The Truth Plain An Simple– St John 5:28-29, Romans 2:6-10
News From A Biblical Perspective -Ordained, Predestined, Called And Justified, By God, Not By Man! – Jeremiah 1:15, Romans 8:29-31, Ephesians 1:5, Ephesians 1:11
Share

Share

Tags: ,
Share

Share

Share

 

 

The Presidents decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement is sure to result in extreme backlash and the promotion of mass hysteria from the radical liberal left and the liberal media. But the truth of the matter is the facts and economics don’t necessarily justify the hysteria.I have been writing for years that ratifications of agreements like this are power and cash grabs by wealthy, sexually perverse liberals,in positions of power.

 

With the ultimate goal of using it as a form of control to force poor and economically disadvantaged countries as well as developed countries to conform to their sexually perverse goals and agenda.Using the newly acquired wealth and power as a result of ratification of these kinds of agreements,as a way to accomplish it.An agenda which includes the further promotion of corrupting, destructive, perverse homosexual behavior worldwide, as well as the legalization of pedophilia,transgenderism and many other forms of twisted, perverse sexual behavior.

 

But the creation of green jobs, etc, in my opinion is secondary in nature and a cloak for the transfer of massive wealth into the hands of sexually perverse, powerful liberals, for the worldwide advancement of a more destructive, diabolical agenda.Creating skilled workers as a response to the anticipation of the possible future growth of green jobs, as those jobs are created,and the demand for workers to fill those jobs increases? Yes. But the transfer of massive wealth into the hands of radical, sexually perverse liberals? Absolutely not.In fact if you are wise and able to do it you should be working to dry up all their revenue sources as opposed to making them richer and wealthier.

 

The ratification of this and similar agreements in my opinion is part of a worldwide scheme to accomplish it.Not to mention using that wealth and power to procure more political power and influence.And the continued promotion of impending doom by the liberal media as a result of withdrawing from the agreement is baseless in fact.

 

The continued promotion of impending doom by the liberal media is designed in part, to make this a political issue in future elections, and presidential elections.It’s also been pointed out that hundreds of billions of dollars of funding delegated towards controlling man made climate change will be unaccounted for. I wonder who’s pockets that money will just vanish into?

 

And going along with the argument and supporting the theory to insure success in future elections will prove disastrous in the end, because you will in essence be relinquishing power and control to wealthy, radical liberals in positions of power.By allowing them to make this a campaign issue as a result of allowing them to continue to promote this as a serious threat to mankind. That deceptive,misleading narrative, needs to be countered.

 

If the climate is warming you can rest assured it’s probably by the hand of God as he’s setting the stage to do what he promised to do in terms of punishing the nations because of their sins through destructive weather events and not as a result of man made climate change.

 

When these predictions of destructive weather events begin to happen it will be by the hand of God because of the sins of nations, and not as a result of man made climate change.I emphasized years ago that the liberal media,the radical liberal left, and climate scientists would try to argue that man made climate change would be the cause, as a way to discredit God and his word and give credence to their predictions of impending doom. Thereby deceptively establishing their own credibility in regards to this issue and working to diminish God’s. But the bible predicted these destructive weather events would happen centuries before a climate scientist or meteorologist ever existed.So they can’t take credit for this.

 

If you want to  change the outcome change your moral position and direction, as it relates to the more serious and abominable sins.If God has purposed to punish a nation or nations for their sins, all the reduction in green house gas emissions and carbon footprints, wont matter one bit.His will is still going to be performed. The only way to insure your future survival is to heed his warnings and obey.

 

But the promotion of  man made climate change as something of extreme importance that needs to be urgently resolved, needs to be countered by honest, accurate, news reporting. One of the points used to argue for justification of ratification is the claim that over 90% of scientist are in agreement with the fact that the climate is warming, and that may be the case, but not as it relates catastrophic warming, but cyclical warming.

 

So when they claim over 90% of scientist are in agreement the climate is warming, in reality it’s in regards to the cyclical warming cycle of the planet. Which most scientist agree takes place and has taken place for hundreds and even thousands of years in cyclical periods as a natural occurrence and natural planetary function.But as it relates to catastrophic warming the truth of the matter is only around 47% of scientist believe that it’s warming in that context and most of those are government funded scientist.

 

The over 90% percent suggestion is a myth and is a result of several flawed studies. And that point and many other facts need to be emphasized as aggressively as the other.So the argument that it’s man made warming and the warming is tantamount to worldwide impending doom, is very deceptive and misleading in nature.

 

Because if not the liberal media will continue to unjustifiably engage in the promotion of mass hysteria. This is not about liberals concern for the climate,as much as it’s about the transfer of massive amounts of wealth,power and control, into the hands of wealthy, sexually perverse liberals, in positions of power.As they use the ratification of treaties like this as money and power grabs, for the advancement of a more destructive and diabolical agenda worldwide, I’m convinced.

 

 

Related Information

Is There A More Diabolical Motive Behind The Global Warming Scare?

 

Why I Stopped Believing in Man-made Global Warming and Became a Climate Skeptic

 

 

Mathematical Proof That Man-Made Climate Change Is A Total Hoax.

 

Climate change (global warming)

 

 

Hoax or Fact? Man-Made Climate Change

Climate change: This Is The Worst Scientific Scandal Of Our Generation

 

Climate Change

 

9 Things You Need To Know About The Climate Change Hoax

 

Man Made Climate Change Hype

  

Debunking The Top Five Man Made Climate Change Myths

 

 

John Coleman Founder Of The Weather Channel Exposes Man Made Climate Change As a Hoax. 

 

Lord Christopher Monckton Ends The Global Warming Debate And Proves Its A Hoax

 

 The Continued,Repetitive,Debunking Of The Man Climate Change Hoax/Fraud.

 

The Founder Of The Weather Channel Continues To Debunk The Man Made Climate Change Fraud.

 

The Science Behind Global Warming Hysteria.

 

The Man Made Climate Change Deception.

 

Is Man Made Climate Change Now Indisputable?

 

The Great Global Warming Swindle.

 

 

Related articles:

Australia Reining in Climate Schemes After Voters Reject Carbon Tax

Top Scientists Slam and Ridicule UN IPCC Climate Report

UN Carbon Regime Would Devastate Humanity

Australia Votes to Crush Carbon Tax and Big Government

Arctic Ice Expands, Dispelling Myths of Climate Change

Australia’s Carbon Tax Contributing to Record Business Failures

Carbon Tax Bad for Australian Hospitals’ Health

Climate Theories Crumble as Data and Experts Suggest Global Cooling

Poll: Australian “Carbon Tax” Wildly Unpopular

“Climate Science” in Shambles: Real Scientists Battle UN Agenda

Global-warming Alarmism Dying a Slow Death

Despite Lack of Global Warming, UN Sure Humanity Is to Blame

Obama & Allies Tell UN to Cover for Lack of Global Warming

Amid UN Climate Deception, Experts Decry Corruption of Science

Obama EPA Climate Decrees Will Further Damage U.S. Economy

The Real Agenda Behind UN “Sustainability” Unmasked

IPCC Researchers Admit Global Warming Fraud

Share

Share

Biologist Targeted For Exposing The Gender Bending Pesticide And Antidote To Heterosexuality- “Atrazine” – Poisoning America.

 

 

Related Information
Genetically Modifying Mosquitoes To Fight The Zika Virus Is It Worth The Risk?

 

 

Christina Sarich
Waking Times
Fri, 06 May 2016 20:15 UTC

 

 
Biologist, Tyrone Hayes is a soft-spoken professor at the University of California with a big message. One of the most commonly used pesticides in agriculture, atrazine, is responsible for feminizing amphibians, according to his research. More importantly, the chemical is effectively eliminating male chromosomes at an alarming rate, at levels which are three times lower than what are currently appearing in our drinking water. It isn’t just lead and fluoride we need to be concerned about, but a known endocrine disruptor, created by Syngenta, that is utterly changing our gene pool.

 

 

Hayes has been fighting Syngenta, to report the harmful effects of Atrazine for decades now. His scientific papers describe how Atrazine demasculinizes male gonads producing testicular lesions associated with reduced germ cell numbers in teleost fish, amphibians, reptiles, and mammals, and induces partial and/or complete feminization in fish, amphibians, and reptiles. These effects are strong (statistically significant), consistent across vertebrate classes, and specific. Reductions in androgen levels and the induction of estrogen synthesis – demonstrated in fish, amphibians, reptiles, and mammals – represent plausible and coherent mechanisms that explain these effects.

 

 

Big Ag Targets a Truth Teller

Other scientists have since come forward to corroborate Hayes’ claims, but not until after Syngenta dumped a 102-page document trying to discredit the scientist.

 

Atrazine is used on everything from corn fields (75 percent of them are sprayed with Atrazine in the US) to Christmas tree farms, and it is one of the most pervasive chemicals in agriculture. Syngenta actually asked Hayes to research the chemical, but after he found results which the manufacturer of atrazine didn’t expect, he was targeted in ways that, sadly, have become familiar to whistleblowers.

 

Comment: Silencing the Scientist: Tyrone Hayes on being targeted by herbicide firm Syngenta

Lead, Fluoride, and Now Atrazine

In typical biowarfare-fashion, this chemical is being used everywhere, and while we fret about fluoride and lead, rightfully so, in our drinking water, an even more sinister chemical is being forced into our ground water, eventually seeping into municipal water supplies.

 

Atrazine affects men adversely, by literally shrinking their gonads, or causing them to effectively become women, but it also affects women, causing low estrogen levels and irregular menstruation. All in all, this chemical acts exactly as many other UN Agenda poisons do – from chemtrails to vaccines, BPAs which are known xenoestrogens, to pharmaceuticals, including birth control pills that pass unharmed through sewage systems into in our drinking water – it makes fertility a genetic Russian roulette.

 

Are we to believe that a chemical that causes complete chemical castration in male African clawed frogs, isn’t eventually going to have similar effects on us? More than 80 million pounds of this stuff is used annually, but with all the false-flag attempts, and Flint, Michigan water crises, who can keep up with the numerous ways they are trying to cull the masses?

 

The population of the US is supposed to DROP 78.2% from 316+ million now to ONLY 69 million people in 2025 according to a government website, and many have made statements admitting they want to lessen the earth’s population numbers.

 

Even the CDC in December 2014, offered the shocking comparison in population totals from 2007 to 2013, where they state “There were 3.93 million births in the United States in 2013, down less than 1% from 2012 and 9% from the 2007 high. The U.S. general fertility rate was at an all-time low in 2013.”

 

Is this the real reason Tyrone Hayes is being targeted?

He says we’re making ‘toxic babies’ due to the largest selling chemical poison from one of the largest chemical companies in the world. It’s banned in the EU, but still used copiously in the US, even re-registered by the Environmental Protection Agency in the very same year it was banned overseas. 0.1 parts per billion exposure to Atrazine is changing a frog’s sex. How many parts per billion will it take to turn off your reproductive ability? Maybe its time to listen to Mr. Hayes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Related Information
Genetically Modifying Mosquitoes To Fight The Zika Virus Is It Worth The Risk?

Share

Share

 

Share

Tags:
Share
Trump could approve a giant merger that’s scaring American farmers
Business Insider.
Business Insider Dana Varinsky
AAmEiD8
© Provided by Business Insider Corn farmer Illinois
By the time President Donald Trump took office, he had already gotten involved in one of the world’s biggest mergers.
In mid-January, the CEOs of Bayer and Monsanto, Werner Baumann and Hugh Grant, reported in a joint statement that they had a “very productive meeting” with the incoming president about their potential $66 billion merger.The deal, which the two companies announced in September, would combine the German pharmaceutical and chemical group with the US seed giant — a move they claim would boost agriculture research and innovation.“By the time 2050 rolls around, the world will have 10 billion people and the demand for food will double,” Robb Fraley, Monsanto’s Chief Technology Officer, tells Business Insider. “The whole point here is that the business combination between Monsanto and Bayer will allow the companies to invest in and create more innovation, and it’s going to take a huge amount of innovation in order to double the world’s food supply.” 

Farmers aren’t so sure.

“From my perspective, they’re saying the exact opposite of what most people in the industry actually believe,” Clay Govier, a farmer in central Nebraska, tells Business Insider. Govier is the fifth generation to work on his family farm of 3,000 acres, which primarily grows corn and soybeans. The farm has used Monsanto products for at least 12 years, and if this merger goes through, Govier’s family expects seed and chemical prices to increase.

With both corn and soybean commodity prices at some of the lowest levels they’ve been since 2012, that could put many small family farms in tough positions.

 

“I just sat down to chat with my banker the other day, and fortunately we’re in a position that I don’t think we’re going to have to have a hard conversation when it comes to loans for next year. But he said there are a lot of guys out there that are going to have a really hard conversation,” Govier says. With the increasing consolidation of the agriculture supply industry (Monsanto-Bayer is one of three major mergers on the table, along with Dow-DuPont and Syngenta-ChemChina), Govier doesn’t expect things to get easier anytime soon.

“They’re locking in their profit and they’re cornering the market by getting bigger, not by creating new products,” he says of Bayer and Monsanto. “They’re just choking out the rest of the competition.”

 

AAmEg8z

Hugh Grant Monsanto

© Provided by Business Insider Hugh Grant Monsanto
The size of the Bayer-Monsanto deal — it was the biggest merger announced in 2016 after AT&T and Time Warner — means the companies have to seek approval from regulators in 30 countries. The recent Trump Tower get-together, which occurred before the president nominated a Secretary of Agriculture, signaled the deal has a good chance of getting Trump’s approval.

In a statement, Baumann and Grant suggested that the new president shares their view of the agriculture industry’s need for innovation. To that end, the companies highlighted their plan to spend $16 billion on research and development worldwide over six years — an average of $2.67 billion per year.

 

But a look at their current R&D budgets reveals that added up, the two companies already spend approximately $2.59 billion per year, so the combined increase in funds amounts to less than $500 million over six years.

“Let’s just cut to the chase — these companies want to make more money, they want to raise prices,” says Mark Connelly, an agriculture analyst at brokerage and investment group CLSA Americas. “No company in this industry needs these deals in order to innovate.”

 

Data compiled by the Farmers Business Network (FBN), a data distribution network that collects crowd-sourced information from members, backs up Connelly’s concern. FBN analyzed corn seed yield (the number of bushels farmers can produce per acre) in relation to the seed brands’ market share; they found that, while increased market share did lead to more innovation, the rise wasn’t proportional.

 

“After you got to a few percent market share, it really tapered off quite quickly. So going from 5 or 10 percent to 20 or 30 percent market share didn’t lead to a massive yield increase,” says FBN co-founder Charles Baron.

 

When plotting seed prices in relation to market share, FBN data also showed that greater market dominance was correlated with higher corn seed and chemical prices.

That doesn’t bode well for farmers, since several of the agricultural companies with proposed mergers already make up a significant portion of the market, according to Connelly’s analysis.

 

 

“If you look at how much of the farmers’ seed and pesticide dollars are going to these companies, Monsanto-Bayer — if it were one company today — would be getting $1 out of every $3. Dow-Dupont would be taking one out of every $4. Think that’s a problem? Holy c***, right?”

 

AAmEnNF

 

 

Werner Baumann Bayer
© Provided by Business Insider Werner Baumann Bayer
Bayer representatives acknowledged in a statement to Business Insider that they are often confronted with the allegation that the merger will raise prices and reduce innovation and competition.

 

“We disagree with this and are convinced the opposite is true,” the company wrote. “We are competing with other very strong companies that offer similar products and have strong R&D capabilities. We will only succeed with pricing and selling our products if our value proposition to our customers is better than that of our competitors and if we continue to innovate. We are also convinced that in a competitive business such as the agriculture industry, the efficiency gains generated by innovation will increase returns for farmers.”

 

Monsanto’s Fraley estimates that, under the current system, it takes about a decade for a company to develop and get approval for a new herbicide. Then if that product is popular, it’ll take the company another 10 years to make a seed trait that responds to the new chemical. But since Bayer and Monsanto’s combined resources might allow them to develop paired products in tandem, they could halve the time it takes to bring those new products to farmers, he says.

 

Connelly has a different hypothesis. Monsanto has historically sought out partnerships and joint ventures with other companies that have innovative products. But that means dividing up profits. So Connelly predicts the size of a combined Monsanto-Bayer will lead them to favor a mediocre product or solution that they can develop in-house over a more promising one that would require a revenue-sharing partnership.

“We’re not going to be chasing the best solution anymore — we’re going to be chasing the good enough solution,” Connelly says.

AAmEdys

Soybean farmer Illinois

© Provided by Business Insider Soybean farmer Illinois
Todd Eney, a fourth-generation farmer in central Montana, says that as suppliers of seeds and chemicals have become more consolidated, he hasn’t seen many benefits. “These corporate bigwigs, are they really going to do what they say?” he asks. “Our farm has been out here since 1935 and I’m 40 years old and I’ve watched a lot of small family farms in our area go under. They can’t compete because they can’t pay the price of input because of what these companies are wanting to charge for input now.”

 

 

Eney’s farm grows wheat, malt barley, and field peas, and uses Roundup, Monsanto’s popular weed killer. This year, he says, he and his father decided to use 50% less fertilizer in order to cut costs. The possibility of further consolidation has him on edge.

Clay Govier has a similar feeling.

“You know, it’s almost like you shrug your shoulders and cross your fingers that your regulators are going to have a backbone and not let it happen,” he says.

 

Article Source: http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/trump-could-approve-a-giant-merger-thats-scaring-american-farmers/ar-AAmEvo9?li=BBnbfcL

 

Related Information

http://thetruthplainansimple.info/thebiblerevealed/using-gmo-mosquitoes-to-fight-the-zika-virus-is-it-worth-the-risk/

 

Share

Share


ABC Breaking News | Latest News Videos

 

 

By Donald Bohanon …Sunday– July 31,2016

 

The spread of the Zika Virus is prompting scientist to take desperate measures by introducing GMO mosquitoes into the mosquito population in hopes of stopping the spread of the virus. But is this a good idea? Is it really a good idea to introduce GMO mosquitoes into the environment?

 

 

The truth of the matter is GMO food hasn’t even been proven safe, despite studies that suggest otherwise. And now they want to introduce genetically modified insects into the environment?! It’s actually financially beneficial for many  scientist and food production companies that paint that false narrative.

 

So it’s in their financial interest to suggest that GMO food is safe when it’s been proven dangerous by independent scientist,to not only humans, but the environment as well.

 

Several independent studies have shown GMO food  causes allergic reactions in people from everything to skin conditions, renal failure,toxins, new diseases,nutritional problems,etc. For more information on the danger of GMO food Click Here.

 

One independent study suggests that it doesn’t even increase crop yields. And if it serves no real benefit, not even financially, in terms of profit from crop yields, etc, what is the real purpose behind the push for the production and distribution of it?

 

I’m personally not comfortable with carnal, corrupt, perverse men,motivated and driven by greed and lust,  given the responsibility of genetically modifying my food to their specifications, for financial gain and benefit, or for other dubious reasons. And I’m convinced there is a much more sinister motive behind the mass production and distribution of GMO food.

 

Just like food can be modified to reflect certain food characteristics, it can be modified to produce disease, or to even modify a persons behavior to fit a certain demographic or group,or to produce certain behavioral characteristics that are deemed acceptable to the one wielding the power through human genetic modification and manipulation.

 

Although science has made enormous gains in many areas,the caveat is, such knowledge carries a certain danger with it. In that, if put in the wrong hands, the hands of demented, dubious and diabolical individuals, who are governed by greed and lust, it could prove disastrous beyond imagination individually and for the human race as a whole.

 

And could result in irreparable damage on a physical and spiritual level. Poisonous genetically modified food can  just as easily be used to genetically modify humans and human behavior. And in the wrong hands that could have catastrophic consequences.

 

And even with that being said,  no individual should be given the power to control and covertly force another to comply with their very dangerous and destructive will. And sadly and unfortunately this kind of genetic science gives the practitioner that kind of control and power, and I have no doubt it will ultimately end up in the wrong hands,and be covertly used for the wrong purposes, if it hasn’t already.

 

And the use of genetically modified insects probably carries even more dangerous ramifications. I personally would never allow the use of genetically modified insects on a human population, in the hands of a twisted visionary, with twisted goals,ideas and objectives, it could open up a pandora’s box of perpetual destruction on a genetic and cellular level that could be virtually impossible to reel back in.

 

And in the wrong hands could  be used to covertly eradicate whole races of people…… the poor and undesirables. There are so many ways it can be used to destroy, manipulate and alter, humans and human genetics and  behavior by producing disease, cellular degeneration and degradation,infertility,psychological issues,etc. When operating from a cellular level virtually anything is possible.And I would aggressively and relentlessly protest the implementation of such a plan. 

 

I believe  the use of both genetically modified food and insects for any purpose is extremely dangerous,immoral and unethical to say the least. And both experiments, using humans as guinea pigs, need to be discontinued and reeled in before it’s too late.

 

If you want to reduce your risk for the spread of disease, change your moral direction, or find another method ,because God is cursing the nation with disease, destructive weather events, etc, because of it’s national sins. GMO mosquitoes wont save you, but obeying God and ceasing from provoking him to anger will. 

 

And you can’t improve upon what God has made in terms of food, it’s perfect as it is, it doesn’t need to be genetically modified/altered/ turned into poisonous junk. And those who engage in the act of mass production and distribution of this garbage will be dealt with terribly on a physical and spiritual level in due time.

 

Share

Tags:
Share

Share

Tags:
Share


 Related Information

Trans Humanism: Mans Foolish Blind Rush To Make Himself Equal With God?

Share

Tags:
Share

In this photo taken Sept. 20, 2010. AquaBounty CEO Ron Stotish, the company that applied with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to market genetically modified salmon, speaks to reporters in Rockville, Md. The FDA on Thursday approved genetically modified salmon, the first such altered animal allowed for human consumption in the United States. AquAdvantage Salmon was created Massachusetts-based AquaBounty. Stotish said in a statement that the fish is a “game changer that brings healthy and nutritious food to consumers in an environmentally responsible manner without damaging the ocean and other marine habitats.” (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

 

The Food and Drug Administration on Thursday approved genetically modified salmon, the first such altered animal allowed for human consumption in the United States. The Obama administration had stalled in approving the fast-growing salmon for more than five years amid consumer concerns about eating genetically modified foods. But the agency said Thursday the fish is safe to eat.

There are no biologically relevant differences in the nutritional profile of AquAdvantage salmon compared to that of other farm-raised Atlantic salmon.

FDA

Because there are no material differences between an engineered and a normal salmon, the FDA says the law does not require the fish to be labeled as engineered. That means once the salmon reach stores, consumers may not even know they are eating them. AquaBounty Technologies, which developed the genetically modified salmon, says the salmon has the same flavor, texture, color and odor as the conventional fish. Under pressure from activists who oppose genetically modified foods, some retailers have pledged not to sell the salmon at all. And it’s still unclear whether the public will have an appetite for the fish.

There’s no place on our dinner plates for genetically engineered fish. We will continue to work to ensure the market — from grocery retailers to restaurants — continues to listen to the majority of consumers that don’t want to eat this poorly studied, unlabeled genetically engineered fish.

 

 

 

 

Article Source

https://www.yahoo.com/digest/20151119/salmon-becomes-first-genetically-modified-animal-okd-human-consumption-10126209

Share

Tags:

Powered by Wordpress
Theme © 2005 - 2009 FrederikM.de
BlueMod is a modification of the blueblog_DE Theme by Oliver Wunder
Translate »