No-one has died because of the non-existent problem of manmade climate change. But, as a direct result of the group-think focus and the $1.5 trillion annually being piled on the UN’s climate fabrication, combined with the willfully irresponsible neglect of the real problems in the world, people are dying* needlessly, callously sacrificed on the altar of the most massive scientific fraud ever perpetrated.
This is reprehensible.
Proponents of manmade climate change pretend and posture that they are nobly helping the poor, the disadvantaged. Nothing could be further from the truth. For example, they deny people the life-giving, life-enhancing benefits of fossil fuels, condemning some 1.2 billion folks with no electricity, and another 2.6 billion without clean cooking facilities, to further horrific human misery, severe quality-of-life deprivation, and early death. They co-opt agricultural, food-growing land to cultivate polluting biofuels, adding to food shortages and starvation. Perhaps that’s all just fine with the warmists, because part of their agenda includes de-population. Just let ‘em rot, let ’em die—problem solved.
Here’s another example of manmade climate change-obsessed negligence in addressing genuine, serious problems facing the disadvantaged. According to the CBC’s The Sunday Edition, the World Health Organization says that 70% of the 35 million people living with HIV/AIDS are situated in sub-Saharan Africa.
Although the African AIDS epidemic no longer makes the headlines, tens of millions are still living with HIV, and many more are at risk of infection. A disproportionate number of those affected are young women and children. In some countries, girls are more than five times more likely than boys to become HIV positive.
Two HIV/AIDS activists and community leaders, Vuyiseka Dubula of South Africa and Dorothy Onyango of Kenya, spoke to The Sunday Edition’s Michael Enright about their difficult work.
CBC host Michael Enright asks (at 27:25): “There has been a limit to the amount of money coming in from other governments…it’s flatlined in a sense. Why is that?”
Good question, CBC, and here is the answer:
What they are saying is that HIV is no longer a disaster, but for us we know it is, because the communities that have been affected are still suffering. We have orphans, we have grandmothers taking care of persons living with HIV, orphans living with HIV…the young are being affected every other day. So for us, there is still a lot of work, we still need money for HIV. But they have other priorities. They are looking at global warming. They are looking at environmental things.
The host interrupts Vuyiseka Dubula as she tries to get that last sentence out. Manmade climate change propagandist CBC probably would prefer not to hear anything like that.
Vuyiseka Dubula goes on to make the point that if the people like her and their boots-on-the-ground activist communities and grass roots organizations disappear due to lack of international government financial support “there will be no change” in the fight to prevent and eradicate HIV/AIDS.
CBC: “And what will happen then?”
The stark, chilling answer from Dorothy Onyango:
People will die. We’ll go back to where we were before. It means everybody…who is on treatment will actually die. So it means we will be starting again…the epidemic will continue.
Unfortunately everyone is in the hype of climate change… By the time you come back from climate change to AIDS, there is nobody. People have died. You now have to repair the whole of society.
How many more lives are going to be stunted, tormented, sacrificed and lost while in Paris the world’s leaders bask and pose blindly, devoutly in the sickly, fake, corrupting “green” glow of the UN climate emperors sans clothes?
…the solutions we’ve already rushed into are doing real harm, not only to poor people but to the environment – the biofuels programme has probably killed 190,000 people a year by…increasing the price of food and putting pressure on rainforests and things like that, and we are at the moment constraining aid to developing countries for building fossil fuel power stations. Well, that’s keeping a lot of people mired in the problem where they cook over open wood fires, which not only destroys rainforests but also kills more than three million people a year because of the effects of indoor air pollution.
Health Canada—in spite of itself!—finds a significantly harmful relationship between human health and wind turbine noise
See UPDATE further below.
…the study did demonstrate a relationship between increasing levels of wind turbine noise and annoyance towards several features (including noise, vibration, shadow flicker, and the aircraft warning lights on top of the turbines) associated with wind turbines.
“Annoyance,” as a criterion within the context of a health study, is a recognized, significant health hazard:
A WHO epidemiology study assessed noise annoyance and documented significantly elevated relative risks exist both in the cardiovascular system, the respiratory system, and the musculoskeletal system as well as by depression. The study concluded that for chronically strong annoyance a causal chain exists between the three steps [of] health – strong annoyance – increased morbidity. Other symptoms associated with annoyance from various noise sources include: stress, sleep disturbance, headaches, difficulty concentrating, irritability, fatigue, dizziness or vertigo, tinnitus, anxiety, heart ailments, and palpitation. Chronic severe annoyance induced by noise must be classified as a serious human health risk.
The Health Canada report is only a summary:
A more detailed presentation of the results will be submitted for publication in scientific journals. Results should only be considered final following peer-review and publication in the scientific literature.
The finding of “a relationship between increasing levels of wind turbine noise and annoyance” should have been big, game-changing news and raised serious alarm bells in Ontario, where the Wynne Liberal government is intent on continuing to destroy farmland, rural communities, families, livelihoods, quality of life, wildlife, the environment, beautiful landscapes, and property values with thousands more of the useless industrial monsters, against the will of most of the people and the communities affected, and to the despair of urbanites knowledgeable about the subject. But no—the finding of annoyance, an important health indicator which has an established “causal chain” of “health – strong annoyance – morbidity,” did not make the headlines and was barely mentioned in most media reports, or was dismissed in the “colloquial” sense of the word “annoyance.” Instead, most of the mainstream media dutifully reported a contradictory finding of wind turbine noise (WTN) and human health, which in Health Canada’s summary was detailed first and was helpfully highlighted in a box so as not to be missed:
The following were not found to be associated with WTN exposure:
- self-reported sleep (e.g., general disturbance, use of sleep medication, diagnosed sleep disorders);
- self-reported illnesses (e.g., dizziness, tinnitus, prevalence of frequent migraines and headaches) and chronic health conditions (e.g., heart disease, high blood pressure and diabetes); and
- self-reported perceived stress and quality of life.
But further along in the summary, Health Canada does admit that:
- WTN annoyance was found to be statistically related to several self-reported health effects including, but not limited to, blood pressure, migraines, tinnitus, dizziness, scores on the PSQI, and perceived stress.
- WTN annoyance was found to be statistically related to measured hair cortisol, systolic and diastolic blood pressure.
Health Canada then qualifies these statistically significant findings of both self-reported health effects and objective, measured health indices with statements about how the same things were observed for road traffic annoyance, that the conditions may have pre-dated industrial wind turbine installations, and that community annoyance activities could play a role over and above WTN. Of course!
Health Canada’s study has been heavily criticized on a variety of aspects having to do with its design, methodology, and its unseemly hasty conclusions that favour the wind energy sector’s efforts to convince us that industrial wind turbines are safe and do not adversely affect human health. Find out how and why Health Canada’s Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study is deeply flawed:
- Denise Wolfe: Review of the Health Canada Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study
- Epidemiologist Joan Morris offers her thoughts on the Health Canada’s wind turbine and noise health study.
- Prof disputes wind turbine report
- Jane Wilson, President of Wind Concerns Ontario, describes her disappointment with the Health Canada report on the health effects of wind turbines.
- Dr. Robert McMurtry, the founding director of Wind Concerns Ontario, comments on the Health Canada Study of industrial wind turbines.
- Turbine health impact
- Get a sense of the extreme intrusion, disruption, and health havoc inflicted on rural people from the gut-wrenching video below of life amidst an industrial wind turbine plant in Ontario.
- Read Lawrence Solomon’s article, Ill winds blow from wind turbines, in the Financial Post.
- Read Wind Concerns Ontario’s expert analysis of the Health Canada study: Health Canada Study A Missed Opportunity To Find The Truth