Lunatic Lefty Leo (or "He 'Blessed" A Block of Ice")

Leo XIV blesses a chunk of ice from a glacier in Greenland during the opening session of an international conference celebrating the 10th anniversary of Pope Francis' encyclical "Laudato Si', on Care for Our Common Home," at the Mariapolis Center in Castel Gandolfo, Italy, Oct. 1, 2025. The ice block was fished out of the Nuup Kangerlua fjord in Greenland after becoming detached from the ice sheet. (CNS photo/Vatican Media) (World must come together to fight climate change, Lunatic Lefty Leo says.)

As outrageous as the conciliar “popes” have been, few things aside from the ecumanaical outrages that have taken place in the past six decades (and those outrages are not to be minimized by any means), I must say that Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV’s attempt to “bless” a chunk of ice on Wednesday, October 1, 2025, in Castel Gandolfo, Italy, was perhaps the most surreal exercise in pantheism yet exhibited by the seven men, including Prevost/Leo himself, who have occupied the conciliar seat of apostasy and betrayal since October 28, 1958.

I first saw a report of this utter silliness in which a putative Successor of Saint Peter while waiting to be called as a standby at the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport on Thursday, October 2, 2025, the Feast of the Holy Guardian Angels, for a return flight after having undergone my annual cardiovascular examination. My immediate reaction was to say to myself, “He ‘blessed’ a block of ice, calling to mind the way actor Paul Reed, playing Captain Paul Block, in Car 54, Where Are You?, said, “Toody went to high school” (cf. Car 54, Where Are You?: S1 E14 - Get Well, Officer Schnauser from 3:08 to 5:00). “He ‘blessed’ a block of ice.”

There are all kinds of blessings to be found in Volume 3 of the Roman Ritual (1950 edition). Blessing a block of ice is not one of them.

As was the case with Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV’s immediate predecessor, the Argentine Apostate himself, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Prevost/Leo is an unreconstructed leftist ideologue who accepts every imaginary “scientific” finding about “climate change” that has been debunked by actual scholars numerous times and is a tool for global governance by unelected elites who mask  their anti-life agenda by their “concern” for the “planet.” Prevost/Leo’s emphasis on this issue has been so pronounced and so uncompromising in his acceptance of the fake, phony, fraud experts demonstrates that, as was the case with Bergoglio himself, demonstrates yet again the counterfeit nature of the conciliar sect as its “leaders” do not believe that the first law of the Catholic Church is the salvation of souls.

Moreover, no one who is paying any attention and has a modicum of intellectual honesty can claim that Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV believes that the state of the world depends upon the state of souls and that, to the extent that there are environmental problems, it is the sins of men that causes disruptions both in man’s relation to his fellow men and to disruptions within the physical world. This why he can equate the direct, intentional taking of innocent human life in the womb with the issues of illegal immigration and “climate change” as he has zero comprehension each of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance (willful murder, the sin of Sodom, defrauding the widow, withholding the day laborer’s wages) cry out to Heaven for vengeance. Indeed, it is even doubtful that Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV even knows that there are four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, no less that vengeance entails!

I mean how much can Prevost/Leo XIV really care about the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law if he, like Bergoglio before him, believes that Catholics in public life who have either held office in the past or do so now who support the chemical and surgical destruction of the innocent preborn as well the entire range of the sodomite agenda of perversity are perfectly qualified to be given a platform at the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River to “pontificate” on various parts of the globalist agenda, including “climate change” and “vaccines.” Bergoglio had, at various points, such pro-aborts former California Governor Edmund Gerald Brown Jr. then New York Governor Andrew Mark Cuomo participate, either actually or virtually, in various conferences sponsored by the conciliar revolutionaries within the conciliar Vatican. Therefore, it was no surprise at all to find out that the pro-abortion, pro-perversity moral reprobate named Arnold Schwenegger, a Catholic who is a native of Austria and served as the Governor of California from November 17, 2003, to January 3, 2011 (before being succeeded by the aforementioned Space Cadet Brown, who had served as California from 1975 to 1983), to speak at the Laudato Si’ Movement before “Pope Leo” addressed his fellow ideologues as follows:

Before continuing with a few prepared remarks, I would like to thank the two speakers who preceded me. And I would like to add that there is indeed an action hero with us this afternoon, it is all of you, who are working together to make a difference. (International Conference “Raising Hope for Climate Justice” on the occasion of the 10th Anniversary of the Encyclical Laudato Si’, at the Mariapolis Center (Castel Gandolfo, 1st October 2025).)

Interjection Number One:

Making a difference?

How?

By using private jets to participate in conferences before like-minded idelogues?

Or, for those who do not have access to such jets, by serving as propagandists for globalist population controllers even though members of the Laudato Si’ Movement may not be able to see this anti-life agenda because of their commitment to the “planet” rather to the Divine Redeemer’s eternal call to work for the sanctification and salvation of the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Blood to redeem?

Back to Lefty Leo’s Lunacy:

As we commemorate the tenth anniversary of the Encyclical Laudato Si’ on care for our common home, I cordially greet the organizers, the speakers, the participants and all of those who made the “Raising Hope” Conference possible. I especially thank the Laudato Si’ Movement for supporting the dissemination and implementation of Pope Francis message from the very beginning.

This Encyclical has greatly inspired the Catholic Church and many people of goodwill. It has proven to be a source of dialogue. It has given rise to reflection groups, academic programs in schools and universities, and partnerships and projects of various kinds on every continent. Many dioceses and religious institutes have been moved to take action to care for our common home, helping once more to give priority to the poor and marginalized in the process. Its impact has even extended to international summits, ecumenical and interreligious dialogue, economic and business circles, as well as theological and bioethical studies. The phrase “care for our common home” has also been included in academic, scientific and political addresses and speeches. (International Conference “Raising Hope for Climate Justice” on the occasion of the 10th Anniversary of the Encyclical Laudato Si’, at the Mariapolis Center (Castel Gandolfo, 1st October 2025).)

Interjection Number Two:

Most ordinary Catholics have never heard of Laudato Si’ nor have read it, and those who have are, in general terms, obsessed if not panic-stricken about a nonexistent crisis that has been debunked by studies such as the one published earlier this year:

Millions of people worldwide are concerned about climate change and believe there is a climate emergency. For decades we have been told by the United Nations that Carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions from human activity are causing disastrous climate change. In 2018, a UN IPCC report even warned that ‘we have 12 years to save the Earth’, thus sending millions of people worldwide into a frenzy.

Thirty-five years ago, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the (World Meteorological Organization) WMO established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to provide scientific advice on the complex topic of climate change. The panel was asked to prepare, based on available scientific information, a report on all aspects relevant to climate change and its impacts and to formulate realistic response strategies. The first assessment report of the IPCC served as the basis for negotiating the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Governments worldwide have signed this convention, thereby, significantly impacting the lives of the people of the world.

However, many scientists dispute with the UN-promoted man-made climate change theory, and many people worldwide are confused by the subject, or are unaware of the full facts. Please allow me to provide some information you may not be aware of.

1. Very few people actually dig into the data, they simply accept the UN IPPC reports. Yet many highly respectable and distinguished scientists have done exactly that and found that the UN-promoted manmade climate change theory is seriously flawed. Are you aware that almost 2,000 of the world’s leading climate scientists and professionals in over 30 countries have signed a declaration that there is no CO2-induced climate emergency? These signatories have refuted the United Nations claims in relation to man-made C02-induced climate change. See https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/

2. I have also signed this declaration. How can I make such an assertion? I have experience in the field as a former scientist at the Department of Energy and Climate Change, UK Government; and as former staff member at United Nations Environment, where I was responsible for servicing the Pollution Release and Transfer Register Protocol, a Multinational Environmental Agreement, involving the monitoring of pollutants to land, air, and water worldwide. Real pollution exists, but the problem is not CO₂. Industrial globalisation has produced many substances that are registered as pollutants, including thousands of new man-made chemical compounds, toxins, nano-particles and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that are in violation of the scientific pre-cautionary principle.

A book I published also provides ample evidence and testimony from renowned scientists that there is no ‘CO₂-induced’ Climate emergency. The book titled ‘Climate CO2 Hoax – How Bankers Hijacked the Environment Movement’ is available on Amazon here.

3. Next, I will mention the Irish Climate Science Forum (ICSF) website, a valuable resource founded by Jim O’Brien. I am grateful to the ICSF for their excellent work in highlighting the scientific flaws in the UN climate narrative. The ICSF provides a comprehensive lecture series from renowned international scientists providing much evidence, analysis, and data that contradicts the UN assertions. The lectures are available at: https://www.icsf.ie/lecture-series

The ICSF scientific view coincides with those of the Climate Intelligence (CLINTEL) foundation that operates in the fields of climate change and climate policy. CLINTEL was founded in 2019 by emeritus professor of geophysics Guus Berkhout and science journalist Marcel Crok. Based on this common conviction, 20 Irish scientists and several ICSF members have co-signed the CLINTEL World Climate Declaration “There is No Climate Emergency” (see https://clintel.org/ireland/).

4. The reality is that the climate has always been changing, the climate changes naturally and slowly in its own cycle, and CO₂ emissions (and methane from livestock, such as cows) are not dominant factors in climate change. In essence, therefore, the incessant UN, government, and corporate-media-produced climate hysteria in relation to CO₂ emissions (and also methane from cows) has no scientific basis. It appears to me the UN narrative is yet another example of fake science being used to drive an ulterior agenda, see also the book Godless Fake Science.

In truth I am against ‘real’ pollution, and the reality is that the CO₂ component is not a pollutant. Unfortunately, many misinformed environmentalists are driving around in electric cars, the battery production for which has caused vast amounts of ‘real’ pollution via the industrial mining and processing of rare earth metals, and the consequent pollution to land, air and water systems. See also this article. Note that the UN does not focus on the thousands of real pollutants that corporate industrial globalisation creates.

5. The conclusions of the Climate Intelligence foundation include the following

There is no [CO2-induced] climate emergency… The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.

The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.

Climate policy relies on inadequate models: Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools. They blow up the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO₂. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO₂ is beneficial.

CO₂ is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth: CO₂ is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO₂ is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO₂ in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.

Global warming has not increased natural disasters: There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent.

6. In the above book I reference the relevant work and scientific presentations of some of the world’s leading climate scientists. Let us examine some of the work and testimonies of these scientists:

“deeply flawed logic, obscured by shrewd and unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that Co2 from human industry was a dangerous plant destroying toxin. It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world – that Co2 the life of plants was considered for a time to be a deadly poison.” – Professor Richard Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences at MIT.

Dr Nils-Axel Mörner was a former Committee Chairman at the UN International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He was an expert involved in reviewing the first IPPC documents. He says the UN IPPC is misleading humanity about climate change.  He tried to warn that the IPPC were publishing lies and false information that would inevitably be discredited. In an interview, he stated: “This is the most dangerous and frightening part of it. How a lobbyist group, such as the IPPC, has been able to fool the whole world. These organised and deceitful forces are dangerous” and expressed shock “that the UN and governments would parade children around the place at UN Climate summits as propaganda props”. He states:

“solar activity is the dominant factor in climate and not Co2… something is basically sick in the blame Co2 hypothesis…  It was launched more than 100 years ago and almost immediately excellent physicists demonstrated that the hypothesis did not work.

I was the chairman of the only international committee on sea levels changes and as such a person I was elected to be the expert reviewer on the (UN IPPC) sea levels chapter. It was written by 38 persons and not a single one was a sea level specialist… I was shocked by the low quality it was like a student paper… I went through it and showed them that it was wrong and wrong and wrong…The scientific truth is on the side of the sceptics… I have thousands of high ranked scientists all over the world who agree that NO, CO2 is not the driving mechanism and that everything is exaggerated.

In the field of physics 80 to 90% of physicists know that the Co2 hypothesis is wrong… Of course, metrologists they believe in this because that is their own profession – they live on it.… I suspect that behind-the-scenes promoters… have an ulterior motive… It’s a wonderful way of controlling taxation controlling people” – Dr Nils-Axel Mörner, a former Committee Chairman at the UN IPPC, and former head of the Paleo Geo-physics and Geo-dynamics department in Stockholm

Another climate scientist with impeccable credentials that has broken rank is Dr Mototaka Nakamura. He asserts:  “Our models are mickey-mouse mockeries of the real world”. Dr Nakamura received a Doctorate of Science from MIT, and for nearly 25 years specialized in abnormal weather and climate change at prestigious institutions that included MIT, Georgia Institute of Technology, NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, JAMSTEC and Duke University. Dr Nakamura explains why the data foundation underpinning global warming science is “untrustworthy” and cannot be relied on and that: “Global mean temperatures before 1980 are based on untrustworthy data”.

Professor John R. Christy, Director of Atmospheric and Earth Sciences, University of Alabama, has provided detailed analysis of climate data, see Endnote [i]. I summarise the main points from his analysis below:

“The established global warming theory significantly misrepresents the impact of extra greenhouse gases; the weather that affects people the most is not becoming more extreme or more dangerous; temperatures were higher in the 1930s than today; between 1895 and 2015, 14 of the top 15 years with the highest heat records occurred before 1960; the temperatures we are experiencing now in 2021 were the same as 120 years ago…

the number of major tornadoes between 1954 and 1986 averaged 56/year, but between 1987 and 2020 the average was only 34/year… Between 1950 and 2019 the percentage of land area experiencing droughts has not increased globally – the trend is flat… Sea levels rose 12.5 cm per decade for 8,000 years and then it levelled off, now it rising only 2.5 cm per decade… worrying about 30 cm rise in sea level in a decade is ridiculous, in a hurricane the east coast of the U.S. gets a 20 foot rise in 6 hours, so a 30 cm rise will be easily handled!”

In a lecture titled The imaginary climate crisis – how can we change the message? Available on the Irish Climate Science Forum website, see Endnote [ii]. Richard L Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences at MIT summarises the battle against the climate hysteria as follows:

“in the long history of the earth there has been almost no correlation between climate and co2… the narrative is absurd…  it gives governments the power to control the energy sector… for about 33 years, many of us have been battling against the climate hysteria… Elites are always searching for ways to advertise their virtue and assert their authority. They believe they are entitled to view science as a source of authority rather than a process, and they try to appropriate science, suitably and incorrectly simplified, as the basis for their movement.”

“CO2…  it’s not a pollutant… it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis…  if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality.” – Prof. Richard Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences at MIT

Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, and President of Greenpeace in Canada for seven years, states:

“the whole climate crisis is not only fake news its fake science… of course climate change is real it’s been happening since the beginning of time, but it’s not dangerous and it’s not caused by people… climate change is a perfectly natural phenomenon and this modern warming period actually began about 300 years ago when the little ice age began to come to an end. There is nothing to be afraid of and all they are doing is instilling fear. Most of the scientists who are saying it’s a crisis are on perpetual government grants.

I was one of the (Greenpeace) founders… by the mid-80s… we were hijacked by the extreme left who basically took Greenpeace from a science-based organisation to an organisation based on sensationalism, misinformation and fear… you don’t have a plan to feed 8 billion people without fossils fuels or get the food into the cities…” – Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace

Professor William Happer, Princeton University, Former Director of Science at the US Department of Energy, is also a strong voice against the myth of man-made global warming. He states: “More CO₂ benefits the Earth”.

7. The UN IPCC cherry picks data, uses flawed modelling and scenarios not remotely related to the real world

The UN climate crisis predictions are not based on physical evidence, rather they are based on complex computer modelling. One has to decode and analyse the modelling process to ascertain whether or not the models are valid and accurate or whether they have obvious flaws. The vast majority of scientists, economists, politicians and the general public have simply assumed that the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) models are accurate. Very few people have the time or skills to analyse these models, not to mention actually dispute them. Nonetheless, there were many senior and highly distinguished scientists that did exactly that – they claimed the UN narrative was incorrect and that there was no climate emergency. Their voices have been drowned out by a vast money-driven political and media establishment of the globalised ‘system’. The vitally important work of some of these renowned scientists is referenced in the above book.

“The computer models are making systematic dramatic errors… they are all parametrised… fudged…  the models really don’t work” – Patrick J. Michaels, Director, Cato Institute Center for the Study of Science

Dr Roger Pielke Jr, University of Colorado, has conducted a detailed scientific review and analysis of the UN IPCC AR6 report, see Endnote [i].  He describes that in relation to climate modelling, the IPCC detached the models from socio-economic plausibility. In creating the models, instead of first completing integrative assessment models (IAMs), the IPCC skipped this essential step and jumped straight to radiative forcing scenarios and thus these scenarios are not based on competed IAMs. This led much of climate modelling down the wrong track. I quote points from Dr Pielke’s analysis as follows:

“The four IPCC scenarios came from a large family of models so instead of splitting modelling from socio-economic assumptions the models already had the assumptions faked and baked in to them, because they had to have those assumptions to produce the required radiative forcing (to produce a desired climate ‘crisis scenario’ outcome)… There are thousands of climate assumptions, but only 8 to 12 of them are available currently for climate research. The IPCC report even states that “no likelihood is attached to the scenarios in this report”. The likelihood is considered low they admit – This is an incredible admission by the IPCC.

These extreme unlikely scenarios dominate the literature and the IPCC report; therefore, the IPCC report is biased. Bottom line is that there is massive confusion. The IPCCs’ Richard Moss warned that RCP 8.5 was not to be used as a reference for the other RCPs, but 5,800 scientific papers worldwide misuse it like that… The whole process is seriously flawed… Nothing close to the real world is represented by the IPCC scenarios. Climate science has a huge problem! The IPCC currently uses RCP 8.5 as the ‘business as usual’ scenario, but RCP 8.5 is wild fantasy land and not remotely related to current reality at all… climate science has a scientific integrity crisis.” – Dr Roger Pielke Jr, University of Colorado

8. Financialization of the entire world economy is now based on a life-killing ‘net-zero’ greenhouse gas emissions strategy.

The UN Agenda 2030 plan and the Paris Agreement goal to reduce CO₂ emissions by 7% per annum until 2030 is in effect a plan that would seemingly disable the current fossil-fuel-based mechanisms of the industrial economy for the food, energy and goods that enable human life and survival. Yet the narrative is quite hypocritical as the production of green energy infrastructure, and mining of rare earth metals for batteries for electric vehicles, is, and will most likely continue to be, very fossil-fuel intensive. Globalisation resulted in much of humanity becoming largely dependent on the trans-national industrial economy rather than on traditional more self-sufficient local/regional economies. Therefore, one has to ask where is this all going to lead if the plug is truly pulled on fossil fuels? Almost all of us are seemingly locked into, and have become dependent upon, the current economic paradigm of globalisation. A system rigged by debt-money created from nothing; created and controlled by private mega-banks and behind the scenes money-masters; and which can induce boom, bust, bailout scenarios that detrimentally effect the populace.

It should be noted that for decades, these same political, government, and corporate powers have rampantly promoted corporate economic globalization and fossil fuel dependency. Whilst, at the same time actively hindering the funding, creation, or government support of, more self-sufficient local communities/regions, and local co-operatives. Most of the world population thus became reliant on the globalized fossil-fuel driven system. I explore this topic in the books Demonic Economics and the Tricks of the Bankers and Transcending the Climate Change Deception Toward Real Sustainability.

Zero carbon emissions, in essence, means pulling the plug on current systems of industrial agriculture, transport, goods production, electricity production, etc. This could have terrible consequences, particularly in locations and countries, that are currently unable to produce much food. In Ireland, the deluded greens in government had planned to close the coal-fired power station Moneypoint, in the name of reducing CO₂ emissions. However, as the price of electricity increased and the dawn of so-called ‘green energy’ began to evaporate like the Irish morning mist, the government scrapped this plan in 2022, instead deciding to convert the station to an oil-burning facility. The Irish Times newspaper reported:

“With growing concerns over security of the energy supply in the State, the Government is not in a position to decommission Moneypoint as a fuel-burning station in the near future. It was confirmed by the Irish Government in 2022 that Moneypoint will convert to oil generation from 2023.” See Endnote [ii]

The so-called ‘green economy’ (for it is not environmentally friendly in reality) and UN Agenda 2030 are resulting in increased energy poverty and decreased energy independence for the masses, while also developing trillions of dollars for the behind-the-scenes mega-banks. “Stop burning coal and wood logs that causes climate change don’t ya know” my deluded neighbour informed me last year, having threw out her wood burning stove and installed solar panels. Then a typical winter storm in Ireland last month left many thousands of people without electricity or heating for almost a week, shivering and wishing for a wood burning stove, while their solar panels produced little electricity in winter.

9. Furthermore, the current green energy/renewable technologies being promoted by the UN and WEF, are not a viable solution for the world’s energy supply. Although these technologies have some limited viability in certain locations and scenarios, the fact remains that the Energy Returned on Energy Invested is much too low – in essence the entire process is mathematically flawed. This is evidenced by the work of scientists, including Professor David MacKay (1967 – 2016), former Regius Professor of Engineering at Cambridge University, and former Chief Scientific Advisor at the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change.

Summary

In summary, CO₂ reduction is the main focus of the UN-promoted climate-change-hysteria that has been rampant among the world’s population. However, the proclaimed climate crisis exists in computer models only.  The cult of ‘manmade climate change’ is a media and UN politically-promoted ‘ideology’, that is used for a wider political and corporate agenda. Manmade climate change is not based in fact, and has hijacked real environmental concerns.

Due to incessant UN, government, and corporate-promoted climate change propaganda, many people are, thus, in a media-induced state of confusion, and, thus, blindly assume their pre-determined role in society under this ‘dictatorship of words’ without even being aware of it. The unpalatable reality is that people’s access to energy and resources is being intentionally reduced via bogus climate change policies, inflation, ongoing geo-political theatre and intentionally instigated war.

We cannot understand how to create a truly resilient society unless we correctly perceive the current society we live in and how it came to exist. Unless we recognize the untruths of the current paradigm, even if it is not ‘politically correct’ to do so, then we will not be able to make the correct adjustments to our communities and local/regional networks, or create a truly resilient thriving society. In this spirit of truth, new networks are emerging worldwide. (1900 Scientists Say 'Climate Change Not Caused by CO2. Also see: Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions.)

As we know, of course, a “truly resilient thriving society” is only possible when men are vivified by the lifegiving waters of Sanctifying Grace and thus seek to subordinate all their actions, both personally and socially, to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natura Law as far as is possible given the vagaries of fallen human nature.

None of the past four antipopes who have headed the counterfeit church of conciliarism have been intellectually curious enough to critically examine the false contentions by the global climate change alarmists, who desire to enrich their own bank accounts, increase the power of national governments as well as globalist organizations, and to enslave and impoverish the masses to control what they do with their own private property as they, the alarmists, constantly use fear to instill “guilt” in the minds and hearts of men who trust not in the Providence of God and thus who do not recognize that the world will end on His terms, not ours, and that it is sin that worsens the state of men and their societies as well as the state of the physical world.

Well, most unfortunately, I now return to Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV’s remarks of October 1, 2025:

Pope Francis' concerns and recommendations have been appreciated and accepted not only by Catholics, but also many people outside the Church who feel understood, represented and supported during this specific moment in our history. His analysis of the situation (cf. chapter 1), proposal of the paradigm of integral ecology (cf. chapter 4), insistent call for dialogue (cf. chapter 5), and the appeal to address the root causes of problems and to “bring the whole human family together to seek a sustainable and integral development” (no. 13) have aroused widespread interest. Let us give thanks to our Father in heaven for this gift we have inherited from Pope Francis! The challenges identified in Laudato Si’ are in fact even more relevant today than they were ten years ago. These challenges are of a social and political nature, but first and foremost of a spiritual nature: they call for conversion. (International Conference “Raising Hope for Climate Justice” on the occasion of the 10th Anniversary of the Encyclical Laudato Si’, at the Mariapolis Center (Castel Gandolfo, 1st October 2025).)

Interjection Number Three:       

Conversion?

To what?

To a disproved junk science, that’s what.

The sad part is, of course, these poor, misguided people, starting with Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV himself, actually believe what keep saying to each other in their echo-chambers of an alternate universe.

Back to the October 1, 2025 exercise in globalist propaganda:

As with every anniversary of this nature, we remember the past with gratitude, but we also ask ourselves what remains to be done. Over the years, we have transitioned from understanding and studying the Encyclical to putting it into practice. What must be done now to ensure that caring for our common home and listening to the cry of the earth and the poor do not appear as mere passing trends or, worse still, that they be seen and felt as divisive issues? In line with Laudato Si’, the Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum, published two years ago, noted that “some have chosen to deride” (no. 6) the increasingly evident signs of climate change, to “ridicule those who speak of global warming” (no. 7) and even to blame the poor for the very thing that affects them the most (cf. no. 9). (International Conference “Raising Hope for Climate Justice” on the occasion of the 10th Anniversary of the Encyclical Laudato Si’, at the Mariapolis Center (Castel Gandolfo, 1st October 2025).)

Interjection Number Four:

“Listen to the cry of the earth”?

Gee, where have we heard this before?

Ah, yes, I remember:

POPE Benedict has said there is substantial scientific proof of the theory of evolution.

The Pope, speaking as he was concluding his holiday in northern Italy, also said the human race must listen to "the voice of the Earth" or risk destroying its very existence.

In a talk with 400 priests, the Pope spoke of the current debate raging in some countries, particularly the US and his native Germany, between creationism and evolution. 

“They are presented as alternatives that exclude each other,” the Pope said.

“This clash is an absurdity because on one hand there is much scientific proof in favour of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such.”

But he said evolution did not answer all the questions and could not exclude a role by God.

“Above all it does not answer the great philosophical question 'where does everything come from?'“

His comments appear to be an endorsement of the doctrine of intelligent design.

Climate change

Benedict is wrapping up a three-week private holiday in the majestic mountains of northern Italy where residents are alarmed by the prospect of climate change that can alter their way of life.

A full transcript of the two-hour event was issued yesterday.

“We all see that today man can destroy the foundation of his existence, his Earth,” he said.

“We cannot simply do what we want with this Earth of ours, with what has been entrusted to us,” said the Pope, who has been spending his time reading and walking in the scenic landscape bordering Austria.

World religions have shown a growing interest in the environment, particularly the ramifications of climate change.

The Pope, leader of some 1.1 billion Roman Catholics worldwide, said: “We must respect the interior laws of creation, of this Earth, to learn these laws and obey them if we want to survive.”

“This obedience to the voice of the Earth is more important for our future happiness ... than the desires of the moment.

"Our Earth is talking to us and we must listen to it and decipher its message if we want to survive,” he said.

Last April the Vatican sponsored a scientific conference on climate change to underscore the role that religious leaders around the world could play in reminding people that wilfully damaging the environment is sinful. (Ratzinger and Evolution.)

The earth is not the foundation of human existence. God is the foundation of human existence. Neither the earth or anything on it, including the human beings whose first parents, Adam and Eve, were created specifically and specially by God Himself, exists without having been willed in to existence by God, Who is Omnipotence. The earth was created by God to be the temporal home of His visible creation, including the crowning glory of His creative work, man, who was given the power by Him to use the earth responsible for his good purposes. Man does not exist for the earth. The earth exists to serve man as he seeks to save his immortal soul as a member of the Catholic Church and thus return to his true home, Heaven, in the presence of the Beatific Vision of God: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

God spoke specifically about man's right to steward the earth:

And he said: Let us make man to our image and likeness: and let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moveth upon the earth. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth. And God said: Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed upon the earth, and all trees that have in themselves seed of their own kind, to be your meat: And to all beasts of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to all that move upon the earth, and wherein there is life, that they may have to feed upon. And it was so done. (Genesis 1: 26-30)

It must be noted furthermore that man can never destroy the earth. Oh, he can do great damage to certain parts of the earth, to be sure. Not even nuclear war, which would kill millions of people and make it difficult for survivors in some parts of the world, would destroy the earth. The earth will end when God chooses to do so by His own power at a time known to Him alone. God created the earth when He spoke the word as is recorded in The Book of Genesis:

In the beginning God created heaven, and earth. And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters.And God said: Be light made. And light was made. And God saw the light that it was good; and he divided the light from the darkness. And he called the light Day, and the darkness Night; and there was evening and morning one day.

And God said: Let there be a firmament made amidst the waters: and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made a firmament, and divided the waters that were under the firmament, from those that were above the firmament, and it was so. And God called the firmament, Heaven; and the evening and morning were the second day. God also said: Let the waters that are under the heaven, be gathered together into one place: and let the dry land appear. And it was so done. And God called the dry land, Earth; and the gathering together of the waters, he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1: 1-10)

God created the earth. He alone has the power to end its existence. Those who contend that man can destroy the earth demean the omnipotence of God and do not understand Catholic teaching on eschatology.

Listen to the "Voice of the Earth"?

We are not pantheists, thank you. We listen to the voice of God, Who has spoken to us in Divine Revelation, which consists of Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, which speaks to us of how God created the world. Even honest secular scientists have disproved evolutionism as the prototype of junk science (see Gerard Keane's masterful collection of data on this subject in Creation Rediscovered, TAN Books and Publishers). This is beyond any serious argument at this late date. The facts of true science are all arrayed against evolutionism.

Indeed, the late “Father” Peter Damien Felhner, quoted in Creation Rediscovered, noted the following:

Good arguments can actually be adduced in fact to show that evolution is simply not a scientific hypothesis. It is a dogma providing the context for all scientific endeavors. And it is just this assumption of evolutionism as the universal paradigm that directly conflicts with the teaching of the Church. . . . The doctrine of creation, in general and in all its detail, is intimately bound up with the mystery of salvation. That is why the Catholic may not call into question any aspect of the doctrine of creation which in fact the Church believes is related to the mystery of salvation without also doubting that latter mystery.  (Quoted in Creation Rediscovered, p, 192.)

God willed each species of plant and animal into existence, admitting that there have been genetic developments within species. This is something that should fill us awe and should impel us to show others how omnipotent God is, that none of the brilliant colors or varieties of the fishes in the water or the animals that walk the earth could have developed by chance. God, Who is intelligence, order, power and beauty, willed each thing into being. Although science, which has rules and limits of its own, cannot prove empirically the things we accept as articles of Faith, it can disprove propositions that have no rational foundation in scientific fact. True science has disproved evolutionism in a resounding manner, forcing the evolutionists to try to come up with ever-changing variations of their pseudo-religion.

Truth be told, therefore, the propagation of Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection in the Nineteenth Century led liberal Protestant Scripture scholars, eager to adopt a pantheistic view of life, to doubt the inerrancy of Sacred Scripture and/or to attempt to conform the believer's understanding of Sacred Scripture to the dictates of allegedly "scientific" insights.

A belief in naturalistic evolutionism coincided nicely with a rise in naturalism culturally as a result of Judeo-Masonry and the potpourri (yes, I did watch a lot of the original Jeopardy!, hosted by the late Art Fleming) of anti-Incarnational, naturalistic political ideologies, each of which contends that man is the center of the world and that there are no religious or moral absolutes to govern his daily existence. Marxism is the "synthesis," if you will, of the philosophical evolutionism of Georg Hegel and the biological evolutionism of Charles Darwin. One who believes in biological evolutionism will find it easy to dismiss the Book of Genesis and thus to believe that there is no God and that human society must evolve "socially" just as the human species had evolved biologically.

Believers in strict biological evolutionism have a little problem that they are incapable of answering: why aren't human beings evolving biologically into another species at present? Indeed, the reverse is true. Those who believe that they are descended from monkeys devolve over the course of time into acting like monkeys. A belief in the evolution of the human species leads to a devolution of human behavior to the level of barbarism and bestiality that would offend a lot monkeys, points I covered nineteen years ago in The Fruits of Evolutionism (actually written in 2001, well before I began to examine sedevacantism).

Jorge Mareio Bergoglio explained his own views about the false ideology of evolutionism in Laudato Si, May 24, 2015:

18. The continued acceleration of changes affecting humanity and the planet is coupled today with a more intensified pace of life and work which might be called “rapidification”. Although change is part of the working of complex systems, the speed with which human activity has developed contrasts with the naturally slow pace of biological evolution. Moreover, the goals of this rapid and constant change are not necessarily geared to the common good or to integral and sustainable human development. Change is something desirable, yet it becomes a source of anxiety when it causes harm to the world and to the quality of life of much of humanity. . . .

81. Human beings, even if we postulate a process of evolution, also possess a uniqueness which cannot be fully explained by the evolution of other open systems. Each of us has his or her own personal identity and is capable of entering into dialogue with others and with God himself. Our capacity to reason, to develop arguments, to be inventive, to interpret reality and to create art, along with other not yet discovered capacities, are signs of a uniqueness which transcends the spheres of physics and biology. The sheer novelty involved in the emergence of a personal being within a material universe presupposes a direct action of God and a particular call to life and to relationship on the part of a “Thou” who addresses himself to another “thou”. The biblical accounts of creation invite us to see each human being as a subject who can never be reduced to the status of an object. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, Laudato Si, May 24, 2015.)

“Call to life?”

Hogwash.

Balderdash.

The barbarians of today reject this. Catholics understand, however, that God Himself spoke these words. He has given His permission to us to eat the beats of the earth and the fowl of the air, subduing and ruling over the fishes of the sea, and all living creatures upon the earth. Animals are subordinate to the needs of human beings. This is what one can call real simple.

Why, then, is it so difficult for so many "sophisticated" Catholic intellectuals to believe that it was possible for God, Who suspends the laws of nature of which He is the Author when a miracle is performed, to have created the world exactly as is recorded in The Book of Genesis?

Why is it so difficult for these intellectuals to believe that God, Who is pure Intelligence, to have willed into existence each of the species that exist in the world today exactly as we see them?

Why is it the case that thes intellectuals doubt that God Himself willed into existence all of the laws of nature that He suspends when a miracle is performed in His Holy Name and by His power?

Why is it the case that these intellectuals are so ready to subordinate Divinely Revealed truths to the precepts of a disproved thesis, namely, Darwinism and all of its variants?

The answer to those questions is simple: A loss of Faith.

Yes, the essence of God is simplicity. His truths are simple. Complexity is of the devil. Prideful men, tempted by the devil to believe in their own ability to make complex that which is simple, cannot believe that the Omnipotent, Omniscient God created the world as is recorded in The Book of Genesis, thereby casting doubt on the Divinely inspired nature of the very Scriptures in which God's own Word describes how He created the world. Prideful men must believe that the Origins of the world and of man are must more complex than the simple fact that God spoke the Word and created the component parts of the universe out of nothing.

No Special Creation of man by God, no Fall from Grace in the Garden of Eden. No Fall from Grace in the Garden of Eden, no necessity of our Redemption by the God-Man on the wood of the Holy Cross. No Fall from Grace in the Garden of Eden, no necessity of man to reform his life on a daily basis in cooperation with the graces won for us by the shedding of every single drop of Our Lord's Most Precious Blood on Calvary. No knot of Eve's prideful disobedience, no perfect fiat of Our Lady at the Annunciation to untie that knot. In other words, a great deal of the minimization of sin and sinful behavior that we see among alleged Catholic "intellectuals" is the result of a very labored effort to reaffirm themselves and others in "contemporary" trends that emanate from the anti-Incarnational errors of Modernity, including Darwinian evolutionism and all of its biological and philosophical and theological mutations that have wreaked so much havoc in the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

Evolutionism has helped to give momentum to the errors of Hegelianism, Marxism, Freudianism, Social Darwinism (and its variations in Capitalist theory), Utilitarianism, Relativism, Materialism, Positivism, Modernism, Nihilism, and many other false belief systems. Why should Catholics give any credence to something that has been of such an aid to the enemies of the Faith?

We believe in an Omnipotent, Omniscient God, Who specifically created all things and gave each of them a specific nature and ordained that specific laws govern the universe for all eternity. Those "sophisticates" who place into question the Received Teaching of the Church about Origins and Special Creation are in for quite a rude awakening at the moment of their Particular Judgments. They will see that the pure Intelligence Who is God did indeed will all things into existence, creating them out of nothing for His own greater honor and glory.

The acceptance of evolutionism is essential to the climate change fascists as a means to impose their “transformative” policies that are nothing other than Marxism wrapped up in green clothing, something that I pointed out in an article that was published in The Wanderer thirty-one years ago, “When Green is Red.”

The hysteria over “climate change” has been manufactured to create a perpetual crisis that our statist minders—and their enablers among the leader of the world’s false religions, including the false religion of conciliarism will use to impose “climate change lockdowns” that will make the Wuhan Virus lockdowns seem like so much child’s play even the evidence disproving the hysteria is a vast as the solid documentation about the harm caused by the “vaccines” developed during Operation Warp Speed.

The plandemic of 2020-2023 was all part of the World Economic Forum’s global reset, whose ultimate goal is population reduction in order to “save” the planet, which end in fire from the sky sent by God at a time He has willed for all eternity to occur, the “climate change” agenda is the principal means by which this depopulation will occur.

A scientist who once believe in myth of a climate change “crisis” came to realize that the “crisis” was manufactured by ideologues for their own purposes:

We are told climate change is a crisis, and that there is an “overwhelming scientific consensus.”

“It’s a manufactured consensus,” climate scientist Judith Curry tells me.

She says scientists have an incentive to exaggerate risk to pursue “fame and fortune.”

She knows about that because she once spread alarm about climate change.

The media loved her when she published a study that seemed to show a dramatic increase in hurricane intensity.

“We found that the percent of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes had doubled,” says Curry.

“This was picked up by the media,” and then climate alarmists realized, “Oh, here is the way to do it. Tie extreme weather events to global warming!”

“So, this hysteria is your fault!” I tell her.

“Not really,” she smiles.

“They would have picked up on it anyways.”

But Curry’s “more intense” hurricanes gave them fuel.

“I was adopted by the environmental advocacy groups and the alarmists and I was treated like a rock star,” Curry recounts.

“Flown all over the place to meet with politicians.”

But then some researchers pointed out gaps in her research — years with low levels of hurricanes.

“Like a good scientist, I investigated,” says Curry.

She realized that the critics were right.

“Part of it was bad data. Part of it is natural climate variability.”

Curry was the unusual researcher who looked at criticism of her work and actually concluded: “They had a point.”

Then the Climategate scandal taught her that other climate researchers weren’t so open-minded.

Alarmist scientists’ aggressive attempts to hide data suggesting climate change is not a crisis were revealed in leaked emails.

“Ugly things,” says Curry.

“Avoiding Freedom of Information Act requests. Trying to get journal editors fired.”

It made Curry realize that there is a “climate-change industry” set up to reward alarmism.

“The origins go back to the . . . UN environmental program,” says Curry.

Some United Nations officials were motivated by “anti-capitalism. They hated the oil companies and seized on the climate change issue to move their policies along.”

The UN created the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

“The IPCC wasn’t supposed to focus on any benefits of warming. The IPCC’s mandate was to look for dangerous human-caused climate change.”

“Then the national funding agencies directed all the funding . . . assuming there are dangerous impacts.”

The researchers quickly figured out that the way to get funded was to make alarmist claims about “man-made climate change.”

This is how “manufactured consensus” happens.

Even if a skeptic did get funding, it’s harder to publish because journal editors are alarmists.

“The editor of the journal Science wrote this political rant,” says Curry.

She even said, “The time for debate has ended.”

“What kind of message does that give?” adds Curry.

Then she answers her own question: “Promote the alarming papers! Don’t even send the other ones out for review. If you wanted to advance in your career, like be at a prestigious university and get a big salary, have big laboratory space, get lots of grant funding, be director of an institute, there was clearly one path to go.” 

That’s what we’ve got now: a massive government-funded climate alarmism complex. (Scientist admits the 'overwhelming consensus' on the climate change crisis is 'manufactured'.)

As noted above, depopulation is the principal goal of “climate change,” and one can guarantee that, no matter the nuances that Jorge Mario Bergoglio chooses to employ, his ultimate “apostolic exhortation” on the “synodal path” will endorse, if not actually encourage, contraception and might hint at the “limited” acceptance of surgical baby-killing in some cases, something that I discussed several months ago in         .

A secular author discussed the depopulation agenda in some considerable detail:

About a week ago, the UN Human Rights Czar in Geneva issued a stern warning – “Up to 80 million people will be plunged into hunger if climate targets are not met”.

These are the words of Volker Turk, the head of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland. He spoke at a Human Rights event, and highlighted as principal cause for this coming calamity – what else – “climate change”. He said,

“extreme weather events were having a significant negative impact on crops, herds and ecosystems, prompting further concerns about global food availability.”

This is immediately proven by never-before-in-history extreme floods in Vermont, USA, by extreme droughts in Europe and Central – Western USA and by enormous, never-before experienced – forest fires in Canada. More is already announced – extreme Monsoon rains in India, and possibly Bangladesh. What a coincidence. Except, there are no coincidences. Droughts and gigantic flashfloods, in calculated interchange. No coincidences.

Most people of this globe just simply cannot believe how evil some non-people are. The Covid crime and the vaccination genocide was not enough to open their eyes, that their governments cannot be trusted, that they are sold, either by money or by threats, to an extreme evil power, a Depopulation, a Eugenics Cult which is behind it all.

Mr. Turk went on claiming,

“More than 828 million people faced hunger in 2021, and climate change is projected to place up to 80 million more people at risk of hunger by the middle of this century.”

Further contributing to the drama, he added, “Our environment is burning. It’s melting. It’s depleting. It’s drying. It’s dying”; and that these factors will combine to lead humanity towards a “dystopian future” unless urgent and immediate action is taken by environmental policymakers.

And then came the MUST reference to the 2015 (COP) Paris Agreement often referred to as the Paris Climate Accords, which were adopted by 196 parties at the time. COP means “Conference of the Parties”. Adding to the confusion of UN jargons, it refers to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), whose signatories agreed to cap global warming below 2 degrees celsius above the 1850-1900 levels – or to 1.5 degrees celsius if possible. Does anyone understand the language to carry out this easy task?

Such an arrogant statement – humans making the weather with their sheer lifestyles – should already ring a strong bell in a clear-thinking mind of normal humans, but it doesn’t, because our pineal gland for logical thinking and perception of emotions has been gradually dumbed, reduced, even killed in some people with chemicals we eat regularly und imperceptibly in our daily food, chemicals sprayed from the air via chemtrails, “disinfectant” chemicals in the water, the uncountable PCR tests, with absolutely scientifically proven unnecessary sticks up the nose, to the thin separation between nose and brain – and pineal gland — and more.

To dull our sentiments and perception is a long-term goal that “our Masters” have been working on for the last at least hundred years – or longer.

Dulled minds are easier to manipulate. Add to this DARPA’s MK-Ultra and Monarch mind-manipulation program and we know why we are where we are.

Our mental desensitization is the product of a long-term plan, namely precisely the plan that is currently being implemented by the WEF’s Great Reset and the UN Agenda 2030. That just shows that the UN is totally compromised by a “deep state” system, or Diabolical Cult that is way stronger than all our international agencies together.

Incidentally, Bill Gates said once in an interview that even should he “disappear”, the system goes on; it had been prepared for a century or more. You won’t find this reference anymore anywhere on internet. But this is the level of well-planned evil that we are facing NOW – The Great Reset, the UN Agenda 2030, and the all-digitizing 4^th Industrial Revolution. All executed by the World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations, and the World Health Organization (WHO).

They are the willing forefront of an enormously powerful financial behemoth which wants to stay in the dark, both literally and figuratively. Those who work the buttons for the Monster, have been promised “paradise”, or being part of the elite. Enough to buy their soul.

This financial elite system is controlling every sector of production, of food supply, of energy availability, and, indeed, of “climate change”. Yes, man-made climate change, but not the type that is supposedly carbon-based and depending on the human carbon footprint.

We are talking about highly sophisticated Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD), that are and have been causing extreme monsoons in Pakistan last year, this year already announced in India and possibly Bangladesh, and wherever an unruly population needs to be reined in, and where basic infrastructure and housing, as well as food crops must be destroyed, in order to create human misery, famine and death – and as a byproduct human obedience.

Would anybody like to pretend that Mr. Human Rights, Mr. Turk, when he speaks at the Human Rights Council in Geneva, does not know the facts? He is betraying the very people he has been mandated to defend and protect.

Massive depopulation, meaning, worldwide genocide, never seen before in human history – currently ongoing – it is Number One of the REAL 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), i.e. UN Agenda 2030. What the 17 SDGs say on the surface is but a smoke screen. The real meaning is reflected in this depiction – in Spanish – from Thereal2030.org – see this.

What Mr. Turk, Human Rights advocate, is saying goes exactly in the opposite direction of Human Rights. Mr. Turk, as the UN defender of Human Rights, the world’s highest Human Rights Officer, instead of protecting humans, he is sending them to death with the “climate change” narrative, with the false pretense that climate change will create and increase massive famine and death, if humanity and their leaders will not adhere to the 2015 Paris Climate Agreements.

This narrative is correct when applied to the since the 1940’s scientifically developed, today highly sophisticated ENMOD technologies. But people do not know, they are on purpose being indoctrinated that the “climate change” which they live is the result of humanities excessive carbon footprint. That is an absolute lie.

Mr. Turk, like all those who order him to help reduce humanity rather than protect humanity, knows very well that humans cannot change the climate by reducing the carbon footprint, because the human carbon footprint has an absolute minimal impact on what is called “global warming” or “climate change”.

Even if humanity would reach a “net zero carbon emission”, the climate would keep changing as it did for the about 4 billion years Mother Earth exists. The earth, like all the planets in the universe are dynamic beings, lives, if you will.

The climate is not influenced by humans, but to more than 97% by the sun, by sun movements. This is attested by any serious scientist – and more and more of those come to the fore to confront the ever-growing climate crime. And these sun-influenced dynamic changes are slow processes, over thousands of years, not noticeable within the extremely short time span of a human life.

Today, the world’s total energy use is still based to about 85% on hydrocarbons, and unless the world economy is made to completely collapse by the infamous slogan of “net zero carbon use”, or there is a sudden breakthrough in converting the endless sun energy by photo synthesis to energy, what the plants do, humanity’s survival depends on hydrocarbons for many more years to come.

Dear Mr. Turk, Defender of Huma Rights – you must know this, in the high position you are honored to hold, don’t you?

Where is your conscience, Mr. Turk, when you ring the alarm bell on innocent, already deprived people with famine, with a rapid increase of famine, and consequently with a rapid increase of death resulting from famine, when YOU know that the only man-made climate change is the one nobody talks about, the one emanating from the man-made ENMOD technologies.

The science of ENMOD, including HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) is being weaponized, has been gradually weaponized for years. The science is known since the 1940’s and has been perfected to sophistication since then. It can even trigger earthquakes – has done so already on several occasions – killing thousands of people, leaving the masses under the impression that they became victims of a “natural event”.

ENMOD is weaponizing the climate.

The technologies of environmental modification can be and are applied clandestinely, most people have no clue what happens, when for example western summers are hot and dry like never before, when forests burn – put aflame by paid arsonists – and pollute the air for weeks and over thousands of square kilometers, when sudden, mighty thunderstorms bring flash-floods to overheated and dried out soil to slam down the final stroke to food crop destruction.

The media tells them: Claim it on “climate change” and help reduce your carbon foot print, do not eat meat, do not drive cars, do not fly, stay home, adapt to a modern lockdown. The new 15-minute cities are ideal for you, the commons.

Have you noticed how commercial flying is gradually becoming unaffordable for the common people, while of course, the rich and famous, the all-commanding elite couldn’t care less and keep using all the more their private jets to roam around the globe. Their carbon footprint is immaterial.

They laugh at the commons whose brains, and especially pineal glands, have been dulled by 5G ultra-microwaves, chemtrail-chemicals, water disinfectants – and more – so that the majority still falls for their governments lies that they better follow the rules, the “rules-based order” that replaced constitutional laws, or else.

Has anybody noticed? Nations’ constitutional laws are being ignored. No judge in the world would uphold them against the elite-led order.

Mr. Turk, in your recent Human Rights advocacy speech in Geneva, you did not address the latest craziness and ultimate crime on humanity, the Washington and EU idea to block out the sunlight to cool down the earth. For the sake of saving humanity from “climate change”.

See this and this.

Scientists have warned of devastating effects of climate “geoengineering”. Yet, the Human Rights Council has not brought it up. It is an unspeakable crime on Human Rights – as such weather and climate manipulation would abridge every Human Right.

Can you imagine what that would mean? Of course, instead of having a cooling effect to preserve the earth’s temperature within the 2015 Paris Accord – an absurdity in the first place — it would have a disastrous killer effect. Every life form needs the sun and dies without it.

Blocking out the sunlight would be the ultimate killing machine to reach the Number One SDG drastically reduce the world population. You missed that one, Mr. Human Rights.

How can you sleep at night, Mr. Turk, scaring already desperately poor and undernourished people with more famine, because they and their governments do not follow the 2015 Paris climate rules, so they may face death?

Maybe your pineal gland, Mr. Turk, has also been killed and you have no longer any feelings for Human Rights, reason enough for having been placed into the position of the Human Rights czar.

The UN Human Rights Council’s 53rd session ends on July 14. Thus, there are still a couple of days left to right your wrongs, Mr. Turk and your HR Council colleagues. (Climate Change Crime – Depopulation in the Name of Human Rights. Also see my own Dear Morons and Idiots in Copenhagen, which was published in 2009.)

These are excellent points from a purely secular viewpoint, but it is important to note that those who explode ideological fables about climate change but who lack the true Faith always seem willing to believe in the Pelagian fable of human self-redemption that convinces mere mortals they can “stop” forces that are of preternatural origin that can only be stopped by prayer, fasting, and almsgiving in preparation for the direct intervention by God at the time He has ordained for all eternity for Him to put an end to the madness of our times.

There is no need to parse the final two paragraphs of Robert Francis Prevost’s October 1, 2025, address as they simply were reiterations for attendees to the spread the “gospel” of Laudato Si’ and thus continue serve the interest of anti-life, pro-perversity zealots who want to control every aspect of human existence, up to and including suppressing all opposition to their “revealed truths” in the name of “protecting” the planet that they did not create that will end only when God says so.

The environmental alarmists use fascism to advance their ultimate goal: to depopulate the earth and create a globalist utopia to give themselves temporal omnipotence and wealth. That Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV does not understand this is itself a commentary about the counterfeit church of conciliarism’s “reconciliation” with the “world” and of exalting the “care of creation” over the sanctification and salvation of souls.

Turning as always to Our Lady, especially in this month of her Most Holy Rosary, may we beg the August Queen of Heaven for a true pope to be restored to the Throne of Saint Peter who will be submissive only the Sacred Deposit of Faith that has been revealed by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus and has been entrusted exclusively to His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church for its infallible explication and eternal safekeeping to advance the sanctification and salvation of souls and not the “canonization” of pantheistic practices and naturalistic fables.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.