Turning our atmosphere into their atmosphere

“Look around at the environment we live in. Carbon dioxide, fluorocarbons, and methane have increased since 1958. Earth is being acclimatized. They are turning our atmosphere into their atmosphere.

You may remember these words. They were spoken by a rebel leader on TV in They Live, a 1988 movie in which the global elite are extraterrestrial aliens who seek to exploit mankind.

Of course since then a few things happened. Billionaires and fossil fuel companies began pouring millions of dollars into campaigns to convince average Americans that any attempt to stop them from transforming our atmosphere is just an attempt by big government to impose tyranny. All sorts of scientists could receive millions of dollars in funding, if they came up with an argument that it’s really not that bad.

And a lot of you fell for the same line of logic. Maybe it’s not that bad. Earth is actually starved of carbon dioxide right now, compared to previous geological periods. That’s the argument you peddle and hear everywhere. And yet, this misses a few important problems:

-The sun was smaller tens of millions of years ago, it’s gradually expanding. The Earth would now need fewer greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, to maintain the same temperature as it did tens of millions of years ago.

-More carbon in the atmosphere might be fine for life on Earth, but you and me are the descendants of lifeforms that evolved under low concentrations of carbon dioxide. An atmosphere that works well for dinosaurs doesn’t have to work well for you and me.

-What matters is how fast you change the atmosphere. An alcoholic would be better off not drinking alcohol anymore too, but if you completely reduce your alcohol intake to zero overnight you are likely to die (see: Amy Winehouse).

But rather than focusing on how the climate changes when we change the atmosphere, how this affects plants and how the changes to plants affect humans, I just want to look at another question for today: How does it affect your own body?

Considering some of you are so selfless that you wish to resurrect the sort of atmosphere the dinosaurs evolved under, to help “green the Earth”, I feel like it’s worth asking: How would you yourself be affected by this?

Let’s look at the level of CO2 we evolved under:

Here you see the CO2 range we evolved under during the past 800,000 years. This is the air we used to breathe. It would range from around 180 to 280 parts per million. Today at 420 parts per million, we’re 50% above the highest level we saw during the past million years of human evolution.

The last time we saw the concentrations of CO2 we see today, was three million years ago. Back then there were no humans. Our ancestor at the time was Australopithicus, who had a brain about 35% the size of ours. CO2 has all sorts of relevant functions in your body. If CO2 concentrations in the room build up due to poor ventilation, you get nervous and anxious. It also helps your body keep track of metabolic processes.

Let’s ask ourselves a question:


In the 1880’s, this guy was so fat that he was considered a freak, he was a member of a freak show. Today you can just walk into your local Walmart to see a guy like this. What happened?

“It’s the carbs”

“It’s the seed oils”

“It’s the lack of exercise”

“It’s the preachy vegans”

“It’s the High Fructose Corn Syrup”

“It’s the endocrine disruptors in plastic”

“It’s the fat-positive feminists”

All nice theories, but here’s a question for you: How come it’s also happening to lab animals fed a standardized diet?

It looks like something in our environment is changing. What could it be? Well, as the PH of our blood reduces due to excess CO2 in the atmosphere, there’s an increase in protein misfolding. It’s thought that this could lead to many of the modern epidemics we’re witnessing: Alzheimer’s, Diabetes and Obesity.

As atmospheric CO2 concentrations increase, we see that animals behave differently. At 890 PPM, mice show hyperactivity, increased birthweight and decreased weight in pregnant female mice.

We see that PH in the brain is reduced in many mental disorders, particularly Schizophrenia and Bipolar disorder. It’s thought to not just be coincidence, but to play a causal role in the development of such disorders. We can already see at 1000 parts per million, that people’s executive function goes down: Excess CO2 in the air simply makes you dumber.

So here’s a question:

1. Maybe all those studies suggesting high CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere will cause catastrophic global warming are wrong.

2. Maybe all those studies suggesting high CO2 emissions will cause catastrophic ocean acidification are somehow wrong too.

3. But do you really believe that all those studies suggesting high CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere affect our own physiology are wrong too?

To me this looks an awful lot like wishful thinking. Compare your own obscure theory, that the sun causes global warming and CO2 is actually plant food and we need more of it because the atmosphere is starved of it and the satanic pedophiles who run the new world order simply want to use this climate change hoax to implement a global carbon tax, to my own theory:

-It’s a bad idea to turn the atmosphere we evolved in, into the sort of atmosphere dinosaurs evolved in.

-It’s even worse, if you decide to change the whole atmosphere in just a period of 200 years, as this is a very unusually rapid change in the Earth’s geological history.

And that leads me to the next theory I have:

-Maybe those creepy billionaires like Bill Gates want to block the sun and feed you bugs and take away your beef because they’re genuinely worried about what is going on, rather than just coming up with these strange ideas because they’re pedophiles who worship Satan.

Unfortunately however, people have an optimism bias, thanks to the psychological immune system. In many ways, right-wingers are healthier than left-wingers. The most prominent example may be that the psychological immune system functions better.

Look at modern art produced by leftists and it’s all depressing and hideous, concerned with abstract existential problems. That doesn’t appeal to right wing conservatives, because most working class people just have a normal well-functioning psychological immune system that makes them feel alienated by that sort of stuff.

The right-wing brain is much better at coming up with all sorts of theories, to avoid the conclusion that the world is going to change for the worse.

Consider for example the sort of stuff they manage to come up with:

-Oil is abiotic and the Earth just regenerates oil for us, so we will never run out of it!

-The Earth is not overpopulated, we would all fit on Rhode island!

-Global warming is a hoax, the Earth is actually starved of carbon dioxide!

Your general tendency is to believe that the only real problem the world faces is being ruled by satan-worshipping pedophiles. If only we got rid of those people, all of our problems would be solved.

And that’s good for mobilizing people of course. You can’t win a war if you tell your troops: “Well those guys are roughly the same as us and their mothers will miss them too once we shoot them, at the end of the day they just have a subtly different culture and way of viewing the world than we do.” No, you have to depict your enemy as the absolute evil.

However, to depict our global elite as the absolute evil is not a good way to diagnose what’s actually going on in the world, which is something more akin to this:

-Powerful people are very worried about climate change, because it’s a real problem. The reason most powerless people are not very worried about it, is because your psychological immune system blocks you from perceiving this problem.

-A handful of powerful people, whose power derives from using fossil fuels, are eager to deny there are problems involved in humanity continuing to use fossil fuels. Because of this contradiction, we fail to get the kind of global consensus that we need to solve the problem.

And that’s not a very happy conclusion to draw of course, but it is the reality we live in.


  1. I’d just like to add that if you’re living indoors in a modern urban environment, the situation becomes even worse since while the atmosphere itself may have a CO2 concentration of 450PPM, enclosed environments with people in them can see concentrations that rise as high as 3,000 PPM in some cases, depending in part on how poorly designed they are. This is the environment modern people are exposing themselves to in practice for the majority of their waking hours. I can’t help but wonder what those indoor numbers would look like if the outdoor figures reached 800PPM+. Would people be able to stay indoors at all? Might not be such a good thing if the wet bulb temperatures in your area go too high haha

    Civilization is already ending, people just don’t realize it yet. Once the stable climate we have seen for the past 10,000 years ends and is replaced with a fucking Jurassic Park climate with huge variability and extreme weather, and we’re already on the downslope of the industrialization process, agriculture will no longer be viable and that will be the end of it. I hope we will all reincarnate into a less stupid species one day.

    • Exhaled air is 78% nitrogen, 16% oxygen, and 4% CO2. The air we inhale is 78% nitrogen and 21% oxygen, 0.04% Co2. That is 100x less than the air we exhale. Whether it goes up to 0.08% or 0.1% or even 0.3% (3000 PPM), it cannot possibly effect our health. A sustained lack of oxygen can be unhealthy. But we are not going to reduce the 21% oxygen in the air we inhale by burning fossil fuels at the current pace. Whatever you may believe about warming, CO2 is simply not an air pollutant.

  2. Nice article. I really liked the “They live” reference and the cited studies about the animal obesity epidemic. I just went with my first brain fart that was somewhere along the lines of “if this would be true, then what about Africa?”, so I Googled “obesity africa” and there are all sorts of interesting results, including this one: https://www.afro.who.int/news/obesity-rising-africa-who-analysis-finds

    It claims that “in 2019, the continent was home to 24% of the world’s overweight children aged under 5.” So even if your thesis is wrong, modern capitalism is still such a great system, either it starves a continent or feeds it trash.

    BTW, what is that Amy Winehouse reference about? Officialy she died of alcohol poisoning, i.e. stopped breathing because there was too much alcohol in her blood for her poor bullimic physique.

    • I remember her dying because she just quit alcohol cold turkey. It seems she tried to quit cold turkey, lost her tolerance, began drinking again and died as a result.

  3. Thats a hell of a lot of words to avoid the facts mate.
    We can handle higher CO2 FINE, we aren’t heading towards 8000ppm (highest recorded) and 500 or 600ppm (ie less than 0.1%) does sweet fuck all to us, so thats a red fucking herring.

    As to standardised diet mice, yeah, sure, same bullshit game they always play, swapping healthy lard and old school actual foods for crisco and soy, and pretending its the same metabolically, utter bullshit

    As to “all the studies”: what fucking studies, that 97% number? Total hoax, the real number was 0.3% of relevant studies support your position. The ONLY “studies” that ever supported this nonsense were computer simulation model based ones using models that DO NOT match the observed reality, and the only data that even supports warming is the “adjusted” data, ie, fraudulent, modified by the “hide the decline” crew using a method they WILL NOT make public, ie, it is scientifically completely meaningless, its just someones undocumented private model, nothing to do with reality

    as to Gates “caring”, his father was PRESIDENT of the US eugenics society, his foundation came from his fathers one and he has spent his life trying to suppress population, which first requires us to feel guilty for existing so we dont hang him from a tree for genocide. Oh, and the funding? Look up who founded, funded, and still funds the main “research” (propaganda) centre used for the data in the IPCC fantasies…Rockefeller, shell, oil billionaires and oil multinationals…funding GW supporting research for (((some))) reason.

    Pull your head out, and open your eyes, it IS a bunch of baby raping pedophiles (the elite criminal control system runs on blackmail as currency, the worse the act you agree to do on video, the bigger your buy in and more you can be “trusted” not to turn) running this scam and they ARE trying to kill us, with your unwitting support

    • look up the CRU at east anglia university. Note how front and center it is in the GW hoax, then look up who founded and funded it. Gullible GW supporting fools who claim big oil is funding the 99.7% of studies in the field that actually support the null hypothesis, not GW, are flat wrong, its the other way round.

  4. “-Maybe those creepy billionaires like Bill Gates want to block the sun and feed you bugs and take away your beef because they’re genuinely worried about what is going on, rather than just coming up with these strange ideas because they’re pedophiles who worship Satan.”

    Why then do you oppose their lockdowns and vaccines? Just let them sort this out.

    • What is wrong with this position?

      I also think most of them were genuinely worried about Covid and some of them are genuinely worried about the environment. And just like the oligarchy failed miserably at “solving” Covid their solution to the environment is also probably going to be largely farcical.

      Covid was obviously deemed a threat to the system, it could close down factories, disrupt supply chains, decrease general consumption (people scared of going out), expose the healthcare systems for the mess they are and provoke discontent. So the solution was simple: vaccine research at warp speed, semi-forced vaccination campaigns and it will be good ol’ times again.

      Similarily, the prospect of a rapidly degrading enviroment is threatening the society we live in: resource shortages and wars, mass migrations, increased food prices (discontent), extreme weather events disrupting production, transportation and consumption … so you can see why an “enlightened” capitalist such as Gates might try his hand at solving these problems that could fatally endanger the way of being that made him a living deity.

      Final summation: I can see the motivations for their actions and beliefs, which are essentially technocratic solutions aimed at defending the status-quo. Whilst I can understand their positions, that doesn’t mean I necessarily agree with any of the proposed solutions.

  5. Genuinely concerned medical doctors used to bleed patients to balanced the humours, and were for far too long opposed to the radical notion of washing their hands between patients, even after bloody surgeries.

    Sometimes the “experts” are way off the mark.

  6. I have a neighbor who yaps at me relentlessly about how bad climate change is and how it is going to ruin the planet for her two kids. She is very left wing. She and her husband own a second home that is 140 miles away and drive their SUV there and back most weekends. At the second home they have a giant pickup truck. I could multiply this example many times over. At the same time I know some poor rightwing people who use almost no carbon. They think climate change is a joke, but they aren’t actually part of the problem. How bad people are for the climate has little to do with what they believe or yap about; instead it almost entirely tracks their household wealth level.

    If billionaires actually cared about climate change they would set good personal examples, but they don’t. Also a lot of them genuinely are psychopaths; Jeffrey Epstein had plenty of billionaire friends. A person who says that excessive flying will cause mass deaths, and then owns many homes and flies all over the place is a psychopath, and is probably enjoying forcing other people to pretend to pretend admire (or twist their minds into actually admiring) his hypocritical actions.

    Talk is cheap, and people talk a lot, but then how much carbon they use almost always corresponds to their wealth; it doesn’t correspond to their stated beliefs. It’s almost like some sort of Nietzchean will to power that involves gobbling up fuel, and it has nothing to do with political affiliation. I am not saying you are like this but exceptions are rare.

  7. ”The reptilian lower lords have been trying for ages to take over and control this Earth. Their obsession for climate manipulation is to create a warmer atmosphere with high levels of carbon, as it was in the times they invaded Earth; and the fossil fuels, coal, oil, gas, are mineralized residues of the organic matter from beings that lived in those times. Your people knows that burning fossil fuels destroys the planet and its life, yet you have become depending on those vehicles and commodities, unable to see your lives without them, as your ancestors lived just a century ago. You know the alternatives, renewable energies, recycling and green technologies, yet your will power to change is too slow.”

    > [[https://cyberthal-ghost.nfshost.com/the-sasquatch-message-to-humanity-book-2-interdimensional-teachings-from-our-elders/][The Sasquatch Message to Humanity Book 2: Interdimensional Teachings from our Elders]]

  8. Exhaled air is 78% nitrogen, 16% oxygen, and 4% CO2. The air we inhale is 78% nitrogen and 21% oxygen, 0.04% Co2. That is 100x less than the air we exhale. Whether it goes up to 0.08% or 0.1% or even 0.2% cannot possibly effect our health. Unlike actual air pollution from NOx. We are not going to reduce the 21% oxygen we inhale by burning fossil fuels at the current pace. Whatever you may believe about warming, CO2 is simply not an air pollutant.

  9. Perhaps a few responses to this can be made.

    First to your questions:
    1. “Maybe all those studies suggesting high CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere will cause catastrophic global warming are wrong”
    What studies are those? I am not aware of any published studies that suggest catastrophic global warming is likely to occur.

    2. “Maybe all those studies suggesting high CO2 emissions will cause catastrophic ocean acidification are somehow wrong too.”
    Again which studies are these? I am not aware of any published studies that state there will be catastrophic ocean acidification from CO2.

    3. “But do you really believe that all those studies suggesting high CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere affect our own physiology are wrong too?”
    And yes again, where are these studies??

    The idea of catastropic anything occuring from increased CO2 is actually not well supported by either the science or the scientists. The concept of looming disaster is promoted by politicians and activists, not scientists. Your claims that increasing CO2 levels are somehow bad for us physiologically is also unsupported.

    This is a great lecture by a Princeton Atmospheric Physicist on the effects of greenhouse gasses. Perhaps listen to a recognised expert. https://youtu.be/o5HYbAkVXuU

  10. I really liked the introductory movie reference, fascinating. The argument that CO2 concentrations may affect our health struck me as absolute genius at first, but turned out to be nonsense quite quickly. Exhaled air has around 4-5% CO2, which means that we have constant high rate of CO2 in our blood, as we are constantly removing some from our body. Inhaled air would have 400 parts per million, i.e. 0.04%. Clearly this won’t have a noticeable effect on blood pH. CO2 blood levels also largely depend on breathing frequency, lung power and volume, fitness and many other factors. The idea that everybody has a constant 0.02% is utter nonsense.

    There are many attempts at explaining the “obesity epidemic”, and most of them just try to blame external and largely unavoidable factors. It’s really, really funny because if you take even just ONE trip to any local store, you will quickly realize in 3D the reason for obesity in the West.

    The human body isn’t primed to take in as many calories as it can. If you don’t believe me, eat unprocessed macadamia nuts for a whole week and allow yourself as many as you want. If you make it for more than a day I will gladly compliment you. No, the problem is the variety that industry creates for us in finding ever more different-tasting things that shove calories down our throats. This isn’t natural, and we’re not adapted to that at all. It simply overloads our reward systems and keeps us on edge all the time. It’s like porn addiction, but with foods. And it’s not the meat, sugar, eggs, milk, fats, salt – it’s the COMBINATION of all of those, and the marketing. Keeping people stupid by saying that it’s the fault of CO2 is literally the problem. Oh and lab animals (mice) get fat on an ad lib diet because they are overbred like you wouldn’t imagine. They also have hella long telomeres, which actually don’t compare to humans or outside mice at all. The mice from outside don’t actually get fat on that same diet.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.