from the federal government which offer to pay them to lay their fields fallow. Video like this one.
What’s interesting is, all the leading globalist-controlled disinformation outlets masquerading as ‘fact checkers’ immediately sprang into action. ‘LeadStories’ and ‘Politifact’ both fact checked these reports with the same deceptive strawman technique: they hand-selected a different, minor argument being made by the farmers in the videos and “refuted” that, while not touching the main exigency. For instance, in the above case, they refuted that there was a “food shortage” currently in the U.S., and attacked the claim that the U.S. government was “forcing farmers to destroy their crop”. These are strawmen. No one said there were already food shortages; the food shortages are coming later, once this plan is realized. Secondly, no one said the government is “forcing” anyone to destroy crops, they are merely paying and coercing them to do so. More importantly, the main part of the plan is not destruction of already viable crop, but rather signing contracts to take fields entirely ‘offline’ and lay them fallow and unused for a given amount of seasons.
This cannot be “fact checked” with any strawmen; it is an undeniable fact whose press releases you can even find on the White House’s very own website.
But let’s back up a minute. First, it should be noted that the federal government, under the aegis of corporate lobbying firms representing globalist Davos/WEF interests, have long paid for various ‘studies’ which claim to demonstrate a ‘miracle technique’ capable of saving the world by simply ‘sequestering’ the carbon dioxide in our atmosphere by—essentially—burying it in the ground.
Though it may rightfully sound ludicrous to you, the concept goes as follows. Allow me first to post a de facto definition from the wikipedia entry for carbon sequestration, to give you a basic gist of how the establishment defines it:
Forests, kelp beds, and other forms of plant life absorb carbon dioxide from the air as they grow, and bind it into biomass. However, these biological stores are considered volatile carbon sinks as the long-term sequestration cannot be guaranteed. For example, natural events, such as wildfires or disease, economic pressures and changing political priorities can result in the sequestered carbon being released back into the atmosphere.
For instance, only about 50-60% of a plant’s carbon content is said to exist in the above-ground portion of the plant. The rest resides in the biomass of the plant matter beneath the surface, and the thriving microorganisms and bacteria that form a symbiote with the entire system.
The theory, then, is that the plants capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and biologically convert it into a form of storage, a large percentage of which can be stored in the soil beneath the ground, as long as that ground is not disturbed. If you farm the ground by tilling it or outright harvesting the crops, then scientists believe you are ‘releasing’ this stored CO2 back into the atmosphere by exposing the now-turned soil to oxygen and sunlight, which breaks down the storage mechanisms, causing the CO2 to become molecularly unbonded and rise back into the atmosphere.
So Davos-funded scientists would like to sequester a large portion of the world’s farms in this manner, as they believe that the various agricultural industries, which conveniently include that of the meat-producing, cattle-raising industries, are responsible for a major, disproportionate amount of CO2 production, which is claimed to be calamitously leading us to global warming ‘climate change’. You’ll note, of course, how ‘global warming, had to be rebranded with a more ambiguous name after enough people got wise to the fraud implicit in its oxymoronic name.
The problem is, of course, that many scientists don’t even agree on a single point of the pseudo-science of ‘carbon sequestering’, or climate change for that matter. But I don’t intend to wade into that debate, as it’s an endless sinkhole of opinion-milling and rage-baiting that no one can ever ‘win’, as there are ample fraudulent statistics on both sides that can be readily hand-picked for a cheap ‘gotcha’ or to prove a flimsy point. The only thing to be said is that the climate change debate has mostly devolved into a matter of faith and has become a religious institution of sorts, coming standard with its own assorted relics and holy articles, treated with the same unquestionable reverence as the pedestaling of the Holy Prepuce. It’s pointless to argue against one dogma or the other.
But what is not closed to argument, not confined to the designed ambiguity of such broader debates, is the fact that ‘carbon sequester’ has many overly ‘convenient’ attributes and contrivances, which place it firmly in the designs of the greater Davos/WEF programs meant to usher in the ‘Great Reset’.
Some of these coincidences include the following quote from wikipedia:
Starting in the mid-late 2010s, many pieces of US climate and environment policy have sought to make use of the climate change mitigation potential of carbon sequestration.
It’s interesting how, as per my previous article, where I outlined how the societal-engineering movements began precisely following the Obama era and the 2008 financial collapse, similarly here, we see that the WEF-designed carbon sequester initiatives were accelerated only recently, just as many of the other parallel initiatives of social-engineering were ramping up. These projects are designed to work in conjunction towards several key objectives.
The first being to create a sort of low-simmer prevalent tension to keep all of society at an interminable psychological unease. Cortisol levels spiking, anxiety at a low boil, this both lowers the threshold for suggestibility of ‘authority’ directives and creates a latent fear-response forcing victims to privilege information coming from authority figures in general. The carbon sequester racket works towards these goals by creating an ever-present specter of scarcity which feeds an underlying dread that pervades our every subconscious thought, worms through our every interaction with fellow human beings.
The second objective is the more direct and overt. Carbon sequester is obviously being used to actually create legitimate, tangible food shortages, societal scarcity, for the very purpose of blaming this on ‘climate change’.
To understand how they do this, allow us to back up a little bit and review the other similarly disingenuous methods adopted by the WEF crowd. This is the age-old method that’s (somewhat erroneously) become associated with the ‘dialectic’ sequence of objective engineering. To wit: create the problem (with a telos in mind), propose the solution, then enact the solution which you’ve always intended as the objective.
We see this, for instance, in the other approaches to ‘fighting climate change’. Bill Gates and the rest of the WEF nomenklatura claim that blocking the sun will help lower ‘global warming’, thus nullifying ‘climate change’, yet the plan would in fact create catastrophic climate dysfunction in and of itself, which they would subsequently blame on ongoing climate change. The ultimate operative and underlying connection is that the elites cannot abide society to carve out their own independent destiny because the historical trend of that destiny has always been towards liberation from the globalist financial framework. Not for some bleeding-heart, new-age reasons savoring of vague feel-good faux-spirituality or some superficial concept of good and evil; no, simply for the fact that the globalist financial system has never been sustainable. It exists purely on the basis of perpetual renewal in the form of cataclysmic, zero-sum game bubble cycles. This comes down to the bare fundamentals of usury and how interest functions. You cannot have a society which indefinitely subsists on interest-based economics because that interest will always inevitably compound beyond the ability to repay it. It’s the ultimate Xeno Paradox in reverse. Although, the bigger root of the problem is the fractional reserve system, specifically, but for the purposes of my broader point, the generalization is adequate.
So, getting back to the elites: Their system is in perpetual peril. The ultimate consequence of this will ineluctably be the complete breakup of the system, which will result in the permanent destruction of a formalized Western hegemonic architecture hundreds of years old, and really, thousands of years in the making. From this fall would sprout a system of multi-polar, multi-varied modalities which would never again allow a single system like that to dominate. Ergo, it is an all-or-nothing final battle, waged in the waning stretch of their system’s disintegration.
They must preserve the system at all costs.
The only way to do that, is to frighten and fear-monger society into a series of ever-constricting controls by which they are forever prevented from escaping the rigors of this monolithic financial network. And the only way to get people to ignore other, better options, and ultimately to abnegate their rights is by playing to that ultimate human weakness—their sympathy.
That’s what climate change, the ‘pandemic’ fraud, and all the rest are really all about, when you think about it. These are pandemics of sympathy—and empathy—where humans are gaslighted and beguiled into making life-altering concessions based on the feel-good principle of ‘sacrificing for the better of the whole’. With climate change, we’re pushed to lower our living standards in order to preserve the planet for everyone. Likewise, during the ‘pandemic’ hoax, we were meant to relinquish bodily autonomy in Christ-like fashion, sacrificing ourselves for the sins of others, so that the critically unhealthy, the immuno-compromised, the obese and negligently vitamin-deficient could have a second chance at life on the backs of our pious selflessness.
Play to the natural, instinctive selflessness and humaneness of society, take advantage of it via gaslighting, coercion, and every guilt-trip mechanism in the books, and then achieve their willful abjuration of autonomy, personal freedoms and comforts in exchange for keeping them inside that neo-feudal architecture.
Now we know there’s been a war on Dutch farmers, though really it’s happening in many other places, and the Dutch have simply called attention to themselves best with the resistance they’ve put up.
Protesters claim the Dutch government is lying about the extent of the emissions problem in order to grab privately owned land.
Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s administration has vowed to take radical action to meet its ambitious target of halving the country’s nitrogen emissions by 2030, and has identified the country’s large agriculture sector as being the main culprit due to its large livestock count and use of fertilizers.
Here, too, the globalist regime entwined with the WEF are planning to kill the European agriculture industry under the misrepresented guise of fighting ‘climate change’. Once more, the same underlying goal remains: to actually engineer the catastrophic conditions they claim will be induced by ‘climate change’, so that they can push further policies of control. Their praxis is always the same: they use the Trojan Horse of fighting a problem that doesn’t exist, in order to actually create that very problem itself, so that the devastation brought about can then be used to scare society into total obedience.
Look at the Covid fraud. They used an engineered pandemic that never was, to create the conditions by which:
Many people died through the criminal negligence of the medical industry
Many people died through sheer hysteria and panic-induced bad decision making, such as masks, untested treatments, over-compensations of questionable therapeutic decisions, etc.
Many people died due to not being afforded normal treatment for other chronic/critical issues due to the entire medical/hospital industry being thrown off-kilter, short-staffed, etc.
Many people died from the highly-toxic mRNA gene therapy fraudulently billed as a vaccine
All those things were combined into a set of doctored statistics which were fraudulently imputed onto ‘Covid’ as the cause, which gave the pandemic false legitimacy, conveniently spawning a crisis used to usher in a new age of restrictions and oppression onto the people who naturally resisted and protested it all.
Every movement from the ruling class is designed to actually achieve the exact thing it feigns to ‘fight against’. For instance, take the trans rights movement which revolves around valorizing quote unquote “women”, all the while actually trampling all over real women’s rights and destroying their agency to make sure they can’t resist or protest.
Similarly here, by destroying the food supply under some false guise, they are factitiously engineering the very global crisis which will be used to legitimize the ‘climate change’ agenda. They will simply shift the blame onto climate change and memory-hole that they ever ‘carbon sequestered’ half the world’s farms into total depletion, causing a chain of societal collapses.
To bring it back to the root, there’s no denying that this agenda has been supercharged from the Obama era onward, as explained in the agriculture.com article above. However, the measures were defeated by a unified front of American agriculture stakeholders, and it wasn’t until the Biden administration that the globalist initiative really broke through.
The article states:
The government will help farmers mitigate climate change by paying them to “put their land in conservation” and plant cover crops, said President-elect Biden, providing some details on his campaign call to offset greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. The sector accounts for roughly 10% of emissions nationwide.
Further in the article, they even put forth the idea of ‘carbon trading’ and a ‘carbon sequester bank’ to be the basis of the U.S. agriculture industry:
The newly formed Food and Agriculture Climate Alliance, composed of environmental, farm, and food-retailer groups, says the government should build its climate mitigation platform around voluntary action and “market-driven opportunities” such as carbon trading. The alliance supported a USDA carbon bank as a way to set a floor price for carbon sequestration in the soil.
Carbon trading is an absolutely zany idea that could only have been hatched in the twisted subterranean laboratories of the unhinged WEF cabal. In a sense, it proposes converting the carbon system into a sort of Goldman Sachs-esque financial firm or banking operation, by which carbon credits become the fungible currency which countries use to buy and sell carbon offset responsibilities amongst each other. From an outside perspective, it really smacks of an investment firm’s wet dream: the ability to financialize and commodify the shiny new financial instrument promising to yield returns in an era of sagging economics.
But more crucially, later in the article it summarizes the history:
House Agriculture chairman Collin Peterson says a doubling in size of the land-idling Conservation Reserve to a minimum of 50 million acres would be a straightforward way to achieve climate change goals through a program already popular with farmers. “Land enrolled in the program has helped to keep billions of tons of soil from eroding and sequestered millions of tons of carbon,” said Peterson in unveiling his proposal.
By contrast, he said, farmers are skeptical of other unproven approaches: “You’re not going to be able to sell that to farmers.”
In short, they want to continue expanding the amount of land that they take offline, but couching it in soft, misleading terms like “conservation” and “land-idling” to keep the public from ever being fully cognizant of what ‘carbon sequester’ actually represents.
Now, Ukraine, known as one of the world’s biggest ‘breadbaskets’ has been courting BlackRock, and it’s come as no surprise that news has broken out about the corporate takeover of Ukraine’s famous fertile land.
It’s common knowledge that Bill Gates is now the largest landowner in America:
When he was asked why he’s purchased so much land, he demurred by saying that it’s purchased by account managers through his foundation. He’s clearly dissembling here.
On his own blog, Bill writes that ‘a quarter of all greenhouse emissions come from the agriculture industry’. Here’s an excerpt from his very own piece:
Here’s a mind-blowing fact: there’s more carbon in soil than in the atmosphere and all plant life combined. That’s not a big deal when left to its own devices. But when soil gets disturbed—like it does when you convert a forest into cropland—all that stored carbon gets released into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. That’s one reason why deforestation alone is responsible for 11 percent of all global greenhouse gas emissions. (Another reason is that forests and grasslands are natural carbon sinks. Clearing them reduces the planet’s capacity to remove carbon dioxide from the air.)
One of his suggested prophylactics includes bioengineering a new strain of wheat that has longer and denser roots, so it can absorb more carbon dioxide from the soil. Because, certainly, genetically modifying wheat in the same way his Rockefeller related companies did to Covid and vaccines won’t have any deleterious effect, right?
The point is, Bill has become obsessed with agriculture as the next stage of the Rockefeller Group/WEF plan. And for Bill, it’s always a double dip because he gets to ‘invest’ early on in the companies artificially thrust to the forefront, which end up lobbying (by way of coercion and paying off corrupt politicians) to get billions in government subsidies (the same as Pfizer, et al) from which Bill reaps miraculous profits.
In this 2021 article, one of the board members of a Gates-linked agriculture conglomerate states:
“In the future, farmers will be paid for sustainability,” says Sherrick, who sits on the group’s board. There will be incentives for things like using less water, fewer chemicals, and storing more carbon.
Notice how they always couch the approaches in softer, more ‘acceptable’ terms first. Whether it’s ‘sustainability’ or ‘land-idling’, but then it always leads to the same fineprint stuck in at the end: storing more carbon. And in direct terms this translates to taking land offline, producing less food for humanity.
Of course, Bill hopes to make up for this deficit with a vast array of new synthetic products, from Schwab’s infamous bugs to synthetic meats and everything in between. You can see how these initiatives work hand in hand.
A growing number of increasingly inhuman climate initiatives are now sweeping the globe:
"In Germany it is proposed to sterilize people to protect the climate.
A climatologist from Germany sterilized herself to reduce CO2 emissions into the atmosphere, reports eXXpress. And this is not an isolated case - the rejection of children "in favor of the climate" develops into a real movement.
It is headed by Verena Brunschweiger. She demands to pay 50,000 euros to everyone who has not had a child by the age of 50. Men who voluntarily undergo vasectomy also join the movement.
Critics of this idea wonder who today's activists really want to protect the climate for if they advocate for no more children in the world. For the next generation? It sounds paradoxical."
These initiatives will work hand in hand with all the coming systems to turn us into carbon debt slaves. What’s interesting is that in their own white papers, it states that carbon neutrality is only the first mile marker of the end goal. What comes after ‘neutrality’? Carbon deficit. That means the ultimate plan is to slowly depredate us along gradually moving goalposts until we have nothing left.
But getting back to carbon sequestering: is it bad science? Not necessarily. The question simply comes down to, do we want a group of shadowy multi-national elites controlling the entire world’s farms for some vague purpose sold to us via statistics their own bought-and-paid-for shell companies manufactured?
As I mentioned before, it’s no different than all the other cockamamie schemes secretly designed to create the very problem they propose to combat:
Ultimately, these plans are not designed to ‘enslave humanity’ for some cartoonishly nefarious purpose. They intrinsically revolve around the same teleological purpose: staving off the collapse of the Western financial system, which has been in triage for decades now. For the system to collapse would mean the fall of the ruling families who’ve husbanded their stake for hundreds of years.
The problem is, if they lose control of humanity, letting the lumpen rubes do as they will, make their own economic choices, carve out their own destinies, it would invariably lead to the dissolution of the financial system simply because no people in their right mind would ever willfully stay bound to such a system. Given a choice, they will always choose something that, at least on paper, appears brighter. This explains why the newer generation, misguided as you might think they are, are so enamored with various forms of socialism—because it gives at least the appearance of a sensible path away from the Malthusian enslavement of our system.
This ultimately is what I believe to be behind the totality of these plans; whether it’s the manufactured epidemics I wrote about here, or the push toward transhumanism and identity fracture I examined here. It’s all designed to sow chaos in society for the purpose of maintaining the integrity of the global financial system, which, at the very top, is operated by a few key families and institutions.
It may seem paradoxical—after all, how can one maintain the order of an intricate system by creating disorder? But that’s just the thing: the disorder is meant to destroy any semblance of competition to ‘The System’, in the fray of its convolution. By creating societal panic, scarcity, privation, etc., the System Controllers are able to use our fears and desperation to enroll us into ever constricting bonds while using the manufactured panic and upheaval to effect large-scale, illegal monetary displacements to keep their system afloat. By that I mean, shuffling the money around, printing and laundering it in ways that would normally be defined as highly unethical, illegal, and outright criminal.
By creating ‘supply chain issues’ and mass starvation through the ostensibly ‘climate fighting’ initiatives described above, they will shuffle society into an endlessly narrowing corridor of choices. It’s like an aggressive authority, pushing you through the smoke-choked hallway of a burning building, all the whilst barking and elbowing you into the designated exit of their choice. These engineered ‘crises’ are all about generating a latent state of panic to fray our nerves, deplete our decision-making senses via ego-drain, then shuffle us off into new, more draconian blood contracts with The System, in a never-ending play of servitude.
The way to fight back is at the grassroots level. Sharing the knowledge of their campaigns and initiatives through continual edification, supporting the farmers around the world in word and deed, the ones who are actually on the line, engaged in pitched battle against these destructive forces. And most importantly, never letting off the pressure, even for a little bit.
If you enjoyed the read, I would greatly appreciate if you subscribed to a monthly/yearly pledge to support my work, so that I may continue providing you with detailed, incisive reports like this one.
Alternatively, you can tip here: Tip Jar
As a carbon-based lifeform I oppose carbon sequestration!
I get the overwhelming feeling that we are simply witnessing a cult-like mass suicide taking place in the west. Whether it is outright suicide such as increased violent crime, suicides, drug overdoses, or childlessness, or a quiet destruction of life in the form of alcoholism, drug addiction, morbid obesity, transgenderism, rampant homosexuality, and the failures to protect our children, everything points to the west killing itself. Provoking world war 3, extreme national debts, unsustainable world orders, unnatural rapid demographic changes, I could go on, but I'd rather not.