The Overblown Corona-Scare

Catholic Candle note: Catholic Candle usually focuses directly on Faith and morals.  However, sometimes issues in society have a severe indirect impact on Faith and morals and should be addressed.  Below, we examine one of those issues which has a severe indirect impact on Faith and morals, viz., the overblown corona-scare.  We put COVID-19 in perspective, to help readers face this challenge in which Providence placed us, for the glory of God and for our good.

In our current corona-crazy world, people are acting strangely because they are frightened by (supposed) imminent death from COVID-19, or they are intimidated by abusive governmental lockdown orders.

People have been coerced into failing to gather to sanctify the Sunday together (which is important, even in the present Great Apostasy, when we have no Masses and no uncompromising priests, at least in most places in the world).  People have been bludgeoned into letting go of their humanity and are fearfully acting as if their fellow man was a threatening virus-culture rather than a fellow child of God and fellow soldier in the Church Militant.

Lastly, another reason to examine the exaggerated corona death toll is because it is a prominent example showing (for anyone who needs further proof) that the mainstream media is unreliable as a source of the truth concerning what is going on in the world.  It is Catholic Candle’s hope that this present article is a helpful reminder to our readers that they should distrust the mainstream media because it lies and “spins” the truth.

This article uses the statistics which were current when the article was written in August and September, 2020.  The article mostly uses data from the U.S. because there is so much of this data available.  For the most part, we do not include the data from the rest of the world because that information is less available to us and also in order to avoid this article becoming too cumbersome. 

However, the data we have from other countries supports the theses of this article.  That support makes sense because human nature is the same in all countries, COVID-19 is (apparently) the same everywhere, and the lockdowns are broadly similar, although more severe and abusive in some places than in others.

There are three aspects to the COVID-19 (so-called) “pandemic”, which help us to put the “COVID-19 death” totals in perspective:

1.    COVID-19 is in the same “ballpark” with (and has the same fatality profile) as the annual flu;

2.    The collateral deaths caused by the government lockdowns likely greatly exceed the deaths caused by COVID-19, even if the inflated COVID-19 death tolls were the true ones; and

3.    The COVID-19 death numbers are unreliable and inflated

Below, we examine each of these points.

 

1.   COVID-19 is in the same “ballpark” with (and has the same fatality profile) as the annual flu

There are almost no deaths of younger and healthier people.  For example, the latest CDC numbers (from August 15, 2020) show 309 deaths of persons 24 years of age and younger.[1]  More than 90% of COVID cases are asymptomatic and people usually don’t know they ever had the virus.[2]

Almost all persons who were listed as “COVID-19 deaths” were retirement age (65 or older), especially over 85 years old.[3]  Almost all of them (94%) had co-morbidities, meaning they were being treated for something else which was a known lethal condition.[4]

In fact, the persons who were counted as “COVID deaths” had an average of 2.6 co-morbidities – meaning that more than half of them had three co-morbidities (compared to the number who had 2 co-morbidities).[5]

A person who receives only the slanted, deceptive news of the mainstream media would not be aware of the truth concerning the relative lack of danger for most people.  Instead, people are given the impression that everyone is in great danger of dying at any time from COVID-19.  A recent Gallup poll reveals how ignorant and scared the American people are (because of the mainstream media’s and Democrats’ fear-mongering).  Look at these two graphs of Gallup Poll results, comparing reality and misperception:


This graph is found here: https://www.franklintempleton.com/investor/article?contentPath=html%2Fftthinks%2Fen-us-retail%2Fcio-views%2Fon-my-mind-they-blinded-us-from-science.html

This graph is found here: https://www.franklintempleton.com/investor/article?contentPath=html%2Fftthinks%2Fen-us-retail%2Fcio-views%2Fon-my-mind-they-blinded-us-from-science.html

Despite the false perception promoted by the mainstream media and the Democrats, the reality is that COVID-19 is in the same “ballpark” with, and has the same fatality profile as the annual flu, viz., it is usually something that does not affect most people and, if it does affect us, it is usually a little “blip” in our month.  (See, the two graphs above.)  However, older people in poor health have to take extra precautions for COVID-19, just like they should regarding the annual flu. 

To put this in perspective, there were 80,000 U.S. fatalities in the 2017-2018 annual flu season, and this number was so unremarkable that this death toll passed virtually unnoticed at the time.[6]

 

No one was locked down in 2017-2018 because of 80,000 flu deaths.  The economy was not destroyed because of that annual flu.  There were no masking orders, no churches closed, and no other oppressive government orders.  In a country the size of the U.S., with over 330 million people, a lot of people die every day and every year. 

Not only is the current COVID-19 scare overblown, but even now, some years of the annual flu, e.g., 1968, have killed more people per capita than COVID-19.  https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31201-0/fulltext  (We do not even mention the far-worse 1918 flu season.) 

It goes without saying that in none of those years – which were worse than the current year – was there a lockdown or other over-reaction, such as we see in the current year.

 

2.   The collateral deaths caused by the government lockdowns likely greatly exceed the deaths caused by COVID-19, even if the inflated COVID-19 death toll were the true one

In the section above, we saw that COVID-19 is in the same “ballpark” with (and has the same fatality profile as) the annual flu, viz., it is usually something that does not affect us and if it does affect us, it is usually a little “blip” in our month.  However, older people in poor health (especially with multiple co-morbidities) have to take extra precautions for COVID-19, just like they should regarding the annual flu. 

That older, sicker persons are in a different situation than the general population, is underscored by the fact that 42% of all U.S. “COVID-19 deaths” occur in nursing homes, although those facilities contain only 0.62% of the U.S. population.[7]

In the U.S., the states controlled by the (more liberal) Democratic party locked down more severely their general populations of younger and healthier people (compared to Republican states).  However, the Democratic governors of four of these states killed thousands of their most vulnerable people (who were in nursing homes) by forcing those nursing homes to receive other persons who tested positive for COVID-19.[8]

This is exactly the opposite of what should have happened!  Younger, healthier people should have been allowed to go on with their lives, while the government should have allowed nursing homes to protect the most vulnerable people, like those nursing homes protect their residents every year from the annual flu. 

 

Self-inflicted harm and the deaths from delayed medical care, during the corona-isolation

Among the many severe tolls taken by the corona-scare is the increases of suicides, drug overdoses, and deaths from delayed care for other serious illness because of the draconian corona-lockdowns.

It is obvious to any person of common sense that the severe lockdowns would cause great collateral harm.  Here are how more than 500 doctors described this harm in their public letter to President Trump:

It is impossible to overstate the short, medium, and long-term harm to people’s health with a continued shutdown. …  Losing a job is one of life’s most stressful events, and the effect on a person’s health is not lessened because it also has happened to 30 million other people.  Keeping schools and universities closed is incalculably detrimental for children, teenagers, and young adults for decades to come.

The millions of casualties of a continued shutdown will be hiding in plain sight, but they will be called alcoholism, homelessness, suicide, heart attack, stroke, or kidney failure.   …  In youths it will be called financial instability, unemployment, despair, drug addiction, unplanned pregnancies, poverty, and abuse.[9]

Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security examined the idea of “Large-Scale Quarantine Measures” in its November 4, 2006 study entitled: Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza.  Here is what that university study concluded:

The negative consequences of large-scale quarantine are so extreme (forced confinement of sick people with the well; complete restriction of movement of large populations; difficulty in getting critical supplies, medicines, and food to people inside the quarantine zone) that this mitigation measure should be eliminated from serious consideration.[10]


Although many people gullibly accept the false narratives of the mainstream media, we see now – by looking at the results of the lockdowns around us – why rational studies and doctors (like those quoted above) have rejected/opposed such lockdowns.

Before discussing the dramatic increase in suicides during the corona-scare, we note that this suicide increase was paralleled by a dramatic increase in help calls to suicide hotlines.  Here are some examples of different suicide hotlines with different increases:

  Two national hotlines had increases of 47% and 300% respectively.[11]

  Another national suicide hotline had a 40% increase.[12]

  Another national suicide hotline had an increase of 891% in March 2020, compared to March 2019.[13]

  Two other suicide hotlines had an 800% increase in call volume.[14]

These increased suicide “help” calls are attributed by those hotline organizations to “social distancing” and “social isolation” suffered because of the lockdowns.[15]

Indeed, common sense makes predictable the severely negative effects of the lockdowns, because we are human.  These lockdowns are inhuman and have never been tried before in the history of mankind: viz., isolate everyone in a nation from all his friends and fellow humans – and isolate each nation throughout almost the entire world.  This is rash and foolish in the extreme!

It is no wonder that one of the epidemiologists who advises the British government called the lockdowns a panic response.  Here are his words:

Lockdown was a panic measure and I believe history will say trying to control Covid-19 through lockdown was a monumental mistake on a global scale, the cure was worse than the disease.  …  It was always a temporary measure that simply delayed the stage of the epidemic we see now.  It was never going to change anything fundamentally; however low we drove down the number of cases …. 

We absolutely should never return to a position where children cannot play or go to school.  …  I suspect right now more people are being harmed by the collateral effects of lockdown than by Covid-19.  … 

Any restrictions imposed should be considered measures and should protect those who needed it while letting everyone live more freely.  …  Instead of concentrating on schools, we should have been concentrating on care homes. We were not really thinking about where the risk lies, just on suppressing the virus.[16]

Regarding the suicide death toll, obviously, the 2020 suicide death toll will not be certain until after the end of 2020.  However, the current projection for suicide/drug overdoses deaths is about 150,000 in the U.S.[17]  To estimate how many of these deaths are due to the extreme corona-isolation, we subtract the total for the latest year for which there is data: 2018.  In 2018, there were 48,344 self-inflicted deaths (suicides and drug overdoses) in the U.S.[18]

Let’s round that 2018 number up to 50,000 deaths.  Thus, according to the best projections we have, suicides and drug overdoses in our times of extreme corona-isolation are estimated to be about 100,000 greater this year than before this corona-scare.  In other words, self-inflicted deaths are 300% of the 2018 number!

The death toll from COVID-19 is extremely inflated, as we see in section three of this article.  However, this death toll is supposedly estimated to be about 183,000.  One way to put this supposed death toll in perspective, is that if we take this number and subtract the increase in self-inflicted deaths because of the corona-isolation, we get 83,000 (i.e., 183,000 – 100,000 = 83,000).  This is approximately the fatality total from the 2017-2018 annual flu which was so unremarkable that this flu death toll went almost unreported then.  Yet, politicians over-react in 2020 and ruin the country’s life.

But there is more: What is not evident in the above comparison of the numbers (viz., “COVID deaths” vs. collateral deaths), is that the deaths blamed on COVID-19 are almost entirely of older, retired people with multiple co-morbidities, most of whom are given only a relatively short time to live even without COVID-19.  By contrast, the suicide and drug overdose deaths occur in the younger and otherwise healthier people who have a far longer life expectancy.  In other words, each “COVID death” represents a far smaller number of years of life lost compared to the suicide/drug overdose deaths. 

Of course, we don’t want anyone to die, but we recognize that a sick, older person losing the last year of his life – as tragic as that is – is not the same as a high schooler losing that last 60 years of his life.

Below, we quote how the U.S. Center for Disease Control (“CDC”) sounded the alarm about the current suicide/drug overdose rate for high schoolers during our corona-isolation.  These COVID-19 lockdown death tolls are far greater than the corresponding “COVID-19 death” toll:

But there has been another cost that we’ve seen, particularly in high schools. We’re seeing, sadly, far greater suicides now than we are deaths from COVID.  We’re seeing far greater deaths from drug overdose that are above that we had as background than we are seeing the deaths from COVID.[19]

Similar spikes in suicide are occurring elsewhere in the world, e.g., in Australia.[20]

Another of the many great harms inflicted by the lockdowns (which are especially extreme in Democratic states) is deaths that occurred because of postponing medical treatment for other diseases, due to the COVID-19 lockdowns.  Those lockdown deaths – which would not have otherwise occurred – are from a variety of causes, e.g., heart attacks, strokes, and cancer.

We don’t know of a comprehensive estimated total of non-COVID-19 deaths which would have been prevented, in the absence of the corona-scare and lockdowns.  However, here are some datapoints:

  Looking at only two of the many types of cancer (breast cancer and colorectal cancer) the National Cancer Institute predicts there will be 10,000 excess deaths in the U.S. over the next 10 years because of pandemic-related delays in diagnosing and treating these tumors.[21]

  Looking at only the drop in cancer referrals, admissions, and diagnoses, compared to pre-COVID levels, one study (using what it called “conservative assumptions”) estimated that there will be 33,890 additional (i.e., excess) cancer deaths during the next year, in the U.S. because of that delayed treatment.[22]

  Although we do not have non-COVID increased-fatality numbers for the entire country for heart attacks, strokes, diabetes, and Alzheimer’s disease, we did find statistics of percentage increases in deaths (of persons who did not have COVID-19) from these four diseases, in five Democratic states (Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania).  These five states were among the most extremely locked down.  In these states, in March and April 2020, compared to January and February 2020, there was a:

 

·         96% increase in diabetes deaths;

 

·         89% increase in heart disease deaths;

 

·         64% increase in Alzheimer’s disease deaths; and

 

·         35% increase in stroke deaths.[23]

Also, in New York City (which suffered a more severe lockdown than almost anywhere), there was a 398% increase in heart disease deaths and a 356% increase in diabetes deaths.[24]

With this data, let’s do our best to estimate, in a rough way, how many deaths these percentages (of additional deaths) would mean throughout the United States.  Let us use the latest national numbers (from 2018) for these four causes of death and let us suppose those percentage increases in deaths from lockdown-delay-in-treatment were the same nationwide.  In other words, let’s use the 2018 national total deaths from each of those four causes, multiplied by the percentage increases given above, to calculate the excess lockdown deaths from each of those four causes.

This formula means that the lockdown-delays-in-treatment caused:

  81,548 additional diabetes deaths (84,946 deaths x 96% = 81,948)

  583,289 additional heart disease deaths (655,381 x 89% = 583,289)

  78,092 additional Alzheimer’s disease deaths (122,019 x 64% = 78,092)

  51,734 additional stroke deaths (147,810 x 35% = 51,734)[25]

Thus, we see, as a “ballpark” number, that the total of these lockdown-delay-in-treatment deaths is 794,663 additional deaths in the United States.  Let’s be clear about these numbers.  They are only rough.  On the one hand, they would seem to be overstated because they use the data of five Democratic states, whereas other (Republican) states exercised a much “lighter touch” in their lockdowns.  So, we would expect that the percentages (of increased deaths) in these Democratic strongholds would be higher than in other parts of the country.  This would mean that the national percentages for these lockdown-delay-in-treatment deaths would be lower than in those five Democratic states.

On the other hand, these numbers undercount the lockdown-delay-in-treatment deaths in another way: viz., those percentages only pertain to the increased death from four causes.  Since there are roughly 100,000 self-inflicted deaths, plus cancer lockdown-delay deaths, and delay-deaths from other causes too, all those numbers should be added to the total of the lockdown-delay deaths from these four causes (794,663) to approximate the additional U.S. deaths.  We see similar collateral deaths from corona-isolation in other countries too.[26]

For the present purpose, we are not trying to get an exact number of the collateral, lockdown-isolation deathsNor are we saying that we know there are 800,000 additional deaths.  Rather, we are pointing out that these collateral deaths from the corona-lockdowns provide a valuable context to our assessment of the current corona-scare. 

It is easy to see how the collateral deaths caused by the government lockdowns could easily exceed – even very greatly exceed – that inflated 183,000 COVID death number which is claimed.  Moreover, when comparing those collateral “lockdown deaths” with supposed “COVID-19 deaths”, the comparison is even more dramatic when we consider the number of years lost by people, compared to the number of lives lost (as shown above).

Perhaps someone might suppose that the “COVID-19 deaths” would be far more numerous if the governments did not order the harsh lockdowns which caused the huge numbers of collateral deaths.  That supposition is false, as will be shown in a future Catholic Candle article.  In fact, those lockdowns were unnecessary and did not help.

 

3.   The COVID-19 death numbers are unreliable and inflated

Above, we saw that the collateral deaths caused by the government lockdowns could easily exceed – even very greatly exceed – that inflated 183,000 “COVID-19 death” number which is claimed.

Now, we examine that “COVID-19 death” total and see if it is reliable. 

 

The overcount of “COVID-19 deaths”

There is a huge difference between dying with COVID-19 and dying from (i.e., because of) COVID-19.  Let’s illustrate the difference: the CDC estimates that adults will come down with 2-3 common colds every year.[27]  With colds being so common, it is common to die with a common cold, even though not because of a common cold.  If someone died while he had a common cold, we would not say he “died from the common cold”.

Well, “COVID-19 deaths” are counted to include anyone who dies with COVID-19 even though not because of (from) COVID-19.  This is similar to counting a person as a “common cold death” if the person died while he had a common cold.

Here is how Dr. Deborah Birx (coordinator of the coronavirus taskforce) explained this U.S. method of counting COVID-19 deaths:

There are other countries that if you had a preexisting condition and let’s say the virus caused you to go to the ICU and then have a heart or kidney problem some countries are recording [this] as a heart issue or a kidney issue and not a COVID-19 death. … [In the US] if someone dies with COVID-19 we are counting that as a COVID-19 death.[28]

With this foolishly broad overcounting, which no one ever uses for other sicknesses, there is a greatly exaggerated COVID-19 death toll.  There is not only the everyday overcount we would expect, of sick, frail, elderly people who have multiple co-morbidities, who die of something else (like a heart attack, a stroke, cancer, etc.) but who are counted as a “COVID-19 death” because they died with COVID-19. 

But there are also striking absurdities which are consistent with this official policy of counting every death as a “COVID-19 death” as long as the person had COVID-19 when he died, e.g.,

  A person who died in a motorcycle accident was listed as a COVID-19 death.[29]

  A person who died of suicide was listed as a COVID-19 death.[30]

But the COVID-19 overcount is even more exaggerated because a person need not even be known to have COVID-19.  Rather, current CDC protocols allow a person to be reported as a “COVID-19 death” as long as there is an assumption that COVID-19 somehow contributed to the death.  Here is the CDC’s instruction:

COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.[31]

Thus, when the death certificate lists COVID-19 on it, the CDC and the mainstream media report the person as if COVID-19 caused that person’s death.  For example, here is one instance of this type of falsification (this one from National Public Radio):

Today, more than 6 million Americans have been infected with the coronavirus and some 183,000 have died from it ….[32]

Here is another example of this type of falsification (this one from the Washington Post):

At least 191,000 people have died of the coronavirus in the United States

….[33]

The truth is that the COVID-19 death total is really of people who died in some way connected with COVID-19, but not because of COVID-19.  These people did not all have pneumonia-type COVID-19 symptoms, nor were they all even known to have ever had COVID-19.

In fact, the “COVID-19 death” toll includes many people based on statistical suppositions.  For example, early on, New York adopted the policy of counting as “COVID-19 deaths” the number of people who died in excess of a statistically average year, even though those people never tested positive for COVID-19 or had any symptoms suggesting COVID-19.[34]  The unreasonableness and inaccuracy of this policy is obvious, since “half the time” (even without COVID-19) the fatalities will be above average – maybe even far above average – to offset the other “half” of the years when the death toll is below average.

 

Perverse financial incentives to count persons as “COVID-19 deaths”

We see (above) that the CDC authorizes hospitals to count as “COVID-19 deaths” all people whom they “assume” had COVID-19 which somehow contributed to the deaths.  These assumptions are made more common by the perverse financial incentives pressuring cash-strapped hospitals to “assume” that COVID-19 had some role contributing to patients’ deaths.  For example, the U.S. government pays hospitals a 20% premium in Medicare payments if the hospital “assumes” that a patient was a “COVID-19 death”.[35]

Any reasonable person would know that under these circumstances, there will be lots of “assuming” that COVID-19 had some connection to the death.  In fact, some whistleblower doctors have publicly complained that their hospitals pressure them to add COVID-19 as an assumed “contributing cause” on their patients’ death certificates.[36]

 

Summary of this section so far, of the reasons “COVID-19 death” numbers are inflated

The “COVID-19 death” totals are inflated because a person can be counted if:

  The person had COVID-19 when he died (regardless of what actually caused his death); or

  The person was assumed to have had COVID-19 when he died; or

  There was a statistical increase in deaths above the expected average, regardless of how the persons died.

Further, we see (above) that there is a large perverse incentive for hospitals to lie and to say that a person was a “COVID-19 death” so the hospital would get more money.

 

Let’s try to estimate the true number of persons whose deaths were caused by COVID-19

How do we figure out how many so-called “COVID-19 deaths” were really caused by COVID-19?  One way to roughly approximate this number is to consider what COVID-19 is and then look at the CDC numbers.

COVID-19 is a respiratory disease caused by the virus named SARS-CoV-2. The “SARS” in “SARS-CoV-2” stands for “severe acute respiratory syndrome” (which is sometimes also referred to as acute respiratory distress syndrome or adult respiratory distress syndrome).[37]

The CDC explains that sometimes COVID-19 is severe enough that it leads to death by progressing to pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).[38] 

Here is another way this causation is stated:

The virus that causes COVID-19 is designated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The major morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 is largely due to acute viral pneumonitis that evolves to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).[39]

This is why, last spring, the CDC directors used a “case definition of COVID-19 requiring a diagnosis of pneumonia” in an article they wrote for the New England Journal of Medicine.[40]

Thus, let’s look at the death toll of persons whose death certificates at least mentioned pneumonia (regardless of what they died of).  In the CDC chart below[41], you see that there are 71,700 persons who died between February 1, 2020 and August 31, 2020, who at least had influenza or pneumonia when they died (regardless of the actual cause of their death).

Again, this total is 71,700 deaths.  Let’s count that as a rough proxy for how many people with COVID-19 actually died from it, since these people at least had influenza or had the pneumonia which accompanies COVID-19 when people actually die from the disease.

This data is the best we have although, obviously, to the extent that persons had COVID-19 and pneumonia but died of something else, such as a heart attack, these persons would be included in this total and would overcount COVID-19 deaths.  Further, to the extent that these persons had influenza and not pneumonia, they also would be an overcount.  But let’s “be generous” and count them all, to approximate a real COVID-19 death toll.  That number (71,700) is still only 40% of the claimed total of COVID-19 deaths (183,000).

It might seem that 71,700 is a big number.  However, the U.S. is a country of 330 million people.  In fact, about 2.8 million people die in the U.S. during a typical year.[42]

So, although we don’t want anyone to die, nonetheless pneumonia (and influenza) deaths are currently average for the entire country, not above average.  See the current CDC map below.

 

Map taken from: https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/mortality.html

 

Italy

We could talk about other countries too.  However, we will only briefly talk about one other country, Italy, because it has been mentioned so often in the mainstream media’s corona-scare.  Italy has the second-oldest population in the world.[43]  Just as the annual flu strikes more severely in elderly people with co-morbidities, so does COVID-19 too, as we saw in section one of this article. 

However, there is a dishonesty in the reporting of Italy’s COVID-19 fatalities, just as is true in the statistics for the U.S. and other countries.  Like for the U.S., the mainstream media attributes to COVID-19 all deaths in which the persons had some connection to the virus.  In other words, Italy’s COVID-19 fatality statistics include all the people who died with COVID-19, even when they die of something else and their deaths are not caused by COVID-19.

Here is how this is explained by Prof. Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s minister of health:

The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus.  On re-evaluation by the National Institute of Health, only 12 per cent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus, while 88 per cent of patients who have died have at least one pre-morbidity – many had two or three ….[44]

Thus, looking at how many people – even among Italy’s more elderly population – have died from COVID-19 as the cause, only 12% of those attributed in Italy as “COVID-19 deaths” showed a “direct causality from coronavirus”.  In other words, Italy’s “COVID-19 death” toll is inflated by 800%!

 

Summary of this article

There are many reasons that it is plain that the corona-scare is overblown.  The reality is that:

  COVID-19 is in the same “ballpark” with (and has the same fatality profile as) the annual flu;

  The collateral deaths caused by the government lockdowns likely greatly exceed the deaths caused by COVID-19, even if the inflated “COVID-19 death” toll were the true one; and

  The “COVID-19 death” numbers are unreliable and inflated.

 

Lastly, beware of the lies and “spin” in the reports of the mainstream media!



[16]         Assessment by Professor Mark Woolhouse OBE, University of Edinburgh professor of infectious disease epidemiology and member of the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviours that advises the British Government.  https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/1320428/Coronavirus-news-lockdown-mistake-second-wave-Boris-Johnson

 

[19]         Robert Redfield, MD, Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, https://www.buckinstitute.org/covid-webinar-series-transcript-robert-redfield-md/

[25]         All of the above death total data was taken from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db355_tables-508.pdf


[28]         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blZpgra3XbU (emphasis added).

 

[33]         Washington Post Evening Edition, September 15, 2020, article entitled: Trump health appointee apologizes to HHS staff after accusing scientists of ‘sedition’ (emphasis added).

 


[36]         See, e.g., one doctor telling a major new outlet this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jB0OYp0S0yo&feature=emb_logo

[40]         Covid-19 — Navigating the Uncharted, by Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., H. Clifford Lane, M.D., and Robert R. Redfield, M.D., New England Journal of Medicine, https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2002387 (emphasis added).

 

Should nations be run by “experts”?

In our “corona-crazy” time[1], our political leaders receive much advice from medical “experts”.  Some leaders are attacked in the media for not following the advice of the “experts”.  For example, radical Democrat, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, attacked President Trump for not “listening to the medical experts”.[2]  Pelosi means Trump was not making decisions which followed the opinions of the “experts”.

Even if we assumed that the medical “experts” all agree (which they do not) concerning how to respond to the current corona-craziness, who should run the country?  Should Trump (or any political leader) simply do whatever the health “experts” tell him to do?

In other words, should specialized “experts” run the government and the nation?  No!  A nation (and other political bodies) should no more be run by specialized “experts” who are focused on a particular field than an individual man should make all of his decisions based on one of his passions which is focused on a particular desire.

 

Let’s look at how an individual man should weigh competing concerns when making his decisions

A man has many desires such as food and sleep.  He has many passions such as fear and anger.  These passions and desires are good and are part of the nature God gave him.  But a man should not be ruled by those desires and passions.  For example, he should not allow his fears to rule him. 

Instead, man should be ruled by reason, while taking reasonable account of “advice” he receives from his passions.  So, e.g., a man should “consult” his fears while his reason is weighing what decision to make.  But if a man’s fear rules him then he acts wrongly because he acts as if nothing is more important than to be safe.  He lives (and wastes his life) locked up in safety, whereas there are many things more important than safety.

If a man’s desire for food ruled him, then he acts as if nothing is more important than eating.  His decisions would lack balance (and temperance) and all of his decisions and actions would serve the goal of eating.

If a man’s desire for sleep ruled him, then he would act as if nothing is more important than sleeping and his need for sleep would not be balanced with other parts of life.  The man would get a full night’s sleep every night but would lose his job because he does not come to work on time.

If a man’s desire for health (or fear of disease) is allowed to rule him, then he would stay away from all possible health risks and he would waste his life in useless fear.  Here is how billionaire Howard Hughes allowed himself to be ruled by the desire for health (or the fear of disease):

Howard Hughes – the billionaire aviator, motion-picture producer and business tycoon – spent most of his life trying to avoid germs.  Toward the end of his life, he lay naked in bed in darkened hotel rooms in what he considered a germ-free zone.  He wore tissue boxes on his feet to protect them.  And he burned his clothing if someone near him became ill.  …

He wrote a staff manual on how to open a can of peaches – including directions for removing the label, scrubbing the can down until it was bare metal, washing it again and pouring the contents into a bowl without touching the can to the bowl.[3]

This is unreasonable!  The correct course is for a man’s intellect to rule him and to make decisions which take into account all of the various desires and passions as far as they are reasonable.  A person should take risks, act reasonably, weigh the different competing concerns, the advantages and disadvantages, all in light of his Final End and the Common Good.

 

Now let’s apply this principle to see how a leader must make decisions for a nation

A nation’s leader should act like a man consulting his passions as far as they are reasonable, but making his decisions with his intellect.  A nation’s leader should be a man of reason and prudence, analogous to the intellect in that individual man (in the example above).  This nation’s leader (just like the intellect of an individual man) must balance competing concerns, advantages and disadvantages of different courses of conduct, and make decisions for the Common Good.

This leader should take into reasonable account the advice of “specialists” and “experts” but he should not necessarily follow their advice.  This is analogous to an individual man taking into account the “advice” of his other faculties (such as the desire for food which reminds him that he should maintain his strength and his health by eating when reasonable and appropriate).

So, a nation’s leader should receive advice from military experts.  But these military advisors tend to elevate the importance of military concerns – which is the focus of their careers – often downplaying other important aspects of life.  The nation’s leader should no more slavishly follow the advice of such an expert than an individual man should slavishly follow one of his passions, e.g., fear – whose single-focus is avoiding danger. 

The advice of this military expert (like the individual man’s passion of fear) should be weighed by reason and then the nation’s leader should make an independent judgment what is best for the nation. 

Likewise, other specialized “experts” (e.g., doctors), tend to focus mainly on the concerns of their own specialized field (e.g., medicine).  So, a nation’s leader should no more follow – slavishly – the advice of an expert in infectious disease prevention, than a man should slavishly follow his passion whose single-focus is food.  Instead, the advice of the experts should be weighed by the leader before he makes an independent judgment what best promotes the Common Good of the nation.

 

Conclusion

If a nation’s leader is not “listening to the infectious disease experts”, this does not tell us that he is wrong.  It might be better not to follow them in the particular circumstances.

A nation’s leader should not be singularly focused on disease prevention or any other single aspect of national life.  He must weigh competing concerns and make a prudential judgment what is best for the country, based on the Common Good.



[1]           There is evidence that the danger of the coronavirus (COVID-19) is greatly exaggerated in order to justify heavy–handed government intrusion and destruction of rightful liberty.  However, even if this virus were terrifying and not exaggerated, this virus presents the issue of whether our leaders should simply follow “the experts” in making their decisions.

The Baseless Climate-Change Scare aims to usher in the New World Order

Catholic Candle note:  This article pertains to the hoax that there is a human-caused, climate-change emergency.  The article does not pertain to the natural cycles of the climate which result in no year’s weather being identical to any other year’s weather, nor any century’s weather being identical to any other century’ weather.  Those natural fluctuations have always occurred and always will occur.  There are long-term cycles and short-term cycles.  That is how God created the world.

The second half of the article (below) discusses how the conciliar popes have promoted an important goal of the enemies of Our Lord Jesus Christ.  However, a reader would be mistaken if he assumed that these popes’ cooperation in this evil somehow means that they lost the papacy.

Sedevacantism is wrong and is (material or formal) schism.  Catholic Candle is not sedevacantist.  On the contrary, we published a series of articles showing that sedevacantism is false (and also showing that former Pope Benedict is not still the pope).  Read the articles here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html 

In the 1970s, the government and media hyped a global-cooling climate scare which they called “the new ice age” – until it became too clear to everyone that the world was not cooling in any relevant way.[1]

Then, beginning in the 1980s, the climate scare was global-warming – until it became very clear that the evidence did not support this hoax.[2]

Consequently, the New World Order elites (working for a one-world government) began promoting “climate change” as their preferred climate “emergency” because this allows them to use all bad weather to further their power-grab agenda.  

Moreover, normal “bad” weather is now often hyped in the extreme.  Here are the words of one Time magazine writer who contrasts this current hype to earlier times when routine “bad” weather was merely treated as routine:

Now, every cold front that threatens to slicken roads and cause airport delays along the Eastern corridor (where, not merely coincidentally, almost all network TV news executives live and work) has become urgent news.  And not just in winter.  Springtime thunderstorms, summer heat waves, the first cold snap of the fall — all of them get breathless treatment, often accompanied by a barrage of scary stats: “14 states under severe weather watches”; “24 million people at risk for the possibility of tornadoes”; “43 million people at risk for flash flooding.” I grew up in Kansas City, Mo., in what used to be known as Tornado Alley.  In the late spring and early summer, we were always at risk.  It never seemed to make the national news.[3]

Not only is routine bad weather now hyped in the extreme, but the climate catastrophes of the past are ignored.  The examples are too numerous to count.  For example, in the Central American Country of Belize:

In 1931 an unnamed hurricane destroyed over two-thirds of the buildings in Belize City and killed more than 1,000 people.  In 1955 Hurricane Janet leveled the northern town of Corozal.  Only six years later, Hurricane Hattie struck the central coastal area, with winds in excess of 186 mph and a storm surge (ocean tide) of more than 13 feet.  Hattie was the second hurricane to devastate Belize City, in only thirty years.[4]

Who could doubt that, if those catastrophes occurred now, they would be used as “proof” that climate change is real?

Further, our fallen human nature makes it easy for the New World Order elites to succeed in this climate-scare fraud because fallen man has always been quick to exaggerate any current weather problems and to suppose that the weather was better in the past.  Here is how St. Augustine, Doctor of the Church, explained 1600 years ago how fallen man unreasonably tends to suppose that the weather is becoming more extreme:

Not only did our elders complain about their days, their grandparents too complained about their [own] days.  People have never been pleased with the days they lived in.  But the days of the ancestors please their descendants, and they too were pleased with the days they hadn’t experienced – and that’s precisely why they thought them pleasant.  It’s what’s present that is sharply felt.  I don’t mean it comes nearer, but it touches the heart every day.  Practically every year when we feel the cold we say “It’s never been so cold.”  “It’s never been so hot.”  “It,” “it” – “it” is always in our minds.  But blessed is the man whom You instruct, Lord, to claim him from baleful days, while a pit is being dug for the sinner.[5]

The climate change scare aims at ushering in the power-grab of the New World Order

The purpose of the climate-change hoax is a power-grab.  This hoax aims at destroying what remains of freedom and capitalism[6] in the world’s largest capitalist nation (the U.S.) and destroying national sovereignty to pave the way for a New World Order — i.e., global governance.

This truth was admitted by Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, in February 2015.  At a news conference in Brussels, she admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.  Here are her words:

This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change [i.e. get rid of] the economic development model [i.e., capitalism] that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.[7]

Referring to the Paris Climate Accord which she was promoting, Figueres added:

This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.[8]

Another of the U.N.'s top climate officials, Dr. Ottmar Edenhofer, also admitted that the climate-change scare is not to save the environment but to redistribute the world’s wealth.  Edenhofer, who was co-chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group III, made this admission in an interview with the Swiss Newspaper, Neue Zürcher Zeitung.  Here are Edenhofer’s words:

One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.  This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy, with problems such as forest dying or ozone hole.  …  [O]ne has to say clearly: we are effectively redistributing world wealth through climate policy.[9]

Currently, in the U.S., one aspect of the climate-change hoax (and socialist power-grab), is the Democratic Party’s Green New Deal proposal.  Here is how this proposal is described by the (liberal) New York Times:  

What is the Green New Deal?

The Green New Deal is a congressional resolution that lays out a grand plan for tackling climate change.  Introduced by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Senator Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, both Democrats, the proposal calls on the federal government to wean the United States from fossil fuels and curb planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions across the economy.[10]  …

The resolution uses as its guide two major reports issued last year by the United Nations and by federal scientists who warned that if global temperatures continue to rise, the world is headed for more intense heat waves, wildfires and droughts.[11]

Sponsor, U.S. Representative Ocasio-Cortez, declared that our continued existence requires the Green New Deal.  Here are her words:

Our goal is to treat Climate Change like the serious, existential threat it is by drafting an ambitious solution on the scale necessary – aka a Green New Deal – to get it done.[12]

Examining the Green New Deal shows that it is a collection of goals long sought by the socialists and communists.  It requires Federal Government control throughout many broad parts of people’s lives.  Among many other evils, this proposal mandates the Federal Government to pass many unattainable socialist laws requiring:

  • all carbon emissions are eliminated;
  • all people in the United States have a free higher education;
  • to enforce the sovereignty and land rights of indigenous peoples;

  • all people of the United States have free high-quality health care;

  • all people of the United States have affordable, safe, and adequate housing;

  • all people of the United States have healthy and affordable food;

  • all people of the United States have access to nature;

  • all employers are forced to give paid leave and paid vacations to their employees; and

  • many other mandates of socialism.[13]

As explained above, the Green New Deal’s principal sponsor in the U.S. House of Representatives is liberal New York Democrat, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  Concerning this Green New Deal, her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, (who has since left his job) revealed that the Green New Deal is not about “saving the planet”.  Here are his words about the Green New Deal:

It wasn’t originally a climate thing at all … we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.[14]

The New World Order elite is marshalling all of its forces to push the climate-change scare as a means of convincing the world’s population that the climate emergency gives people no choice but to accept unprecedented government control – especially globalist control – of all aspects of life.[15] 

The conciliar popes declare we need a world government to solve our climate emergency

The New World Order elites have been tirelessly working to install on the papal throne a pope who furthers their goal of one-world government.  This allows those elites to use the incomparable power of the papacy to advance the New World Order power-grab.

Here is how the Carbonari (the Italian Masons) described their plan to subvert and harness the power of the papacy:

[W]e can conspire at our ease, and arrive little by little at the end we have in view.  …  

The Pope, whoever he may be, will never come to the secret societies. It is for the secret societies to come first to the Church, in the resolve to conquer the two.  The work which we have undertaken is not the work of a day, nor of a month, nor of a year. It may last many years, a century perhaps, but in our ranks the soldier dies and the fight continues.  …  

That which we ought to demand, that which we should seek and expect, as the Jews expected the Messiah, is a Pope according to our wants.  Alexander VI., with all his private crimes, would not suit us, for he never erred in religious matters. Clement XIV., on the contrary, would suit us from head to foot.  Borgia was a libertine, a true sensualist of the eighteenth century strayed into the fifteenth.  He has been anathematized, notwithstanding his vices, by all the voices of philosophy and incredulity, and he owes that anathema to the vigor with which he defended the Church.  …  

We have the little finger of the successor of St. Peter engaged in the plot, and that little finger is of more value for our crusade than all the Innocents, the Urbans, and the St. Bernards of Christianity.  We do not doubt that we shall arrive at that supreme term of all our efforts; but when? but how? The unknown does not yet manifest itself.  Nevertheless, as nothing should separate us from the plan traced out; as, on the contrary, all things should tend to it, — as if success were to crown the work scarcely sketched ….

You will have fished up a Revolution in Tiara and Cope, marching with Cross and banner—a Revolution which it will need but to be spurred on a little to put the four quarters of the world on fire.[16]

This Masonic plan having largely succeeded, the post-Vatican II popes promote the globalist agenda in many ways, including promotion of the climate-change scare.

Shortly after Pope Francis’ election, the Masons declared that he was a plan (i.e., “a design”) fulfilled.  Here are the words of Nicola Spinello, Adjunct-Vicar Grand Master of the Masons of Piazza del Gesù:

I believe that this pope [viz., Francis] is the realization of a design that has long wanted to be adopted.[17]

Pope Francis has hopped onto the climate-scare bandwagon.  He declared that “one of the most serious and worrying phenomena of our time [is] climate change.”[18]  To respond to the supposed climate emergency, Pope Francis declared the need for a global government.  Here are his words:

The twenty-first century, while maintaining systems of governance inherited from the past, is witnessing a weakening of the power of the nation states, chiefly because the economic and financial sectors, being transnational, tends to prevail over the political.  Given this situation, it is essential to devise stronger and more efficiently organized international institutions, which functionaries who are appointed fairly by agreement among national governments and empowered to impose sanctions …[19]

Former Pope Benedict XVI likewise promoted a global government to protect the environment.  Here are his words:

In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth.  One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago.[20]

Conclusion

We see the climate-change hoax being used to scare people into allowing destruction of national sovereignty and control of the world’s population.  Unbeknownst to most people, the ultimate goal is to prepare conditions for the coming of the antichrist.

Not only is this climate-scare a fraud, but it is a complete reversal of the priorities we should have.  Modern man cares nothing for his soul and focuses entirely on the material world.  

Even if the climate scare were not a fraud (as it is), nonetheless worldwide environmental catastrophe is much better than even a single venial sin.  Here is how Cardinal Newman states this truth:

The Catholic Church holds it better for the sun and moon to drop from heaven, for the earth to fail, and for all the many millions on it to die of starvation in extremest agony, as far as temporal affliction goes, than that one soul, I will not say, should be lost, but should commit one single venial sin, should tell one willful untruth, or should steal one poor farthing without excuse.[21]

Even if climate-change were not a hoax, we should put more effort into preventing one venial sin than stopping climate-change.

Let us not be deceived by the climate-change scare!  

Let us remember that the only true evil is sin!


[2]          Here is a small sample of information showing that the global-warming scare is a fraud:

[3]          When did routine bad weather become such big news?, by Richard Zoglin, Time magazine contributor and author.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/tv-news-is-too-obsessed-with-the-weather/2019/11/29/df2a678a-116b-11ea-b0fc-62cc38411ebb_story.html?utm_campaign=opinions_saturday&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=Newsletter&wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1 (emphasis in the original).

[4]          Quoted from: Latin America, A Sketch of its Glorious Catholic Roots and a Snapshot of its Present, by the Editors of Quanta Cura Press, © 2016, p.59.

[6]
         In a capitalistic economy, there is an absence of the government control which the socialists and the communists insist upon.  Thus, socialists and communists hate capitalism.  In capitalism, there is relative freedom – which is why the New World Order elites seek to destroy capitalism because it is incompatible with their vision of world control.

However, the pre-Vatican II popes reminded the world that, even in a capitalist economy, bosses and workers must fulfill the duties of justice and charity that those groups have to each other.  See, e.g., Quadragesimo anno the encyclical issued by Pope Pius XI on 15 May 1931 and Rerum Novarum the encyclical of Leo XIII issued forty years before that.  Thus, unlimited capitalism (doing whatever we can to succeed in business) is also immoral because that would disregard justice and charity.

[7]
         Quoted in the daily financial newspaper,
Investors Business Daily, available here: https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism/

(emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity).

[8]          Quoted in the daily financial newspaper, Investors Business Daily, available here: https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism/ (emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity).

[9]          This interview was published on 11-14-10 and is available here:

https://www.nzz.ch/klimapolitik_verteilt_das_weltvermoegen_neu-1.8373227

Here is the original German:

Man muss sich von der Illusion freimachen, dass internationale Klimapolitik Umweltpolitik ist. Das hat mit Umweltpolitik, mit Problemen wie Waldsterben oder Ozonloch, fast nichts mehr zu tun.  …  Aber man muss klar sagen: Wir verteilen durch die Klimapolitik de facto das Weltvermögen um.

[13]          116th Congress, House Resolution 109.

[15]          Climate-change fraud is promoted in countless ways, by countless “foot soldiers” who aid this effort knowingly or unknowingly.  For example, The Oxford Dictionary promotes the climate scare by (among other things) having made the two-word phrase “climate emergency” its Word of the Year for 2019.  https://www.msn.com/en-gb/finance/other/climate-emergency-is-oxford-dictionarys-word-of-the-year-2019/ar-BBX6Roi

[16]          The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita, drafted by the Carbonari (the Italian Masonry) publicly published by the orders of Pope Pius IX and Pope Leo XIII who vouched for its authenticity.  This document is found in The War of Anti-Christ with the Church, by Msgr. George Dillon, D.D., Gill & Son, Dublin, 1885, Ch.13.

[17]          Quoted in the book, Vaticano massone. Logge, denaro e poteri occulti: il lato segreto della Chiesa di papa Francesco, by Giacomo GALEAZZI – Ferruccio PINOTTI, Edizioni Piemme, Milano 2013, p.83, as quoted here: https://onepeterfive.com/freemasons-love-pope-francis/#_ftn23 (bracketed word added to show the context).

[19]          Laudato Si, section 175 (emphasis added).

[20]
         
Caritas in Veritate, (former) Pope Benedict XVI, 6-29-09, §67 (emphasis added).

[21]          Apologia Vita Sua, by John Henry Cardinal Newman, Image Books, Doubleday, Garden City, New York, © 1956, p.324.

Climate-Change serves to usher in the New World Order

Catholic Candle note:  This article pertains to the hoax that there is a human-caused, climate-change emergency.  The article does not pertain to the natural cycles of the climate which result in no year’s weather being identical to any other year’s weather, nor any century’s weather being identical to any other century’ weather.  Those natural fluctuations have always occurred and always will occur.  There are long-term cycles and short-term cycles.  That is how God created the world.

The second half of the article (below) discusses how the conciliar popes have promoted an important goal of the enemies of Our Lord Jesus Christ.  However, a reader would be mistaken if he assumed that these popes’ cooperation in this evil somehow means that they lost the papacy.

Sedevacantism is wrong and is (material or formal) schism.  Catholic Candle is not sedevacantist.  On the contrary, we published a series of articles showing that sedevacantism is false (and also showing that former Pope Benedict is not still the pope).  Read the articles here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html 

 

In the 1970s, the government and media hyped a global-cooling climate scare which they called “the new ice age” – until it became too clear to everyone that the world was not cooling in any relevant way.[1]

Then, beginning in the 1980s, the climate scare was global-warming – until it became very clear that the evidence did not support this hoax.[2]

 

Consequently, the New World Order elites (working for a one-world government) began promoting “climate change” as their preferred climate “emergency” because this allows them to use all bad weather to further their power-grab agenda. 

Moreover, normal “bad” weather is now often hyped in the extreme.  Here are the words of one Time magazine writer who contrasts this current hype to earlier times when routine “bad” weather was merely treated as routine:

Now, every cold front that threatens to slicken roads and cause airport delays along the Eastern corridor (where, not merely coincidentally, almost all network TV news executives live and work) has become urgent news.  And not just in winter.  Springtime thunderstorms, summer heat waves, the first cold snap of the fall — all of them get breathless treatment, often accompanied by a barrage of scary stats: “14 states under severe weather watches”; “24 million people at risk for the possibility of tornadoes”; “43 million people at risk for flash flooding.” I grew up in Kansas City, Mo., in what used to be known as Tornado Alley.  In the late spring and early summer, we were always at risk.  It never seemed to make the national news.[3]

Not only is routine bad weather now hyped in the extreme, but the climate catastrophes of the past are ignored.  The examples are too numerous to count.  For example, in the Central American Country of Belize:

In 1931 an unnamed hurricane destroyed over two-thirds of the buildings in Belize City and killed more than 1,000 people.  In 1955 Hurricane Janet leveled the northern town of Corozal.  Only six years later, Hurricane Hattie struck the central coastal area, with winds in excess of 186 mph and a storm surge (ocean tide) of more than 13 feet.  Hattie was the second hurricane to devastate Belize City, in only thirty years.[4]

Who could doubt that, if those catastrophes occurred now, they would be used as “proof” that climate change is real?

Further, our fallen human nature makes it easy for the New World Order elites to succeed in this climate-scare fraud because fallen man has always been quick to exaggerate any current weather problems and to suppose that the weather was better in the past.  Here is how St. Augustine, Doctor of the Church, explained 1600 years ago how fallen man unreasonably tends to suppose that the weather is becoming more extreme:

Not only did our elders complain about their days, their grandparents too complained about their [own] days.  People have never been pleased with the days they lived in.  But the days of the ancestors please their descendants, and they too were pleased with the days they hadn’t experienced – and that’s precisely why they thought them pleasant.  It’s what’s present that is sharply felt.  I don’t mean it comes nearer, but it touches the heart every day.  Practically every year when we feel the cold we say “It’s never been so cold.”  “It’s never been so hot.”  “It,” “it” – “it” is always in our minds.  But blessed is the man whom You instruct, Lord, to claim him from baleful days, while a pit is being dug for the sinner.[5]

 

The climate change scare aims at ushering in the power-grab of the New World Order

The purpose of the climate-change hoax is a power-grab.  This hoax aims at destroying what remains of freedom and capitalism[6] in the world’s largest capitalist nation (the U.S.) and destroying national sovereignty to pave the way for a New World Orderi.e., global governance.

This truth was admitted by Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, in February 2015.  At a news conference in Brussels, she admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.  Here are her words:

This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change [i.e. get rid of] the economic development model [i.e., capitalism] that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.[7]

Referring to the Paris Climate Accord which she was promoting, Figueres added:

This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.[8]

Another of the U.N.’s top climate officials, Dr. Ottmar Edenhofer, also admitted that the climate-change scare is not to save the environment but to redistribute the world’s wealth.  Edenhofer, who was co-chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group III, made this admission in an interview with the Swiss Newspaper, Neue Zürcher Zeitung.  Here are Edenhofer’s words:

One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.  This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy, with problems such as forest dying or ozone hole.  …  [O]ne has to say clearly: we are effectively redistributing world wealth through climate policy.[9]

Currently, in the U.S., one aspect of the climate-change hoax (and socialist power-grab), is the Democratic Party’s Green New Deal proposal.  Here is how this proposal is described by the (liberal) New York Times: 

What is the Green New Deal?

The Green New Deal is a congressional resolution that lays out a grand plan for tackling climate change.  Introduced by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Senator Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, both Democrats, the proposal calls on the federal government to wean the United States from fossil fuels and curb planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions across the economy.[10]  …

The resolution uses as its guide two major reports issued last year by the United Nations and by federal scientists who warned that if global temperatures continue to rise, the world is headed for more intense heat waves, wildfires and droughts.[11]

Sponsor, U.S. Representative Ocasio-Cortez, declared that our continued existence requires the Green New Deal.  Here are her words:

Our goal is to treat Climate Change like the serious, existential threat it is by drafting an ambitious solution on the scale necessary – aka a Green New Deal – to get it done.[12]

Examining the Green New Deal shows that it is a collection of goals long sought by the socialists and communists.  It requires Federal Government control throughout many broad parts of people’s lives.  Among many other evils, this proposal mandates the Federal Government to pass many unattainable socialist laws requiring:

·         all carbon emissions are eliminated;

·         all people in the United States have a free higher education;

·         to enforce the sovereignty and land rights of indigenous peoples;

 

·         all people of the United States have free high-quality health care;

 

·         all people of the United States have affordable, safe, and adequate housing;

 

·         all people of the United States have healthy and affordable food;

 

·         all people of the United States have access to nature;

 

·         all employers are forced to give paid leave and paid vacations to their employees; and

 

·         many other mandates of socialism.[13]

As explained above, the Green New Deal’s principal sponsor in the U.S. House of Representatives is liberal New York Democrat, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  Concerning this Green New Deal, her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, (who has since left his job) revealed that the Green New Deal is not about “saving the planet”.  Here are his words about the Green New Deal:

It wasn’t originally a climate thing at all … we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.[14]

The New World Order elite is marshalling all of its forces to push the climate-change scare as a means of convincing the world’s population that the climate emergency gives people no choice but to accept unprecedented government control – especially globalist control – of all aspects of life.[15] 

 

The conciliar popes declare we need a world government to solve our climate emergency

The New World Order elites have been tirelessly working to install on the papal throne a pope who furthers their goal of one-world government.  This allows those elites to use the incomparable power of the papacy to advance the New World Order power-grab.

Here is how the Carbonari (the Italian Masons) described their plan to subvert and harness the power of the papacy:

[W]e can conspire at our ease, and arrive little by little at the end we have in view.  … 

The Pope, whoever he may be, will never come to the secret societies. It is for the secret societies to come first to the Church, in the resolve to conquer the two.  The work which we have undertaken is not the work of a day, nor of a month, nor of a year. It may last many years, a century perhaps, but in our ranks the soldier dies and the fight continues.  … 

That which we ought to demand, that which we should seek and expect, as the Jews expected the Messiah, is a Pope according to our wants.  Alexander VI., with all his private crimes, would not suit us, for he never erred in religious matters. Clement XIV., on the contrary, would suit us from head to foot.  Borgia was a libertine, a true sensualist of the eighteenth century strayed into the fifteenth.  He has been anathematized, notwithstanding his vices, by all the voices of philosophy and incredulity, and he owes that anathema to the vigor with which he defended the Church.  … 

We have the little finger of the successor of St. Peter engaged in the plot, and that little finger is of more value for our crusade than all the Innocents, the Urbans, and the St. Bernards of Christianity.  We do not doubt that we shall arrive at that supreme term of all our efforts; but when? but how? The unknown does not yet manifest itself.  Nevertheless, as nothing should separate us from the plan traced out; as, on the contrary, all things should tend to it, — as if success were to crown the work scarcely sketched ….

You will have fished up a Revolution in Tiara and Cope, marching with Cross and banner—a Revolution which it will need but to be spurred on a little to put the four quarters of the world on fire.[16]

This Masonic plan having largely succeeded, the post-Vatican II popes promote the globalist agenda in many ways, including promotion of the climate-change scare.

Shortly after Pope Francis’ election, the Masons declared that he was a plan (i.e., “a design”) fulfilled.  Here are the words of Nicola Spinello, Adjunct-Vicar Grand Master of the Masons of Piazza del Gesù:

I believe that this pope [viz., Francis] is the realization of a design that has long wanted to be adopted.[17]

Pope Francis has hopped onto the climate-scare bandwagon.  He declared that “one of the most serious and worrying phenomena of our time [is] climate change.”[18]  To respond to the supposed climate emergency, Pope Francis declared the need for a global government.  Here are his words:

The twenty-first century, while maintaining systems of governance inherited from the past, is witnessing a weakening of the power of the nation states, chiefly because the economic and financial sectors, being transnational, tends to prevail over the political.  Given this situation, it is essential to devise stronger and more efficiently organized international institutions, which functionaries who are appointed fairly by agreement among national governments and empowered to impose sanctions[19]

Former Pope Benedict XVI likewise promoted a global government to protect the environment.  Here are his words:

In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth.  One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago.[20]

 

Conclusion

We see the climate-change hoax being used to scare people into allowing destruction of national sovereignty and control of the world’s population.  Unbeknownst to most people, the ultimate goal is to prepare conditions for the coming of the antichrist.

Not only is this climate-scare a fraud, but it is a complete reversal of the priorities we should have.  Modern man cares nothing for his soul and focuses entirely on the material world. 

Even if the climate scare were not a fraud (as it is), nonetheless worldwide environmental catastrophe is much better than even a single venial sin.  Here is how Cardinal Newman states this truth:

The Catholic Church holds it better for the sun and moon to drop from heaven, for the earth to fail, and for all the many millions on it to die of starvation in extremest agony, as far as temporal affliction goes, than that one soul, I will not say, should be lost, but should commit one single venial sin, should tell one willful untruth, or should steal one poor farthing without excuse.[21]

Even if climate-change were not a hoax, we should put more effort into preventing one venial sin than stopping climate-change.

Let us not be deceived by the climate-change scare! 

Let us remember that the only true evil is sin!



[2]           Here is a small sample of information showing that the global-warming scare is a fraud:

 

·         Volcanoes under Antarctic glaciers are cause of melting; explanation why this melting won’t cause rise in ocean levels.  https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/wouldnt-it-be-nice-if-cnn-didnt-report-fake-news-about-global-warming

 

·         Leaked emails by global warming alarmist scientists show attempt to explain-away the data because it contradicts them.  http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/09/20/warming-lull-since-18-haunts-climate-change-authors/

 

·         So-called “greenhouse” gas, CO2, is only .04% of the composition of the air.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide

 

·         https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-blogs/realimpactofweatherwithdrjoelnmyers/throwing-cold-water-on-extreme-heat-hype/70008963

 

·         https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/leading-global-warming-scientist-ordered-to-pay-opponents-legal-costs-in-libel-suit

 

·         https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/global-warming-is-fake-science-promoted-by-biased-scientists

 

·         http://merionwest.com/2017/04/25/richard-lindzen-thoughts-on-the-public-discourse-over-climate-change/

 

·         https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/climate-scientist-who-got-it-right-predicts-20-more-years-global

 

·         http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/latest-news/top-stories/global-warming-is-rubbish-says-top-professor-1-6536732

 

·         http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/20/times-atlas-apologizes-for-misleading-greenland-ice-melting-claim/

 

·         https://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/science/earth/18juneau.html

 

·         https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/science/earth/21climate.html

 

·         https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/climate-change-alarmists-disregard-sanctity-of-human-life-population-expert

 

·         https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315690426_A_National_Survey_of_Television_Meteorologists_About_Climate_Change_Preliminary_Findings

 

·         https://www.alipac.us/f19/no-global-warming-16-years-monckton-explains-scandal-over-climate-change-269898/

 

·         http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html

 

·         https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11561629/Top-scientists-start-to-examine-fiddled-global-warming-figures.html

 

·         http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11367272/Climategate-the-sequel-How-we-are-STILL-being-tricked-with-flawed-data-on-global-warming.html

 

[3]           When did routine bad weather become such big news?, by Richard Zoglin, Time magazine contributor and author.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/tv-news-is-too-obsessed-with-the-weather/2019/11/29/df2a678a-116b-11ea-b0fc-62cc38411ebb_story.html?utm_campaign=opinions_saturday&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=Newsletter&wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1 (emphasis in the original).

 

[4]           Quoted from: Latin America, A Sketch of its Glorious Catholic Roots and a Snapshot of its Present, by the Editors of Quanta Cura Press, © 2016, p.59.


[6]           In a capitalistic economy, there is an absence of the government control which the socialists and the communists insist upon.  Thus, socialists and communists hate capitalism.  In capitalism, there is relative freedom – which is why the New World Order elites seek to destroy capitalism because it is incompatible with their vision of world control.

 

However, the pre-Vatican II popes reminded the world that, even in a capitalist economy, bosses and workers must fulfill the duties of justice and charity that those groups have to each other.  See, e.g., Quadragesimo anno the encyclical issued by Pope Pius XI on 15 May 1931 and Rerum Novarum the encyclical of Leo XIII issued forty years before that.  Thus, unlimited capitalism (doing whatever we can to succeed in business) is also immoral because that would disregard justice and charity.


[7]           Quoted in the daily financial newspaper, Investors Business Daily, available here: https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism/

(emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity).

 

[8]           Quoted in the daily financial newspaper, Investors Business Daily, available here: https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism/ (emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity).

 

[9]           This interview was published on 11-14-10 and is available here:

https://www.nzz.ch/klimapolitik_verteilt_das_weltvermoegen_neu-1.8373227

 

Here is the original German:

 

Man muss sich von der Illusion freimachen, dass internationale Klimapolitik Umweltpolitik ist. Das hat mit Umweltpolitik, mit Problemen wie Waldsterben oder Ozonloch, fast nichts mehr zu tun.  …  Aber man muss klar sagen: Wir verteilen durch die Klimapolitik de facto das Weltvermögen um.

[13]         116th Congress, House Resolution 109.

[15]         Climate-change fraud is promoted in countless ways, by countless “foot soldiers” who aid this effort knowingly or unknowingly.  For example, The Oxford Dictionary promotes the climate scare by (among other things) having made the two-word phrase “climate emergency” its Word of the Year for 2019.  https://www.msn.com/en-gb/finance/other/climate-emergency-is-oxford-dictionarys-word-of-the-year-2019/ar-BBX6Roi

 

[16]         The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita, drafted by the Carbonari (the Italian Masonry) publicly published by the orders of Pope Pius IX and Pope Leo XIII who vouched for its authenticity.  This document is found in The War of Anti-Christ with the Church, by Msgr. George Dillon, D.D., Gill & Son, Dublin, 1885, Ch.13.

 

[17]         Quoted in the book, Vaticano massone. Logge, denaro e poteri occulti: il lato segreto della Chiesa di papa Francesco, by Giacomo GALEAZZI – Ferruccio PINOTTI, Edizioni Piemme, Milano 2013, p.83, as quoted here: https://onepeterfive.com/freemasons-love-pope-francis/#_ftn23 (bracketed word added to show the context).

[19]         Laudato Si, section 175 (emphasis added).


[20]         Caritas in Veritate, (former) Pope Benedict XVI, 6-29-09, §67 (emphasis added).

 

[21]         Apologia Vita Sua, by John Henry Cardinal Newman, Image Books, Doubleday, Garden City, New York, © 1956, p.324.