Ætherna

Bulletin Board

BookRetreats
Home >> News

News

Celeste McGovern, CMSRI
Waking Times

A plague is spreading silently across the globe. The young generation in America, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Japan, Australia – in virtually every western country – is afflicted by rapidly increasing rates of infertility.

This spring, the United States reported its lowest birth rate in 30 years, despite an economic boom. Finland’s birth rate plummeted to a low not seen in 150 years. Russian President Vladimir Putin recently introduced a string of reforms aimed at stemming the country’s “deep demographic declines.”  The government of Denmark introduced an ad campaign to encourage couples to “Do it for Denmark” and conceive on vacations, and Poland produced a campaign urging its citizens to “breed like rabbits.”

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Something – or things — are robbing young women and men of their capacity to procreate and public health admits it doesn’t have a clue where to start to fix the emerging priority.

The “population bomb” we were all endlessly warned about by environmentalists failed to blow, and instead, demographers have been trying to raise the alarm about the population implosioncrisis unfolding across the West — the graying of societies facing an unprecedented aging demographic in which there will be too few young to support the old. Most often, they blame social factors: young women embracing careers instead of motherhood, men shunning marriage and fatherhood, rising consumerism or couples choosing to delay raising a family until the economy settles. But there is another phenomenon that is rarely mentioned – the growing numbers of young people who are not childless by choice but who are incapable of bearing children.

The Centers for Disease Control reports that more than 12 percent of American women – one in eight—have trouble conceiving and bearing a child. Male fertility is plunging, too, and the trend is global. Something – or things — are robbing young women and men of their capacity to procreate and public health admits it doesn’t have a clue where to start to fix the emerging priority. Besides bantering about expanding access to costly and risky artificial reproductive technologies, very little is being done to discern the cause of the rising infertility crisis.

So, earlier this month, when an unprecedented study was released that looked at a database of more than eight million American women and singled out a whopping  25 percent increase in childlessness associated with one ubiquitous drug that young women have been taking for only a decade — in tandem with a marked decline in fecundity — you would have thought there would be significant interest from public health, the medical profession and the media, wouldn’t you?

A Common Denominator Behind Growing Infertility Rates

Instead, all three of these behemoths remain stone silent. The reason? Because the study, published in the current Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, examines the childbearing capacity of women who received the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine – compared to those who didn’t — and the results are chilling. No one in public health, medicine or mainstream media, which are tangled up in the money-making machine of this vaccine, dare to publicly question the “safe and effective” mantra they’ve promulgated about Merck and GSK pharmaceuticals’ “blockbuster” commodity worth billions.

The study is by Gayle DeLong, associate professor of economics and finance, at Baruch College at City University of New York. She observed that the declining birth rate had plunged in America in recent years – from 118 per 1,000 in 2007, to 105 in 2015 for the cohort aged 25 to 29.

The HPV vaccine was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in the US in 2006 to prevent cervical cancer – an illness women face a 0.6% lifetime risk of being diagnosed with. Although it is diagnosed most frequently at age 47 in the United States, it was rolled out en masse, initially targeting girls aged 11 to 26 (and has since been marketed to boys as young as nine to prevent rare anal and penile cancers  — a disease that afflicts 0.2 % of men in their lifetime.).

They raised troubling questions about some vaccine ingredients’ documented impact on reproduction, cited serious deficiencies (some would say criminal negligence) in preliminary vaccine trials and concluded that further research was urgently required….for the purposes of population health and public vaccine confidence.

DeLong had read a case study in the British Medical Journal by Australian physicians Deirdre Little and Harvey Ward, who described a 16-year-old girl whose regular menstruation ceased after receiving HPV vaccinations and she was diagnosed with premature ovarian failure.

In 2014, the doctors published a case series of more teens who had entered premature menopause — a phenomenon Little and Ward described as ordinarily “so rare as to be also unknown.” They raised troubling questions about some vaccine ingredients’ documented impact on reproduction, cited serious deficiencies (some would say criminal negligence) in preliminary vaccine trials and concluded that further research was “urgently required….for the purposes of population health and public vaccine confidence.”

As well, between 2006 and 2014, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) cited 48 cases of ovarian damage associated with autoimmune reactions in HPV vaccine recipients. Between 2006 and May, 2018, VAERS catalogued other reproductive issues: spontaneous abortion (256 cases), amenorrhea (172 cases), and irregular menstruation (172 cases), all of which are likely under-reported symptoms.

All of this intrigued DeLong, who has followed the vaccine debate for years and makes no secret of the fact that she has two daughters, 18 and 21, both having been diagnosed on the autism spectrum, whom she saw regress developmentally and withdraw following vaccinations early in life.  “I am sceptical of vaccine science and the safety studies that are done, or not done,” she says.

She set out to analyze information gathered in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), which represented 8 million 25-to-29-year-old women living in the United States between 2007 and 2014. Using logistic regression, she matched the young women for other variables, including age, and compared pregnancy as an outcome in those who received an HPV vaccine compared with those who did not get any of the shots.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Approximately 60% of women who did not receive the HPV vaccine had been pregnant at least once compared to just 35% of women who had had an HPV shot had ever conceived.

“I just wanted to see if there was an issue,” says DeLong. “I certainly didn’t expect to find such a strong association.” Approximately 60% of women who did not receive the HPV vaccine had been pregnant at least once compared to just 35% of women who had had an HPV shot had ever conceived. For married women, the gap was also about 25%:  75% who did not receive the shot were found to have conceived, while only 50% who received the vaccine had ever been pregnant. “Results suggest that females who received the HPV shot were less likely to have ever been pregnant than women in the same age group who did not receive the shot,” the study says. It concludes, as all studies like this do, that the data points to an association, not causation, between the new vaccine and reduced fertility but that further study is warranted.

If the association is causation, however, DeLong’s math suggests that if all the females in this study had received the HPV vaccine, the number of women having ever conceived would have fallen by two million. That’s not two million missing children. That’s two million women who can’t conceive one, two, or any children. It is millions of American children missing from a single cohort. The implication, considering the sweeping breadth of the global HPV vaccine campaign targeted now at both males and females aged nine years old and up, is staggering.

The Skeptic Response

Skeptics are reliable vaccine industry defenders. Armchair scientists who frequently hide behind pseudonyms, they have sort of schizophrenia about vaccines. They insist vaccines are powerfully immune-modulating drugs capable of altering the immune system’s response to infectious exposure. But they can’t accept that, like all drugs, vaccines can and do have thousands of documented long-term adverse reactions  — especially because they are designed to induce the delayed manufacture of antibodies by the adaptive immune system. Because these responses are mediated by the immune system, they are diverse, unpredictable and profound.

As expected, the Skeptics welcomed DeLong’s research with snide and personal (read unscientific) attacks. They slammed her failure to include data on contraceptive use. As a result, DeLong intends to attach that data to an addendum on the study, but what she found and reported on Age of Autism’s website only bolsters the study’s findings. Among married women in the survey, 36.6 % of those who had received the HPV shot told the NHANES that they were using contraception (condoms at least half the time, birth control or injectables otherwise) compared to more than half (51.5%) of those who didn’t get the shot – a difference of almost 15%.

Less contraceptive use should translate to more babies among the vaccinated. But, it seems that the vaccinated women in the study were actually trying harder to conceive (or at least not so worried about it) but still having less luck – not good for the Skeptic argument.

DeLong “isn’t even an epidemiologist” the Skeptics howled. (In other words, shoot the messenger if you don’t like the message.) To which she replies, “No. I’m not. I am a statistician, however. I would be grateful if epidemiologists would do their job and conduct this research thoroughly.” This is precisely what her study called for. If they did, mothers of vaccine injured children would not be required to.

Infertile Women Excluded From Study on Infertility

DeLong cites another study, from Boston University’s Schools of Public Health and Medicine and the Research Triangle Institute (RTI) in North Carolina, which found no such association between HPV vaccination and impaired fertility. Interestingly, Boston University has been the recipient of tens of millions from globalist vaccine promoters Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, as has RTI, an organization that has received more than $47 million dollars in grant funds in recent years. RTI has published a number of recent studies on HPV vaccine, including one  jointly-funded with GSK (a vaccine manufacturer) on the safety of the company’s HPV vaccine, and another, cautioning public health agencies to “take special measures to ensure their messages are not perceived as sponsored by drug companies” lest they incite “reduced liking and trust” by parents who will be less likely to give the HPV vaccine to their sons. Other RTI publications describe “Promising alternative settings for HPV vaccination of US adolescents,” changing “provider behavior” to enhance HPV uptake and more.

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

“These could be the women with ‘hard core’ issues of fecundity,” says DeLong, “but they are precisely the women who should be included.”

The RTI study about HPV vaccine’s impact on fertility was based on patients’ own recall of vaccines received (remember how the Skeptics howled at self-reporting before?). But the study did not control for a far more important factor in fertility – age. Age in this context affects not just the possible effect of the vaccine itself on fertility, but fertility is skewed dramatically in favor of the young and the study lumps 18 year-olds in with 30-year-olds. As well, at the outset, it excludes 881 women from a pool of 5,020 because they were already trying – without luck – to conceive a baby for more than six months. This has the effect of shrinking the infertility finding overall. “These could be the women with ‘hard core’ issues of fecundity,” says DeLong, “but they are precisely the women who should be included.”

Environmental Concerns

To be sure, many environmental factors could be affecting female fertility. Plunging male fertility is one of them. Male sperm counts have nosedived in recent decades – scientists published data last year showing that globally, they have dropped 50 percent in just the past 40 years – signalling serious unidentified environmental hazards.

Environmental scientists have pointed to everything from GMOs and toxic aluminum (more on this later) to Wi-Fi and birth control excreted by women into the drinking water, as possible causes of vanishing sperm and lowered fertility generally.

But in DeLong’s study, these environmental factors influence the whole group of women equally. There is no reason why women who vaccinate would choose men with lower sperm counts, for example.

What’s in the HPV Vaccine?

So, what is it about a vaccine targeting a virus associated with cancer of the human reproductive tract that could go so wrong? DeLong notes that both HPV vaccines contain aluminum, a toxic metal with documented potential to induce autoimmune self-attack, including on reproductive organs. HPV vaccines are loaded with aluminum: Merck’s original Gardasil vaccine contained 225 micrograms of nanoparticlized aluminum in each of three shots, totalling 675 micrograms; the “new improved” Gardasil 9 shots contain a total of 1500 micrograms – a wallop of stimulant for the immune system that DeLong thinks might just be “a tipping point” for youths who have had so many previous injections of aluminum in the schedule of 50 vaccines before school age.

The CDC states that all these reactions are normal and that HPV vaccines are safe without any adverse impact on maternal or fetal outcome in pregnancy.

Perhaps this is why HPV shots have such a high number of reported adverse events: 45,277 from its introduction in 2006 to May, 2018 (and these are considered to be vastly under-reported). The CDC states that all these reactions are normal and that HPV vaccines are safe without any adverse impact on maternal or fetal outcome in pregnancy.

A recent paper from Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center cautions that this CDC assurance is based on incomplete data. It points out biases in reporting and gaps in data. “Certain adverse effects of the vaccine against HPV that have not been well studied as they are not well defined,” add the researchers who describe a host of documented, diverse autoimmune, neurological and cardiovascular disease in the wake of the vaccine. The most frequent reported symptoms after HPV vaccination are poorly understood – fainting, chronic pain with tingling or burning sensations, headaches, fatigue, and dizziness, nausea and other symptoms that are worsened on standing upright, for example.

HPV vaccination – as well as tetanus vaccination – has been linked in medical literature to a condition called anti-phospholipid syndrome which is a poorly defined disease caused when the immune system erroneously manufactures antibodies against certain lipid proteins found in membranes that are in a host of tissues — eyes, heart, brain, nerves, skin – and the reproductive system.  One 2012 study by Serbian researchers at the Institute for Virology, Vaccines and Ser “Torlak” found that “hyperimmunisation” of the immune system with different adjuvants, including aluminum, in mice, resulted in induction of antiphospholipid syndrome and the tandem lowering of fertility.

“Unequivocal evidence” of high concentrations of the metal were found, especially in the semen of men with low sperm counts.

Other research has implicated aluminum in conception problems. French infertility researcher Jean-Philippe Klein and his colleagues at the University of Lyon published the results of their 2014 study of the sperm of men seeking assistance at a French infertility clinic. They dispatched semen samples from 62 men who were having infertility issues to Christopher Exley’s aluminum research laboratory at Keele University in England where they were fluorescently stained to show the aluminum content as a luminescent blue.  “Unequivocal evidence” of high concentrations of the metal were found, especially in the semen of men with low sperm counts. Clearly fluorescing and concentrated aluminum in the DNA-rich heads of the sperm led the researchers to speculate about what impact this may have on the ability to procreate and on the development of newly formed embryos.

Deirdre Little, the Australian GP who documented primary ovarian failure following HPV vaccination, has also criticized the fact that Merck’s product information was misleading about what sort of “saline” placebo was used in trials of the Gardasil vaccine – it failed to mention that the “placebos” contained both the high doses of aluminium as well as another scary ingredient, polysorbate 80. This chemical has exhibited delayed ovarian toxicity to rat ovaries at all injected doses tested over a tenfold range.

None of the trials accurately assessed the long-term impact of the vaccine on the reproductive health of girls, Deirdre and Ward said, adding that drug damage to reproductive health may take years or decades to manifest.

What kind of public health agency brushes off 45,277 reports of adverse events – including neurological and reproductive symptoms — among young women of childbearing age? Urgent and Unanswered Questions

The elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about is why the HPV vaccine is so heavily marketed to begin with? Why make a vaccine for a disease that afflicts less than 0.3% of people in their lifetime? And why include ingredients that are toxic, especially high doses of ingredients that scientists have objected to, and with documented toxicity to reproductive organs? Why not use a true control in the trials? What kind of scientist would do that kind of science? What kind of public health agency brushes off 45,277 reports of adverse events – including neurological and reproductive symptoms — among young women of childbearing age?

Answering these questions turns out to be a lot more awkward than it seems at first. There are chilling facts that are hard to set aside.  There are, as recently as 2015, the charges by Catholic bishops and human rights activists that public health agencies had deliberately tainted  tetanus vaccines given only to women of reproductive age in Kenya. Public health organizations denied they had laced tetanus vaccines with miscarriage-inducing Beta human chorionic gonadotropin (b-HCG) – a key sterilizing ingredient described in the extensive medical literature about the quest for a contraceptive vaccine to control population growth. The Kenyan bishops insisted they had laboratory evidence that was ignored and the issue was ignored like DeLong’s study.

Another inconvenient truth is that the very people funding the HPV vaccine juggernaut are the same people most interested in reducing birth rates.  When Melinda Gates launched her Family Planning Summit in 2012 with the objective of bringing contraceptives to the world’s poor, it was clear she had one measure for that goal in mind: “If you see what’s happened in other countries that have had contraceptives, they use them first of all and the birth rates go down,” she said at the time. “The question is could it have come down even more quickly?”

So long as there is no satisfactory answer as to why the West is facing an infertility crisis, questions about the long-term impact of the HPV vaccine on human fertility are not only fair and reasonable, but the future is very bleak if we do not answer them.

Although she swore her campaign was “not about population control,” Gates’ goals are the same as those who conducted the mass sterilizations of Indian men on railway platforms in the 70s and who continue to sterilize Indian women today en masse to get the birth rate down.  For Gates, success is not measured in access to clean water or energy or in the development of infrastructure or political freedom, it is measured in access to drugs, drugs she and her husband hold stock in: contraceptives and vaccines. Their success is measured by exporting what most western countries are facing as social catastrophe: demographic decline.

So long as there is no satisfactory answer as to why the West is facing an infertility crisis, questions about the long-term impact of the HPV vaccine on human fertility are not only fair and reasonable, but the future is very bleak if we do not answer them.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

**© [11/29/18] Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter. Study Links HPV Vaccine to Historically High Infertility Rates was last modified: December 3rd, 2018 by WakingTimes

A common theme in our world is misinformation, and if you follow the brilliant work of independent scientists and journalists, you will see it’s currently plaguing the field of mainstream science in multiple areas. This is not just due to error on part of researchers, but the politicization of science, something scientists, especially with regards to medical and climate science, are gathering together and speaking up about every single year.

Credible, dissenting scientific voices go largely unheard by the mainstream media and education. As a result, most of our beliefs and thoughts about what is happening on our planet come from programming, brainwashing and mass marketing heavy with mainstream politicized science.

Overall human consciousness has been influenced by the global elite, simply for the purposes of driving us into acceptance of the limited, and often ridiculous, solutions they pose for the problems that they create. This is why critical thinking and independent research is crucial for citizens. Seeking out multiple sources for information is important while living in the age of information. Thankfully, there are a lot of people waking up right now, and as a result, many things are shifting and new sources are emerging.

A Coming Ice Age?

When I say we may be at the start of the next Ice Age, I am not really talking about a massive armageddon scenario, it’s important to be clear on that. Instead, all of the research that’s being put out now, that’s not connected to human-induced climate change, is showing that we are entering a period in Earth’s cycle where we will likely be experiencing a cooling effect, not a warming one. Scientists are calling this a “little ice age.”

The latest information on this topic seems to become from a scientist named Martin Mlynczak, from NASA’s Langley Research Centre. According to his research, and the research of what seems to be a number of scientists some of whom are mentioned later in the article, the Sun’s ultraviolet output has severely dropped, and our atmosphere is responding to it. There are multiple parts that constitute our atmosphere, and the thermosphere is one of them. It’s the part of our atmosphere that seems to react to solar activity the most.

This was the topic of a viral article that’s made its way across the internet claiming that this is indicative of a mini ice age.

There are so many factors influencing the global climate, it goes far beyond human-induced change, but also into the activity of our Sun, and space weather overall. There are a number of factors, and there is still a lot to learn about our climate, climatic cycles, and why it operates the way it does.

Based on information from NASA’s TIMED satellite, our thermosphere is experiencing a cooling effect which always happens when there is a Solar Minimum, something we are currently experiencing.

To help keep track of what’s happening in the thermosphere, Mlynczak and colleagues recently introduced the “Thermosphere Climate Index” (TCI)–a number expressed in Watts that tells how much heat NO molecules are dumping into space. During Solar Maximum, TCI is high (“Hot”); during Solar Minimum, it is low (“Cold”).

Right now it’s cold. In fact, the Thermosphere Climate Index is close to setting a new space age record for cold. Mlynczak said that”We’re not quite there yet…but it could happen in a matter of months.”

Below is a historical record of the Thermosphere Climate Index. Mlynczak and colleagues recently published a paper on the TCI showing that the state of the thermosphere can be discussed using a set of five plain language terms: Cold, Cool, Neutral, Warm, and Hot.

The thermosphere is just one layer of the Earth’s atmosphere, as all of them play important roles with regards to regulating our climatic systems. It sits directly above the mesosphere, and below the exosphere, and extends from approximately 90 km to between 500km and 1,000km above the Earth. Much of the X-ray and UV radiation from the Sun is absorbed in the thermosphere. When the Sun is very active and emitting more high energy radiation, the thermosphere gets hotter and expands or “puffs up”.

In the thermosphere, temperatures climb quite fast in the lower part of it, then they even out, level off and increase with altitude. It’s a great way to measure the effect of Solar activity, as Solar activity strongly influences temperature in the thermosphere. Changes in the thermosphere, like the cooling effect, have also been contributed to an increase in our Carbon Dioxide output, which ironically has a cooling effect on our thermosphere. What happens in the lower atmosphere can also change what happens in the thermosphere, and vice versa, but there is still a lot to be discovered, and more research is needed.

The thermosphere has been cooling for a long time, but again, mainstream publications constantly blame this on the increase in C02 levels without ever mentioning that it’s directly correlated with solar activity.  Scafetta & West (2006) estimated that 25-35% of global warming in the 1980-2000 period was attributable to solar variability. Other scientists disagree, finding no evidence of global warming due to solar activity.

How Does The ‘Mini Ice Age’ Link In?

Well, the thermosphere, as mentioned above, is a great way to measure solar activity and how it can and does affect our climate. But the focus here is the Sun, as a number of researchers have pointed towards a ‘cooling effect.’ Just because the thermosphere is responding to the Sun’s cooling down phase, does not mean we are going to see the same result in the lower atmosphere. So to imply that a mass cooling effect within the thermosphere will trigger an ice age not correct.

That being said, solar activity does indeed have many researchers positing a mini ice age,

For example, Nils-Axel Mörner from the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics Institute states,

By about 2030-2040, the Sun will experience a new grand solar minimum. This is evident from multiple studies of quite different characteristics: the phasing of sunspot cycles, the cyclic observations of North Atlantic behaviour over the past millennium, the cyclic pattern of cosmogenic ra-dionuclides in natural terrestrial archives, the motions of the Sun with respect to the centre of mass, the planetary spin-orbit coupling, the planetary conjunction history and the general planetary solar terrestrial interaction. During the previous grand solar minima—i.e. the Spörer Minimum (ca 1440-1460), the Maunder Minimum (ca 1687-1703) and the Dalton Minimum (ca 1809-1821)—the climatic conditions deteriorated into Little Ice Age periods.

The idea that solar activity is not affecting Earth’s climate is extremely fishy and doesn’t make much sense when you go through the literature, but it seems to be brushed off within mainstream academia, and hardly studied. It definitely made me scratch my head when IFL Science, for example, put out a statement saying “The Sun simply does not have that large an effect on our climate compared to human activity.” This is a very ridiculous and irresponsible statement. It’s also important that readers recognize there isn’t even any course to back up such a false claim.

Don’t believe what is written, research what is written. What’s worse is the ridicule factor, the way mainstream publications attack any narrative that presents an explanation for climate change that is not human induced. Something is very wrong with this picture, regardless of your stance on the ‘global warming’ phenomenon. There is more on this later in the article.

The paper  by Morner  goes on to make some very important points:

So as you can see, the comment from IFL science quoted above, again, is simply not true. I’ve provided one of many soures available here, and I encourage other writers to do the same.

The author goes on to conclude:

Durinng the last three grand solar minima…global climate experienced Little Ice Age conditions. Arctic water penetrated to the south all the way down to Mid-Portugal, and Europe experienced severe climatic conditions…The Arctic ice over exapanded significantly…By 2030-2040, we will be in a New Grand Solar Minimum, which by analogy to past minima must be assumed to lead to significant climatic deterioration with ice expansion in the Artctic..We now seem to be in possession of quite convergent data…This precludes a continual warming as claimed by the IPCC project, instead of this, we are likely to face a new Little Ice Age.

According to the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS,

A new model of the Sun’s solar cycle is producing unprecedentedly accurate predictions of irregularities within the Sun’s 11-year heartbeat. The model draws on dynamo effects in two layers of the Sun, one close to the surface and one deep within its convection zone. Predictions from the model suggest that solar activity will fall by 60 per cent during the 2030s to conditions last seen during the ‘mini ice age’ that began in 1645. (source)

A few years ago, the National Astronomy Meeting in Wales was held, where Valentina Zharkova, a mathematics professor from Northumbria University (UK), presented a model that can predict what solar cycles will look like far more accurately than was previously possible. She states that the model can predict their influence with an accuracy of 97 percent, and says it is showing that Earth is heading for a “mini ice age” in approximately fifteen years.

Zharkova and her team came up with the model using a method called “principal component analysis” of the magnetic field observations, from the Wilcox Solar Observatory in California. Looking forward to the next few solar cycles, her model predicts that from 2030 to 2040 there will be cause for a significant reduction in solar activity, which again, will lead to a mini ice age. According to Zharkova. You can read more about that here.

Again, these are just a few examples of multiple scientists pointing to these facts.

How Human-Induced Climate Change Fits Into The Picture

The “97 percent” tagline is often used to demonize those who question human-induced climate change, and the mainstream media will do their best to make those who question it, no matter their background, credentials, or credibility, look foolish. This is a common tactic used by the elite. They ridicule opposing views that threaten their control and profit. Ivar Giaever, a Norwegian-American physicist who shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1973, compares current climate science to pseudoscience.

Based on my research, the top scientists within this field are not all in agreeance, in fact, the majority of them may all agree with the narrative of this article. But you will not see them on CNN.

What is going on here?

The “climate hysteria” that most scientists in the field label what we see today as is a result of mass media, brainwashing, and the politicization of climate science. Take Dr. Richard Lindzen, for example, he is one of the hundreds who refer to this type of narrative (hysteria) and claims that climate scientists raising this issue have been extremely demonized.  Lindzen is actually one of the world’s top experts in the field and lead author of “Physical Climate Process and Feedbacks,” Chapter7 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Third Assessment report on climate change.

He and many others have been quite outspoken regarding the political influence that weighs heavy on all IPCC publications. The final reports and conclusions are drawn, as expressed by Lindzen in multiple lectures, are actually written by the politicians.

How Human Activity Is Throwing Things Out of Whack

Another important point to realize is that environmental degradation is never really addressed, the focus constantly seems to be on our carbon output. Historically, we’ve seen periods in Earth’s history, prior to the industrial revolution, where CO2 levels were just as high as they are now. But, what we haven’t seen before is the complete destruction and disruption of our national systems that mitigate CO2, control it, and regulate it.

We’ve completely polluted our planet, and perhaps the focus shouldn’t be on CO2 output, which is already at the moment highly questioned with its connection to climate change, but our destruction of the systems in place to regulate our climate. As well as pollution and degradation. Why should the people have to pay for the actions of a system unwilling to change? That being said, those of us who question the mainstream narrative on this topic seems to be the most passionate about clean energy technology, and ‘saving’ our planet.

The notion of static,unchanging climate is foreign to the history of the earth or any other planet with a fluid envelope. The fact that ‘the developed world went into hysterics over changes in global mean temperature anomaly of a few tenths of a degree will astound futuregenerations. Such hysteria simply represents the scientific illiteracy of much of the public, the susceptibility of the public to the substitution of reptition for truth, and the expliotation of these weaknesses by politcians, environmental promotors, and, after 20 years of media drum beating, many others asl well…Ice ages have occurred in a hundred thousand year cycle for the last 700 thousand years, and there have been previous periods that appear to have been warmer than the present despite CO2 levels being lower than they are now. More recently, we have the medieval warm period and the little ice age. Durin the latter, alpine glaciers advanced to the chagrin of overrun villages. Since the beginning of the 19th Century, these glaciers have been retreating. Frankly, we don’t fully understand either. –Lindzen

Human beings no doubt have had an impact on the climate, for sure, but other factors have been ignored and the human impact has been ramped up for ulterior motives, it’s hysteria and fear that’s being created in order to justify measures that benefit the global elite, the ones who take advantage of us and enslave us, while we live in the illusion that we’re actually free. It’s like a bird being born in a cage.

The point is, if we want to learn anything real about this subject, we must turn our eye away from the mainstream, and our ears towards the actual scientists within the field and what they are actually saying. We must actually look into things, we must read and educate ourselves instead of relying on authoritative figures to disseminate information.

Below is a great debate with a few scientists on both sides of the coin, one that approaches the issue from both sides. All will acknowedge that the field is still split on this issue. That’s not really the narrative we see from the mainstream.

Global warming is about politics and power rather than science. In science, there is an attempt to clarify; in global warming, language is misused in order to confuse and mislead the public. The misuse of language extends to the misuse of models. For advocated of policies allegedly addressing global warming, the role of models is not to predict but rather to justify the claim that catastrophe is possible. As they understand, proving something to be impossible is itself almost impossible.

The quote above comes from Lindzen, who in the video below educated people on what the scientists are actually saying, compared to what the media tells us they are saying.

The Takeaway

This is a big topic that branches off into so many discussions, like the fact as to why climate engineering is never mentioned? Weather modification and the drastic manipulation of our atmosphere has been proposed as a potential solution to this supposed problem. The process involves seeding the atmosphere with sun reflective particles. There is a lot of evidence suggesting that atmospheric weather manipulation has been occurring for a long time, who knows why. What we’re told is that it’s for the purposes of climate change mitigation, but again, when has our government ever exposed the truth on subjects that are classified simply because a powerful group of people deem it a ‘national security’ issue?

Recognize that, first, that I am in no way a climate change denier. Clearly, our climate is constantly changing. I am also, as most people who question the mainstream global warming narrative, completely for the transition into cleaner energy technology. It seems our ‘leaders’ are as well, but they’re only interested after sitting on top of decades of transformative technology. Only within the past few years have elitist groups been divesting into clean energy, simply because they want to control the entire energy industry as they do now with oil, therefore they must oversee its transition.

New clean and free energy threatens our entire economy, therefore to them, the transition must be made in a way that does not collapse it.

Bottom line, fossil fuels are no longer needed, there are “breakthroughs available..that never see the light of day” (Dr. Brian O’Leary) that could completely revolutionize our plant. The same group of people who seem to be pushing climate hysteria are also behind the suppression of clean energy technology, which doesn’t make much sense at all. At least this is what I believe based on my research.

Anytime the mainstream makes you feel stupid for questioning something or demonizes and uses ridicule to shut down the opposing points, you know something us up. We see the same thing happening with vaccines today. The good news is, people are waking up every single day, and what seems so obvious cannot stay in the shadows for too long. The truth eventually presents itself.

To stand idle and not create awareness on how the preservation of our Earth is being used by the global elite is not an option. Letting so-called “leaders” of our world meet every single year to talk has resulted in zero action in solutions that could have been implemented decades ago. All that happens is taxpayers are squeezed. What’s worse is that those meeting to discuss it know that.

Think for yourself.

Walking down the self-help aisle of any bookstore may yield you a plethora of book titles and subtitles referencing ‘becoming the best of version yourself.’ You might pick up a book, turn it over to read the back cover and find a series of recommendations from prominent authors stating ‘this book will bring you to a whole new level’ or ‘this book truly unlocks your hidden riches.’ Excited, you might open to the table of contents, hoping to find some early insight or tips on what you can try right away:

“Today’s challenge,” “Who are you?,” “Learning to love yourself,” “Being the best you.” These may be the first few chapter titles you come across, but you may be left with the question, that may not even be answered in the book, “What does it mean to be the best version of yourself?’

A question that many are trying to answer.

I will start by saying marketing a book can be a difficult task. I have been working towards publishing my first book and every publisher I talk to wants to know that title and subheadline right away so they know how easy it will be to sell your book. The insurgence of self-help books has been huge over the last few years. Thousands of inspired and well-meaning authors have felt the urge to write a book, and so they do.

But from my experience, many are repeating what has been learned in one book or another, or seem to be coming from a place of learning, but not quite mastery. Something that shouldn’t stop someone from writing a book, but more so reveals that the advice we’re getting in these books can often be incomplete, inexperienced or based on egoic ideas of the subjects being discussed. This isn’t to say any of this work is bad or anything, just that there is much more to the picture.

Are We Running In Circles?

I have been working on myself for 12 years and have been through many different phases. In no way would I call myself a leading expert in self-help or anything, but I’m consistently let down by the state of consciousness within many of these books. I feel it keeps people running in circles, chasing one thing or the next or it has people feeling like they need to act a certain way in order to appear a certain way. Are we really getting to the core of what we are seeking?

I’ve been writing a book for quite some time and note that there are many important nuances that are learned and expressed with much internal observation and practice. Yet it seems today we want quick fixes and instant healings in order to move past what we feel. Yet I feel in many cases, through the popular work being spread around, we are only temporarily band-aiding the inner aspects of ourselves that are crying to come out and be released.

It’s in the marketing and in the lack of experience that I feel the term ‘live the best version of yourself’ truly comes from. It has an allure that somehow you will find the best aspect of you and live it always. It suggests, vaguely, that perhaps this will unlock your wildest dreams or make you be the best at something. The fact that it leaves room for interpretation is great for marketing, but does it push us towards a goal that is actually contrary to what most of us who end up buying these books are truly seeking?

Are we running in circles? Photo by: Pedro Alamo Orellana

Scratching ‘The Best Version’ Idea

First off, I strongly feel we need to let go of the whole idea of ‘being the best version of ourselves.’ I feel we’ve played with polarity long enough and are ready for some deeper truths.

What I’m going to share is what I’ve gathered from my own life’s experience. I have been exploring myself, my consciousness and reflecting on how I BE in this world for many years. I have done this with the help of a mentor and many hours of personal reflection. Instead of moving from book to book, I was fortunate to start my journey by simply spending a lot of time with myself, exploring meditation and developing a strong connection to my inner knowing, yet remaining open to asking for help when needed. I’ve remembered that there is no ‘best version of yourself.’ There’s simply you.

You can be a funny word in itself. Is it ‘you’ the mind? Is ‘you’ the soul? Is ‘you’ the higher self? Is ‘you’ the ego? Is ‘you’ your personality? Who are you?!

This is an important place to begin because it changes so much of how we seek to live the best version of ourselves, or as I like to call it ‘our authentic self.‘ Like I said above, scratching the idea of ‘best version of yourself’ is a great place to stop playing within polarity and ideas, and instead recognize knowing and neutrality. Higher consciousness, what many of us are seeking whether we are consciously aware of it or not, plays in a realm of neutrality, where we recognize experiences are what they are, we can learn from them as they take place, and where we don’t seek to see everything as right or wrong, worst or best.

To Be Fair

The actual definition many of these books are portraying for ‘the best version of self’ can be different, and some can actually be quite authentic. However, I still find there is much room to consider re-thinking the subject, or rather, begin feeling about it.

To me, the self-help space could really be summed up as humanity seeking ways beyond our self-imposed limitations, belief systems, and suffering, ultimately seeking to live our true authentic selves. We are, in some ways, a society that does not seek deep truths but instead moves from platitude to platitude as we search for deeper understanding. Like my mentor taught me, taking the road straight to the core is a lot easier and less painful than spending years jumping from trend to trend or belief system to belief system. While my journey has had phases, the core understanding and methods for how I move past pain and challenges has never changed – I go to the core, no band-aids needed.

What does it look like to live your authentic self? It means being aware of how we often operate from our minds, ego’s, belief systems, societally programmed beliefs, patterns etc. and instead begin living from a deeper knowing within ourselves. Something that touches how we truly FEEL about decisions, situations, and experiences in our lives. Not what we think we should do to impress someone, uphold a certain stature or because that’s the ‘smart’ thing to do, but because we truly connect with and feel it.

An example of this is choosing to walk away from a relationship we are not happy in even if it means the other person will have to grow past the initial pain they will feel when the relationship ends. Not only will it be growth for you within yourself, but the other person will also find themselves through the process as well so long as they choose to do the work.

Another example might be learning to move past the complaining we often do about a particular job, to move onto a job or experience we’ve always wanted to do. First off, we may not always be doing ‘the most ideal job’ but it doesn’t mean we can’t find peace and be our authentic self within that job. While there, communicate with others based on your TRUE authenticity, make decisions and deal with challenges in the workplace based on that authenticity. Your actions and ways of being in these situations can bring higher consciousness to the workplace in a deep way. We don’t always have to ‘serve’ by doing work in the ‘consciousness’ space, we can serve anywhere, at any time.

Further to the example above, perhaps we have always wanted to leave our current job, are ready to but are fearful of taking the leap because of what others might think or that we might not make enough money in another position. Living authentically might look like taking that leap past the stories and fears that are holding us back from doing what we know inside is what we want to do. In this case, we’re not judging our current job, hate it or hate the people there, we are simply at peace but fearful of the unknown. A great time to further explore and express our authentic self.

Exploring Your Authentic Self

The examples above give an idea of how we can look at our current lives and see where we are or aren’t living authentically to how we feel inside. Be careful to observe belief systems on this. Sometimes we may still think it’s our authentic self to do something based on a prior belief system we have because we did not connect deeply enough with what we know inside. Sometimes it may take time for us to see this, that’s OK, we are always seeing what we need to in each moment that is exactly what we need for us to keep evolving. The trick is; are we paying close enough attention to move through the signs and knowing that comes from within? Or are we caught up in the mental chatter and daily distraction of everyday life? This is why meditation is key.

Aside from that, you can explore your authentic self, and whether or not you’re living from it, simply by asking yourself reflective questions when you are unsure. Am I truly making a decision based on what I feel? Or am I making a decision based on what I’m defending, trying to protect, or think I’m supposed to do?

Your authentic self is expressed in exploring higher levels of consciousness.

These deep inner knowings may not come overnight. It’s a muscle, a practice, and a feeling that takes time to develop. You notice when you are living your authentic self that your life feels different, you are calmer and more in tune with yourself, others and the planet. This muscle takes time to build, and letting go of the old ways of being, states of consciousness and belief systems can take time. Just keep noticing, keep reflecting and keep exploring. There is no wrong in this, it is simply an exploration.

The Takeaway

An individual living their authentic self pushes theirself into higher states of consciousness. This makes an incredibly powerful impact on those around us and in our everyday lives. Beyond this, it also makes an incredibly profound impact on the collective consciousness. This is how we go from creating change within ourselves to creating change within our world.

The path to the changes we are all looking for is practicing living our true authentic self.

It was so great to find out that doctors in Scotland are actually prescribing hiking as a form of medication, something that will not put money into the medical industry and into the doctors pocket. It’s a prescription based on the health and well-being of the patient, recognizing that medication can often be a harmful option unless direly needed, and that in most cases there are alternatives to certain ailments.

NHS Shetland, the health authority in the Scottish archipelago, has authorized the move to officially prescribe nature as a healthy supplement to traditional health care. The goal of the program is to open the eyes of health professionals around the world to such simple, non-traditional treatments for the body and mind.

For everything from high blood pressure to diabetes, anxiety, and depression, the medical community is learning (though lots of us have always known) that many ailments and diseases can be treated with activities like birdwatching, maybe a little kayaking, perhaps combing a beach for shells, even skipping pebbles across a slow-moing stream. Even just sitting silently in a forest, meditating. (Adventure Journal )

The Science

The science is quite clear about nature being essential for optimal health and well being. We are designed to be in it, and it’s a shame our system could not work with nature while at the same time developing the way we have. Instead, we’ve worked against it, used it and abused it, and we hardly spend any time in it given the choices we make in modern day human lifestyle.

Here is an article summarizing research that shows hiking can literally change the brain.  I also published an article that provides a number of sources detailing what can happen to our body when we try “Earthing,” or walking barefoot on the ground. It can reduce inflammation, change your blood pressure, heart rate, etc. There are a whole host of benefits and ailments that can be managed through regular grounding practice. You can read more about that in the article linked below.

Studies Show What Happens To The Human Body When We Walk Barefoot on Earth

Further, here is an article I published discussing how meditation affects different areas of the brain, and one more showing the same thing, as well as its effect on the human gut.

Scotland’s move to begin doing this is something that’s going to become more prevalent as the consciousness of our planet continues to shift and people continue to think more holistically. Our society is trying to transition into one where well being comes first and is the driving factor behind our decisions, not money. Right now, the main things doctors do, unless they are trauma doctors, working in the ER and performing surgeries (a key aspect of modern day medicine), is prescribe medication, this leaves little room for preventative advice, even though that is changing slowly as well.

Deeper Thoughts

Looking at a baby, you see something that is the closest thing to our natural state at the moment. It’s a time when we are extremely curious and there is nothing on our mind but exploration and discovery. Today, things have changed and the human lifestyle requires us to work frivolously hard to keep a roof over our head and food in our mouths. This has created a number of health and wellness challenges, including a rise in mental health challenges that arise for many reasons.

One thing is for sure, if we spent more time outside in nature we would begin to feel a whole lot better, and significantly reduce our chances of contracting various diseases and ailments. That being said, I do not mean to paint a depressing picture, we are here to learn and play within this human experience, and ultimately change it for the better as time goes on. Sometimes we have to face the starker realities of our current world, to realize what we need to begin shifting.

Our Consciousness Is The Starting Point

There are some challenges, our consciousness and the ‘system’ we have for medicine. Firstly, we have chosen to stay asleep in many ways. Even when life pokes at us to wake up and change ourselves, our lifestyle etc. we keep our heads down and push on, blaming the other things for all of our problems, when it’s only part of it. We have to begin to wake up, and be proactive in what we can change in our lives. We have more power in that area that we realize.

When it comes to the system, most of what is done is done for profit first. Humanity, well-being, and empathy seem to come second, or not at all. The medical field is a perfect example. Imagine if doctors were actually properly educated, and prescribed nothing but healthy, proven remedies instead of prescription medication that sometimes don’t even go through appropriate safety testing?

Prescription medications cause approximately 100,000 deaths every single year (( Null, G PHD. (2011). Death by Medicine. Mount Jackson, VA: Praktikos Books), and they’re also responsible for a number of adverse effects on the human body. What’s worse is the corruption and deceit from where these medications come. It’s also noteworthy to mention that pharmaceutical companies cannot be held liable for issues that arise from their product, they are completely protected and have no incentive to develop safe medications. This, alongside their domination over government regulatory agencies, provides a recipe for disaster, and that’s exactly what we’re seeing today.

What’s even more bothersome is that we are talking about professionals with giant hearts, who enter into this profession to do nothing but good, with good intentions.

Doctors have no choice but to prescribe medications, it’s part of how they make money and it’s a big part of what they’re trained to do. Little effort is put into actually looking at the medication, where it comes from, the approval process it’s gone through and the independent research that usually completely counters the pharmaceutical research. Doctors can actually get in trouble for prescribing something that does not cost any money. Take alternative treatments for cancer, for example, they exist outside of a doctor scope, so they can’t touch them or they could lose their license. The only two options doctors are even allowed to mention are radiation and chemotherapy. It’s patented, so that’s what we get.

The Takeaway

There are so many ailments where prescription medications are simply not necessary. Inflammation, arthritis, many mental health diagnoses and more. The pharmaceutical industry loves to create new ailments, and perpetuate them, because they can make a pill for each one. It’s quite clear that there is a big problem with healthcare when our doctors are learning absolutely nothing about these types of interventions, and are simply trained to prescribed drugs. What about nutrition? What about meditation and spirituality?

Dr. Asseem Malhotra, a well-known Doctor in Britain had some choice words to say in front of the European Parliament about modern-day medical education and overall knowledge doctors possess.  He stated that we are in “an epidemic of misinformed doctors.” He’s one of many who continues to emerge and speak out. You can watch that video and read more in-depth about it here.

The point is, you don’t need to constantly rely on your doctor for something that’s not so serious and life-threatening. You have the ability to think and do your own research. The issue here is that people are putting their complete trust in doctors, with no questioning or research themselves.

At the end of the day, spending time in nature and away from our modern day lifestyles is vital for anybody who wants to achieve optimal health, take care of themselves and feel good.

Pages

Connect with us

Subscribe to our rss and social networks accounts...

On the Subject of US

Ætherna Guild is a free will, clean energy & sustainable living community resource website. More

Navigation

Browse Ætherna's resourceful info!

Ætherna Guild



Energetic Balance Frequencies

Ætherna Guild's Mission

Awaken mankind's universal consciousness to find equitable solutions for a real, honest, best and prosperous Guild, based on unity and sharing, peace, respect and love, in harmony with nature and our environment to foster the achievement of collective goals leading to a higher intelligence and collective consciousness.

A Sovereign Space for One Hearth Guild ॐ

More