WHERE Are Greta Thunberg And David Attenborough Now?

“Action must be powerful and wide-ranging.
After all, the climate crisis is not just about the environment.
It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and of political will.
Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fueled it.

We need to dismantle them all.”
– GretaThunberg™️

H/t @KathyConWom

FOR that matter, where are the cries of “Environmental Justice” from any of the usual suspects? Does caring for the environment only matter when it fits the mainstream media’s current political narrative? Their current agenda is most definitely to (unscientifically) promote the wearing of toxic, non-renewable face masks in order to maintain COVID-19 fear and anxiety amongst the community, perpetuating the seemingly endless COVID-19 “crisis”.

Efficacy and people’s livelihoods be damned.

via Daily Mail Australia :

  • Environmental researchers write about the issues disposable masks pose 
  • Currently there is no established way to decontaminate and recycle them
  • Many single-use coverings are being recklessly thrown away and into nature
  • Experts call for ways to improve technologies to allow for recycling of masks  

By JOE PINKSTONE FOR MAILONLINE 

PUBLISHED: 00:34 AEDT, 13 March 2021 | UPDATED: 00:34 AEDT, 13 March 2021

THREE million face masks are discarded every minute as a result of mass adoption during the coronavirus pandemic, and experts warn it could soon lead to environmental catastrophe. 

Face coverings are being worn by the majority of individuals around the world in order to curb the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus which causes Covid-19. 

However, they pose a greater risk to the environment than carrier bags because of their ubiquity and the fact there is no way to safely decontaminate and recycle them.

In an article published by the University of Southern Denmark, experts call the huge amount of face masks being worn and thrown away a ‘ticking time bomb’. 

They add that littering is causing masks to break down into dangerous microfibres and they may also be carrying harmful chemicals into the environment.

Environmental Toxicologist Elvis Genbo Xu from the University of Southern Denmark and Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering Zhiyong Jason Ren from Princeton University penned an article on the topic in the journal Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering.

And the conundrum of what to do with the recent deluge of masks truly is a new frontier for scientists, who have never before been faced with such a rapid explosion of a product for which there is no established responsible disposal method. 

‘With increasing reports on inappropriate disposal of masks, it is urgent to recognise this potential environmental threat and prevent it from becoming the next plastic problem,’ the researchers warn. 

This graphic shows the potential environmental impact of face masks and what they can do to nature if not properly disposed of.

Face masks are a ‘ticking plastic bomb’ for the environment | Daily Mail Online

••

FACE-MASK EFFICACY

How effective are dehumanising face masks against pandemics/viral transmission?

What “the science” says :

Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers: A Randomized Controlled Trial: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 0, No 0

About 4,860 participants completed the study. The researchers had hoped that masks would cut the infection rate by half among wearers. Instead, 42 people in the mask group, or 1.8 percent, got infected, compared with 53 in the unmasked group, or 2.1 percent. The difference was not statistically significant.

[…]

Dr. Mette Kalager, a researcher at Telemark Hospital in Norway and the Harvard School of Public Health, was persuaded. The study showed that “although there might be a symbolic effect,” she wrote in an email, “the effect of wearing a mask does not substantially reduce risk” for wearers.

via New Study on Masks Shows…That NO ONE Knows What They’re Talking About…NO ONE.| Town Hall

What actual observation says :

Judge for yourself …

Charts via the excellent and accurate @ianmSC


3 Reasons The Left Hates Scott Pruitt

“AND no, he doesn’t believe we should be creating useless regulations that eliminate jobs and make families pay more for energy just so Al Gore and most of Hollywood can feel good about themselves.”

Spot-on Genevieve.

PA Pundits - International

By Genevieve Wood ~

You know why they are going after Environmental Protection Agency secretary Scott Pruitt?

I can give you at least three reasons.

No. 1: He has led the Trump administration’s efforts to dismantle President Barack Obama’s expensive and ineffective climate legacy piece by piece.

From the Clean Power Plan, which was all about Obama’s climate agenda and which had nothing to do with creating clean air (we already have laws about that), to the Waters of the United States regulation, which could turn a puddle in your front yard into environmentally-protected swamp land—Pruitt has been rolling back many of the regulations put in place by Obama’s overzealous, power-grabbing, and arguably unconstitutional EPA.

No. 2: They also don’t like the fact that just this week Pruitt’s team at the EPA revised a mandate on fuel standards that will make new cars significantly cheaper—maybe as much as $7,000 cheaper.

View original post 135 more words


China’s Real Pollution Problem

“Forget about so called CO2 pollution. This is the real tragedy, and it has not been helped by Western governments’ policies which simply export jobs to places like China.”

Spot on Paul Homewood.

Toxic ‘Green’ solar panel and other e-waste ~ See no evil, hear no evil … whence made in regulation-free China.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

image

http://www.examiner.com/article/eighty-percent-of-chinese-water-is-too-toxic-to-drink

An interesting article by Thomas Richard in the Examiner:

image

Over 80 percent of China’s wells is heavily polluted, according to new statistics reported by Chinese Media and the NY Times this week, raising new concerns about the world’s most populated country. However, most Chinese cities get their water from deep wells and reservoirs, which weren’t part of the study. Villages and small towns, which dot the countryside, use shallower wells and are the basis of the new report.

Industrial and domestic development along the Yellow River at Liujiaxia Dam

Vmenkov, CC SA-4.0, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:6058-Liujiaxia-Dam.jpg

These shallow wells and rivers have become contaminated from industry and agriculture practices. And while the U.S. is benefiting from China’s lax pollution controls, the toxic byproducts from making iPhones, batteries for electric vehicles, and solar panels is creating an environmental nightmare. Polluted water is falling from China’s skies and infiltrating the watershed where many Chinese get their water.

Dabo Guan, a professor at…

View original post 581 more words