The accelerated climate warming over the last century was shown in 2023 to be in part coming from the oceans, and the core of the Earth. Abyssal oceans are heating faster than the shallower depths. Temperatures rise over sudden 3 -week heat plumes from below, not ambiently from above.
This heating signals the presence of, and comes as a result of, a weakening of the Earth core’s magnetic field. At a certain point the magnetic field will weaken to where the heavier parts of the Earth (Mantle+Crust) will take over our rotation, and it will spin like a gyroscope and not a magnet as it currently does.
When that happens we will have a Noah-style deluge, with oceans sloshing over the surface of the planet – the last time of which, was documented in the Epic of Gilgamesh, and left its clear marks on the Khafre Pyramid in Egypt.
Apparitions and extraordinary spiritual phenomena are not necessary for salvation, but they can be spiritually fruitful. A new document from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) attempts to guide bishops in preserving the spiritual fruit while not having to take a position on the supernatural integrity of the phenomena itself.
The document, entitled “Norms for Proceeding in the Discernment of Alleged Supernatural Phenomena,” replaces the procedures put in place by Pope St. Paul VI in 1978. The new norms and their introduction by Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, prefect of the DDF, make no mention of Medjugorje; however, it seems likely that the claimed apparitions there — which began soon after the 1978 norms, in 1981 — influenced the 2024 document. Medjugorje was addressed in the press conference presenting the document.
…The six options in the new norms are as follows. One can see how, over the last few decades, Medjugorje would have fallen into various of the new categories:
— Nihil Obstat: Without expressing any certainty about the supernatural authenticity of the phenomenon itself, many signs of the action of the Holy Spirit are acknowledged. The bishop is encouraged to appreciate the pastoral value and promote the dissemination of the phenomenon, including pilgrimages;
— Prae oculis habeatur: Although important positive signs are recognized, some aspects of confusion or potential risks are also perceived that require the diocesan bishop to engage in a careful discernment and dialogue with the recipients of a given spiritual experience. If there were writings or messages, doctrinal clarification might be necessary;
— Curatur: Various or significant critical elements are noted, but the phenomenon is already spread widely, and verifiable spiritual fruits are connected to it. Therefore, a ban that could upset the faithful is not recommended, but the local bishop is advised not to encourage the phenomenon;
— Sub mandato: The critical issues are not connected to the phenomenon itself but to its improper use by people or groups, such as undue financial gain or immoral acts. The Holy See entrusts the pastoral leadership of the specific place to the diocesan bishop or a delegate;
— Prohibetur et obstruatur (“prohibited and stopped”): Despite various positive elements, the critical issues and risks associated with this phenomenon appear to be very serious. The dicastery asks the local bishop to offer a catechesis that can help the faithful understand the reasons for the decision and reorient their legitimate spiritual concerns;
— Declaratio de non supernaturalitate: The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith authorizes the local bishop to declare that the phenomenon is found to be not supernatural, based on concrete facts and evidence, such as the confession of an alleged visionary or credible testimonies of fabrication of the phenomenon.
Under the previous norms it was difficult for a bishop to guide — much less encourage — the good fruit that he could see without also endorsing the entire phenomenon as being of supernatural origin. The new norms give the bishop more flexible categories in order to move more quickly, essential in the digital age of instant communication. A determination of supernatural origin could take years, even decades, in the past.
With a lie you can go very far, but there is no turning back.
~Jewish proverb
Globalist Jews and their vassals have a nasty habit of smearing their opponents with accusations of “conspiracy theorists,” implying by this slur that conspiracies exist only in the fertile imagination of their critics, who are commonly portrayed as a bunch of lying crazies. However, according to Harvard University biological anthropology professor Richard Wrangham,
The vital innovation that has given rise to a new kind of political system is the plot. The ability to plot [conspire] rather than the ability to make weapons is what balanced the forces between the classical alpha males and the coalition of the weak. The ability to plot is an example of what psychologist Michael Tomasello has termed “shared intentionality,” a type of collaboration in which participants have psychological states in common. This ability has recently been deemed by psychologist Michael Tomasello to be unique to the human species. Humans excel in shared intentionality, which is already present in children as young as one year old, whereas chimpanzees show almost no signs of it. According to Tomasello, the typically human development of shared intentionality explains why humans can do many special things, from using mathematics to building skyscrapers and from playing a symphony to forming governments.[1]
If, as Richard Wrangham believes, selection against reactive aggression in impulsive people who have difficulty with frustration has indeed led to the self-domestication of humans, globalism and its off-shoot Zionism would in this sense be an attempt to domesticate humanity a step further into slavery. This attempt is only made possible by the shared intentionality of the main belligerents. It’s a conspiracy in the purest sense of the word.
Jeremy Carl is a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, served as deputy assistant secretary of the interior under President Trump, and has been associated with the Hoover Institution. His other books have dealt with energy policy. In a chapter on religion, he describes himself as “an actively engaged Christian of Jewish descent.” That a writer with solid connections to “respectable conservatism” is publishing a book with “anti-white racism” in the subtitle is a sign of changing times. Moreover, the author does not try to tell us that the problem with hostility towards whites is merely “divisive” or supposedly incompatible with Martin Luther King’s “dream.” He states forthrightly that it leads to injustices against whites, and that whites must fight back.
The heart of The Unprotected Class is 12 chapters dealing with anti-white attitudes and policy in civil rights law, crime and punishment, housing, education, historical remembrance, immigration, entertainment, environmentalism, business, medicine, religion, and the military. Race realism peeks through only in the chapter about medicine; the author admits that race differences are based in biology. The first four chapters are the most interesting.
Mr. Carl rightly begins his analysis with civil rights law, the heart of the anti-white regime. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 did much more than outlaw certain types of racial discrimination; it created an army of bureaucrats and lawyers to enforce the new rules. The intrusive powers of this bureaucracy were greatly extended by the Supreme Court’s decision in Griggs vs. Duke Power Supply (1971), a case involving the use of IQ and mechanical aptitude tests to assess employees for advancement.
As the author notes, “the record is clear that the Congress which enacted the 1964 act did not intend to interfere with employment tests,” but that didn’t matter. Blacks do not perform as well as whites on IQ and other tests, and the Court ruled that this “disparate impact” by race is discrimination even if there is no intent to discriminate.
The goal of the Ukraine War is now and always has been to kill as many young Ukrainians as possible while also driving away as many other Ukrainians as possible. This has been a great success: 500,000 Ukrainian young men killed and half the rest of the population driven away since the war began. Who is going to own Ukraine in future and who is going to live there when the war is over? The Ukrainians who have fled say they will never return. It is fair to wonder at this point (and before) if the war was: 1) a backup plan for Israel if they are overwhelmed and driven out of the Middle East in a regional war; or 2) that has always been the main plan. When/if Israel falls, they all move to Ukraine. ABN
(first posted this FEBRUARY 7, 2024, but seems just as true today, only situation worse)
Highly disturbing even if you already know the story. Makes me think of all the young people I know whose parents resolutely followed doctors’ orders and vaccinated their babies who then manifested long-term serious bad effects. Thomas describes a deeply entrenched parasitic subculture which even he did not fully understand while he was an active practitioner. ABN
Here’s what everyone needs to understand about Ukraine:
The United States has already moved on to Plan B. No, the Biden administration has not issued an official statement on the matter, but the shift has already begun. The Washington Brain-trust has abandoned any hope of winning the war outright (Plan A) and has, thus, adopted a different strategy altogether. (Plan B)
Plan B is a combination of two main elements:
A—A Strategy of Denial, which is ‘a defensive approach designed to stop an adversary’ from achieving its goals. In this case, the objective is to prolong the conflict for as long as possible to prevent Russian from achieving a clear victory. That is the top priority.
B—To continue to increase and intensify asymmetrical attacks on vital infrastructure and civilian areas in Russia proper in order to inflict as much damage on Russia as possible.
This, in essence, is Plan B. Any concern for the Ukrainian people or the future viability of the Ukrainian state, have not been factored in to Washington’s cynical calculation. What matters is preventing a Russian victory and inflicting as much pain on Russia as possible. Those are the primary objectives. In practical terms, that means that more Ukrainian soldiers will be slaughtered wholesale in order to continue using Ukraine as a launching pad for attacks on Russia.
This essay by Mike Whitney makes some good points but he misses the real goals of the West. They are: 1) destroy Ukraine. Empty it of its citizens by killing its military-aged men and forcing the rest to flee. 2) Then, destroy the Russian state, dismember it, and seize its assets. Russia is geographically huge with enormous resources, yet its population is a mere 140 million. The ultimate goal is take all of it. The Western cabal/ comitatus is manifestly either reckless or confident. My guess is they are confident because they possess a super-weapon, one stronger and more powerful than nukes or entire armies. It’s possible this is it. Maybe it’s not that but something else. War has always been the underlying reality of civilizations and these wars are our reality. ABN
Studies have found a pronounced decline in male effective population sizes worldwide around 3000–5000 years ago. This bottleneck was not observed for female effective population sizes, which continued to increase over time. Until now, this remarkable genetic pattern was interpreted as the result of an ancient structuring of human populations into patrilineal groups (gathering closely related males) violently competing with each other. In this scenario, violence is responsible for the repeated extinctions of patrilineal groups, leading to a significant reduction in male effective population size. Here, we propose an alternative hypothesis by modelling a segmentary patrilineal system based on anthropological literature. We show that variance in reproductive success between patrilineal groups, combined with lineal fission (i.e., the splitting of a group into two new groups of patrilineally related individuals), can lead to a substantial reduction in the male effective population size without resorting to the violence hypothesis. Thus, a peaceful explanation involving ancient changes in social structures, linked to global changes in subsistence systems, may be sufficient to explain the reported decline in Y-chromosome diversity.
Terrific discussion, well-worth viewing. Forbes talks fast but explains everything very well. I needed to rewind more than a few times to be sure I had not missed anything. ABN
Antisemitism used to mean “someone who doesn’t like Jews,” but nowadays it means “someone that Jews don’t like for some reason or another.” The deliberate trick here is to make you think there is something wrong not with the Jewish baby killers, liars, or scum who are doing bad things but with the person noticing and reacting to the bad things these miscreants are doing.
So, what are the bad things that most people notice about Jews? Before naming and defining the most important ones, let’s first find out what Jews themselves say about antisemitism. Is it a rational and logical reaction to Jewish behaviour? Or is it, as most Jews claim, an irrational hatred of a totally harmless people who have been the innocent victims of human jealousy, vindictiveness, and persecution since the beginning of time?
Theodore Herzl, the Jewish father of Zionism, believed that hostility towards Jews was a natural consequence of their behaviour:
This perfectly understandable reaction follows from the defects of the Jews… The Jews are a people distinct and separate from others, whose interests are different, and often in conflict with those of the peoples among whom they live.[1]
A fact shared by Chaim Weizmann, the first president of the State of Israel:
Whenever in a country the number of Jews reaches a certain level of saturation, that country reacts against them… Now, this reaction is not antisemitism in the ordinary or vulgar sense of the word, but a universal social and economic consequence of Jewish immigration; it is impossible to ignore it.[2]
“It seemed to me,” writes Bernard Lazare, the Jewish author of the book Antisemitism, its History and Causes,
that an opinion as universal as antisemitism, having flourished in all places and at all times, before the Christian era and after, in Alexandria, Rome, Antioch, Arabia, and Persia, in medieval and modern Europe, in a word, in all parts of the world where there have been and where there are Jews, it seemed to me that such an opinion could not be the result of a whim and a perpetual caprice, and that there must be deep and serious reasons for its blossoming and its permanence.[3]
Given the severity of my predictions, I’m often asked what steps I would take if I were vaccinated against Covid-19 (C-19). Well, here’s what I would do: I’d ensure I promptly acquire enough ivermectin to last for about three months. As soon as any heavily C-19 vaccinated country experiences a significant surge in cases of enhanced severe C-19 disease, I’d promptly begin taking ivermectin at a relatively high dose, i.e., 0.5-0.6 mg/kg, once daily. Additionally, I’d make sure to get myself re-vaccinated with a live attenuated measles vaccine (if combined with other live attenuated viruses like mumps and rubella, that would be acceptable too). Drawing from my past research on Natural Killer (NK) cell vaccines, I believe there’s a theoretical possibility that cell-based innate immune training gained from exposure to measles could offer C-19 vaccinees at least some first-line protection against coronaviruses (while C-19 vaccinees are unlikely to mount any meaningful immune response against live attenuated coronaviruses at this ‘chronic’ stage of the pandemic!). While innate immune imprinting can last for a while, ideally, I’d prefer to receive the measles vaccine closer to the onset of the anticipated hyperacute phase of the pandemic. Of course, one might consider self-isolation, but given the airborne transmission and high inherent infectiousness of the new coronavirus I expect to emerge soon, this may not be very effective. The prophylactic use of ivermectin combined with the measles vaccine is, of course, not a medical recommendation but merely a consideration that every C-19 vaccinated individual might want to ponder, particularly since both interventions have well-documented safety profiles. However, before using ivermectin, it’s essential to verify that it won’t have any adverse interactions with other medications one may be taking. On the other hand, vaccination against measles should be avoided in individuals who are ill, pregnant, or have a compromised innate immune system (note: ‘untrained’ does not imply weakened!).
I no longer believe there was a real pandemic because I accept the data which shows covid disease spikes were never natural but the result of government policies, fake PCR tests, fake hospital diagnoses, mandated hospital protocols, and possibly localized biowarfare attacks. That said, I do not believe Vanden Bossche is a mind-control agent consciously spreading lies to cause panic, as some claim. Thus, I have posted the above and if I were vaxxed, I would consider what he is saying. He is one of the few alternate covid scientists who has personally witnessed vax failures and the effects they had on herds of animals. ABN
American Buddhist Net 