SUNDAY 2, [9], 25
Verses for today:
Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.
Romans 12:21 KJV
For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
Titus 2:11-12 KJV
Death and life are in the power of the tongue: And they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof.
Proverbs 18:21 KJV
Be ye strong therefore, and let not your hands be weak: for your work shall be rewarded.
2 Chronicles 15:7 KJV
Canada's "USAID"?
Global Affairs Canada has routinely come under-fire by critics for giving millions of taxpayer dollars to seemingly ‘Woke Causes’ around the globe, including 'Gender-Inclusive Demining for Sustainable Futures in Ukraine.'
Meanwhile, in the United States, USAID has come under unprecedented scrutiny for spending U.S. taxpayer dollars on social projects that many conservatives argue are out of touch with American values—and, in some cases, with the rest of the world.
President Donald Trump has already moved to freeze congressionally approved USAID funding, while Elon Musk, head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has drawn attention to the issue in multiple tweets.
Most recently, Trump criticized USAID for allegedly funding liberal media coverage on U.S. politics. In a tweet, he claimed that Politico alone received $8 million in taxpayer-funded payments.
Just a day earlier, on February 5, Global Affairs Canada was exposed for celebrating its self-described record of “feminist foreign policy” in an article by Jen Hodgson for the Western Standard.
However, the source that documented Global Affairs Canada’s questionable spending—linked in the article—has since been wiped. With accountability seemingly abandoned, Canadians are left wondering where millions of their tax dollars have gone—and for what woke cause.
SHARE-this Story...
The COUNTER Signal
Patrick Bestall
No more Drag Shows at Kennedy Center:
Does President Donald J. Trump ever sleep? It’s refreshing since we had a non-president take naps 24/7 and let his staff push policy, legal or not. The decay and corruption of Joe Biden are being swept away. Trump is working so fast that he seems to have time to make sweeping changes to DC’s cultural scene. Besides nixing Joe Biden’s security clearance yesterday, he installed himself as chairman of the Kennedy Center Board of Directors (via Fox News):
President Donald Trump announced on Friday he decided to immediately fire multiple Kennedy Center board members, including the chairman, and fill that role himself.
Trump claimed he and current chair David Rubenstein "do not share [the same] Vision for a Golden Age in Arts and Culture," according to the announcement on Truth Social.
He said a new board would be announced soon, adding the new chairman, naming himself, is "amazing."
[…]
Following Trump's announcement, the Kennedy Center's website limited users, citing "high traffic."
[…]
“It is unclear which Board of Trustees members have been canned, as of Friday night”.
“He reportedly purged the board and is now quasi-generalissimo of the center. His first order was to shut down the woke nonsense that the venue had produced in the past”:
At my direction, we are going to make the Kennedy Center in Washington D.C., GREAT AGAIN. I have decided to immediately terminate multiple individuals from the Board of Trustees, including the Chairman, who do not share our Vision for a Golden Age in Arts and Culture.
We will soon announce a new Board, with an amazing Chairman, DONALD J. TRUMP! Just last year, the Kennedy Center featured Drag Shows specifically targeting our youth — THIS WILL STOP. The Kennedy Center is an American Jewel, and must reflect the brightest STARS on its stage from all across our Nation. For the Kennedy Center, THE BEST IS YET TO COME!
Oleg Kodolov
Mitochondrial Eve and biblical Eve are looking good: criticism of young age is premature
By Carl Wieland
The critic fails to address the issues, using bluff and bluster. The data are consistent with there being one mother of all humans and within the Bible’s time frame.
Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) indicates that all women have descended from a single woman, called mitochondrial Eve.1 This does not prove that she was the only woman alive at the time, but is consistent with it. High mutation rates indicate that this ancestor lived at about the time of the biblical Eve as well.
A critic has tried to discredit this creationist case. However, he has nothing more than special pleading to explain away data that contradict his materialist paradigm. And he misrepresents the logic of the case—creationists have always used this as evidence consistent with the Bible, while he misrepresents them as using it as proof.
Creationists have enthusiastically welcomed the ‘mitochondrial Eve’ hypothesis (i.e. that all modern humans can be traced back to one woman) because it clearly supports biblical history and contradicts evolutionary scenarios. A few years ago I reviewed the status of mitochondrial Eve research, showing that the identification of mitochondrial Eve with biblical Eve was becoming stronger as more evidence on measured mutation rates accumulated.2
I explained how the mitochondrial Eve findings were in line with biblically based expectations. While not proving the biblical Eve, they were consistent with her reality, and were not predicted by evolutionary theory. However, the dates assigned to mitochondrial Eve had been said by evolutionists to rule out the biblical Eve.
But these dates were based upon ‘molecular clock’ assumptions, which were calibrated by evolutionary beliefs about when certain evolutionary events occurred, supposedly millions of years ago. When these assumed rates were checked out against the real world, preliminary results indicated that the mitochondrial ‘molecular clock’ was ticking at a much faster rate than evolutionists believed possible.3 That is, it directly ‘challenges’ the evolutionary long-age claim. If correct, it means that mitochondrial Eve lived 6,000 to 6,500 years ago, right in the ballpark for the true ‘mother of all living’ (Genesis 3:20).
In addition, I explained that these real-time findings also seriously weaken the case from mitochondrial DNA, which argues (erroneously) that Neandertals are not true humans.4
Evolutionary counterattack
Not surprisingly, the evolutionary community didn’t allow this empirical support for the biblical record to stand uncontested. A recent article by one Alec MacAndrew published on the web has responded to what he calls ‘Challenges to the view of a 175,000 year date for matrilineal MRCA’. Interestingly, he referred to two challenges in his attempt to refute the possibility that mitochondrial Eve is indeed biblical Eve.5
His first ‘point’ is irrelevant
In many ways, MacAndrew’s critique of my article appears to have been written more for its ‘effect’ on the average reader, trying to make creationists appear ill-informed or worse.
For one thing, by the end of the snow-storm (snow job?) of ostensibly technical information, MacAndrew says:
‘They do not understand or they deliberately misrepresent the concept of the matrilineal Most Recent Common Ancestor [MRCA] which does not point to the only female human ancestor.’
So the average reader will likely apply that to my article, which MacAndrew’s article purports to critique. Perhaps MacAndrew hopes that they would have forgotten that my article explained this very carefully. I said:
‘Evolutionists do not claim, nor can it be fairly stated, that this evidence proves that there was only one woman alive at any point in the past.’2
It is easy to verify that I spent several paragraphs explaining this further. So MacAndrew himself has either not understood my article very well or has deliberately misrepresented it. This impinges on his credibility right from the start.
Another polemical tool (propagandistic) is the way MacAndrew says:
‘… the estimate of 150,000 to 200,000 years for matrilineal MRCA was called into question not by one challenge (as Carl Wieland suggests) but by two challenges.’
Implication: Because Carl Wieland hasn’t discussed both ‘challenges’, he doesn’t know what he is talking about. This argument is absurd on the face of it—a second challenge makes life even harder for the evolutionist, but there is not always a need to strengthen a strong argument even further. One is not obliged to play all one’s aces if one will do! But a careful reader would see that the first of his two challenges (in fact it is naïve to talk of just two, anyway—where should we stop?) is totally irrelevant to the single argument I presented in my paper, which, in a nutshell, is as follows:
Christians who believe in the biblical chronology do not need to be intimidated by alleged ‘absolute dates’ given to mitochondrial Eve because the dates are based on calibrations given by evolutionary assumptions. In fact, some measured mutation rates have given dates, using similar assumptions, consistent with the biblical chronology.
A careful reader would see that the first of MacAndrew’s two challenges is all about the cross-linking, which, if confirmed, would lengthen the dates anyway, so it has nothing to do with the argument in my paper. MacAndrew writes:
‘Note that if recombination does occur, the matrilineal MRCA of humans would be older than the current estimate of 150,000 to 200,000 years’ [emphasis in original].
And in any case, as MacAndrew admits, it is at present unconfirmed:
‘At the moment this question has not been settled. The bulk of the opinion is that recombination does not occur, but there has also been some further evidence for it.’
So why even mention it? Presumably, it serves his apparent purpose of adding to the length and ‘scientific impact’ of his paper, despite its being irrelevant.
His response point is special pleading
The second ‘challenge’ (in fact there was, as he indicates, more than one set of results leading to the same sort of challenging conclusion, if one wants to be as nitpicky as he was in his critique) is the one to which my article referred. MacAndrew puts it this way:
‘There have been two papers that have measured unexpectedly high short term mutational rates in the control region of the mitochondrial DNA. The control region is a part of the mitochondrial DNA that does not code for proteins. The normally accepted rate is one mutation every 300 to 600 generations (6,000 to 12,000 years) and this is calibrated, as Wieland correctly says, by counting mutations in great ape and human mitochondria and regressing back to the age of their divergence as determined by fossils dated by radiometric dating.’
It is very significant that MacAndrew admits, both explicitly and implicitly, that the ‘normally accepted’ mutation rate is calibrated by evolutionary assumptions.
This is especially apparent by his misleading claim about ‘counting mutations’. They are counting no such thing, since they haven’t, in this case, seen DNA mutate (change). Rather, the differences are merely assumed to be mutations, on the basis of their belief that humans and apes have in fact descended from a common ancestor. This reminds me of the recent faux pas by the aggressively antitheistic Richard Dawkins:
‘Evolution has been observed. It’s just that it hasn’t been observed while it’s happening.’6
Hence, any conclusions on the date of mitochondrial Eve based on such long-age evolutionary assumptions, regardless of any other ‘challenge’ to the long-age scenario from observations, are at best only circular.
Misunderstanding the logic
MacAndrew writes:
‘No-one in the science community thought that the Parsons et al. study supported a matrilineal MRCA of 6,500 years.’
This is an obvious straw man, presumably erected for polemical effect. Not only did I not imply it, but no-one in their right mind would expect an evolution-dominated science establishment to accept a date for the MRCA of 6,500 years, no matter what the data.
Instead, they would be motivated to search diligently for alternative hypotheses and submodels to explain the data which is outside the paradigm. They can always propose/massage auxiliary hypotheses to protect the core one (in the evolutionists’ case, naturalism), as philosopher of science Imre Lakatos showed.7 This is normal—creationists do the same in similar circumstances, but let’s be straight about what actually happens in the real world.
There is no reason at all why mitochondrial Eve could not be the biblical Eve.
The sorts of explanations MacAndrew offers for the results that contradict his paradigm at face value are of course possible, but are at best tentative. And he could, in any case, only strongly criticize my article based on these explanations if I was taking an evidentialist approach—i.e. saying that it is the mtDNA data which prove that Eve lived at that time. But in fact I take an openly presuppositional approach—my paradigmatic axioms are ‘on the table’ when I say:
‘Since, for example, the creationist’s (true) Eve lived only a few thousand years ago, the mutational substitutions in mtDNA must have happened at a much faster rate than assumed by evolutionists to date.’2
In my article I then present evidence which is consistent with that presupposition. MacAndrew’s ‘explanations’ are essentially of a defensive nature, to try to show why the data presented in the several papers which found high mutational rates does not, at face value, support his axioms.
Explaining away contrary evidence
One of MacAndrew’s possible explanations is ‘Statistical variation in small samples’. But he admits that pooling the data still gives a date which is five times younger than that based on evolutionary assumptions. He talks of needing to consider whether mtDNA ‘does in fact mutate at a fixed rate’. Agreed.
But that would simultaneously render vulnerable any argument for long ages based on mitochondrial substitutions, and so would tend to neutralize opposition to the possibility of mitochondrial Eve being the biblical Eve. The same criterion of assessment needs to be applied to the rest of his list of ‘possible explanations’, which are subsequently delivered as more or less the assured results of ‘subsequent research’.
Also, it is no surprise to hear him say that RFLP8 analysis is ‘not appropriate’ compared to ‘whole genome sequencing’. If RFLP had not delivered results that were antiparadigm, would it have been regarded as inappropriate? The Ingman et al. results fit the paradigm, so they are ‘by definition’ appropriate.
Bottom line:
I do not find in his paper any independent yardstick by which one could say that they were more appropriate, apart from consistency with the paradigmatically derived longer dates.9
Note also my comments in the original paper emphasizing the need to be aware of special pleading to ‘explain away’ the results I highlighted. Special pleading does not mean that one is necessarily wrong, of course, but it helps open a reader’s philosophical eyes to be aware of it. And I do not think that the ‘burden of proof’ I referred to has in fact been adequately met in the MacAndrew article, despite his bold attempt to paper over the deficiencies with a suitably wordy ‘barrage’.
Conclusion
In short, I think MacAndrew is very premature and overconfident when he says that ‘subsequent research has largely resolved’ the challenge presented to long-age dates for ‘mitochondrial Eve’. Note also that prior to the 6.5-ka challenge, creationist literature was still suggesting that mitochondrial Eve could well be the biblical Eve. Creationists were not bluffed or intimidated by the apparent ‘certainty’ of the long dates because of the tenuous foundation upon which they were erected. The 6.5–ka challenge is really a way of saying ‘See? How can you deny the Word of God based upon something which could be overturned so easily by a set of observations?’
But we would recognize all along (and have often stated) that no calculated date (even one that supports a biblical conclusion) is free of non-provable assumptions and hence cannot be used to ‘prove’ the Bible. All that MacAndrew has really done is highlighted this fact, that there are assumptions involved in the 6.5–ka calculations.
If I were an objective outside observer (if there can ever be such a thing), I would think it reasonable to conclude that it is futile to attach much definitive significance to any of the ‘dates’ derived from such calculations, because of the obvious problems and uncertainties. Thus, there is no reason at all why mitochondrial Eve could not be the biblical Eve, which was my article’s main message.
Addendum: Some related papers published subsequently
Carter, R., Taking a crack at the Neandertal mitochondrial genome; 16 September 2008. A more detailed version of this paper appeared in the Journal of Creation: The Neandertal mitochondrial genome does not support evolution. The molecular clock concept and its problems were also discussed in relation to the Out of Africa theory of human origins: The Neutral Model of evolution and recent African origins.
References and Notes
1. Editor’s note: Though this sentence is technically true, it was a slip and should read ‘all people’, not just ‘women’. However, since this is a web archive of our Journal, and the slip was in the printed original, this footnote has been inserted instead of modifying.
2. Wieland, C., A shrinking date for Eve, Journal of Creation 12 (1):1–3, 1998.
3. Loewe, L. and Scherer, S., Mitochondrial Eve: the plot thickens, Trends in Ecology and Evolution 12 (11):422–423, 1997.
4. Lubenow, M.L., Recovery of Neandertal mtDNA: an evaluation, Journal of Creation 12 (1):87–97, 1998.
5. MacAndrew, A., Misconceptions around mitochondrial Eve: a critique of Carl Wieland’ AiG article on mitochondrial Eve, , 9 February 2005.
6. ’Battle over evolution’, Bill Moyers interviews Richard Dawkins on Now, 3 December 2004, PBS network; .
7. Wieland, C., If you are truly scientists [response to critic], 7 February 2003.
8. Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism
9. That does not, of course, preclude the possibility that there may be one, but his paper did not provide it.
Related Articles
Further Reading
Related Media
Creation Ministries
Donna Warren
Attorney General Alan Wilson leads coalition of AGs investigating Dr. Anthony Fauci’s COVID-19 response:
(COLUMBIA, S.C.) – South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson is leading a coalition of state attorneys general in an investigation into Dr. Anthony Fauci’s role in the COVID-19 pandemic response, demanding accountability for alleged mismanagement, misleading statements, and suppression of scientific debate. In a letter to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, the attorneys general commend ongoing Congressional efforts to uncover misconduct and request state-level cooperation in pursuing any violations of state laws.
“President Biden’s blanket pardon of Dr. Fauci is a shameful attempt to prevent accountability,” said Attorney General Wilson. “If any of these findings indicate violations of state laws, we are fully prepared to take appropriate action to ensure justice is served.”
The letter follows the release of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic’s final report, which details widespread failures and potential misconduct by high-ranking government officials, including Dr. Fauci. The report highlights misleading public statements regarding COVID-19’s origins, mismanagement of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, and efforts to suppress scientific discussions about vaccine risks.
Key Findings from the Congressional Report:
· Origins of COVID-19 – Evidence suggests Dr. Fauci worked to discredit the “lab leak” theory despite mounting evidence supporting it.
· Misleading Congress on NIH Funding – Dr. Fauci allegedly provided false testimony regarding NIH-funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
· NIH Oversight Failures – The NIH reportedly mismanaged taxpayer funds by failing to properly oversee grants to EcoHealth Alliance, which funneled funding to the Wuhan lab.
· Suppression of Scientific Dissent – Prominent scientists who raised concerns about vaccine risks were allegedly silenced, limiting public awareness of potential side effects.
Despite these findings, former President Joe Biden issued a sweeping pardon for Dr. Fauci, shielding him from federal prosecution for any offenses committed during his tenure. However, the attorneys general assert that this federal pardon does not prevent state-level legal action.
The attorneys general have requested that Congress provide them with any relevant findings that could lead to state investigations and potential prosecutions. They reaffirm their commitment to upholding public trust, ensuring transparency, and preventing similar failures in future public health crises.
Signatories to the Letter Include:
· Alan Wilson, Attorney General of South Carolina
· Jonathan Skrmetti, Attorney General of Tennessee
· John Guard, Acting Attorney General of Florida
· Liz Murrill, Attorney General of Louisiana
· Ken Paxton, Attorney General of Texas
· Steve Marshall, Attorney General of Alabama
· Raúl Labrador, Attorney General of Idaho
· Drew Wrigley, Attorney General of North Dakota
· Derek E. Brown, Attorney General of Utah
· Todd Rokita, Attorney General of Indiana
· Marty Jackley, Attorney General of South Dakota
· Tim Griffin, Attorney General of Arkansas
· Austin Knudson, Attorney General of Montana
· Andrew Bailey, Attorney General of Missouri
· Kris Kobach, Attorney General of Kansas
· John B. McCuskey, Attorney General of West Virginia
· Mike Hilgers, Attorney General of Nebraska
The attorneys general urge Congressional leaders to continue their investigative efforts and ensure that all responsible parties are held accountable at both federal and state levels.
See the letter attached here: https://www.scag.gov/media/1jeb3sqw/letter-to-congress-covid-19-response-feb-5-2025.pdf
Donna Warren
Dr. Fauci
South Carolina
ATTORNEY GENERAL
The Carbon Fiasco
Now Everyone Is Jumping on the Bandwagon to Remove One of the Carbon Taxes! But What About the Other One?
Well how about that! The Liberals are just finally understanding that the carbon tax costs Canadians money and hurts our economy! It took them eight years to figure this out, but better late than never I suppose. But do you really want a country run by a party that takes that long to put two and two together? The People’s Party of Canada (PPC) has been against this carbon scam since its inception in 2018. Frankly, it’s not rocket science!
Liberal leader hopeful Mark Carney has said he will drop the tax. But … he will institute a plan that will have a “carbon border adjustment mechanism,” which is just another way of saying tariffs. This will be applied on imports into Canada if the products’ country of origin don’t meet Canada’s environmental standards. Carney doesn’t want to say the word ‘tariffs’ as he knows it will worry Canadians and lose him votes, for Canadians are becoming acutely aware of what the U.S. will do in return, and most Canadians understand that the U.S. carries a much bigger stick.
Denying reality never works out well.
Let’s think about that for a second. The United States, by far our biggest trading partner, just pulled out of the Paris Accords. They are no longer aiming for carbon reduction. Instead they’re going to “drill baby drill.” The United States aims to make energy extremely cheap for its businesses and citizens. Although it believes in climate change, it doesn’t believe in climate catastrophe. How do you think Trump will react to this plan of Carney’s? Do you think he will take it lying down?
Our next largest trading partner is China. In 2022 it was building about two coal plants per week, according to a report by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) and Global Energy Monitor (GEM). In 2023 the trend continued with China accounting for 95% of the world's new coal power construction that year, according to a Carbon Brief report. So you can infer from this just what the Chinese think about carbon reduction targets. Again, ask yourself what China will do in response if we tariff their goods?
Tariffs make products more expensive for you and me.
So Carney’s idea of a ‘carbon border adjustment mechanism’ (cough … tariffs) to force other countries to have environmental standards, like the Liberals’ standards, will just add financial hardship to Canadians. Do you think these countries will comply? Or will they instead laugh in our face and match our tariffs with their own? Or worse, exceed them? The U.S. economy is about 13 times larger than Canada’s. How do you think that’s going to work out? And China, our second largest trading partner? It’s about 8 times larger. It’s extremely easy to connect these dots!
Carney also wants to apply ‘incentives’ to Canadian companies that are heavy commercial carbon polluters, such as: oil and gas companies, heavy industry such as steel, cement, aluminum, as well as the chemical industry and energy-intensive trade-exposed sectors. Carney acknowledges this will raise the prices of these products, but he thinks the consumer won’t pay that increase because, how did he say it in the CTV interview on Feb 1, 2025?1 ‘The big products that these companies are consuming are not by and large what Canadians are consuming. A steel company … how much steel are you using these days Todd?’
I’m so flabbergasted at this fallacious claim and lack of reasoning ability, I almost don’t know where to start! Let’s begin at the end of the clip, where Carney asks the interviewer how much steel he himself buys. How about a lot! Steel is used in the construction of houses - which we need for the huge immigration numbers the Liberals, Conservatives, and NDP want to continue bringing into Canada - not the PPC!
It’s used in the making of fridges, freezers, ovens, dishwashers, washing machines, dryers, bedframes, furnaces, air conditioners, stairs and railings, support beams, cabinets, storage racks, shelves - to mention a few. What about cars? Sheds? Laptops? Gardening tools? Cutlery? Pots and pans? Lamps/lights? Power tools? Good grief, there are millions of products!
Some have more than others.
And that’s just steel! What about aluminum? Cement? Other heavy metals? Good grief, what about energy, which is used to produce EVERYTHING and heat and illuminate our homes!!!
And Carney thinks that when the Liberals put an ‘incentive’ on these companies that requires environment compliance, that these costs won’t be passed down to the final consumer? That these extra costs will be absorbed by the primary manufacturer and the secondary manufacturers and won’t result in raised prices? Is he dreaming? What world is he living in? Has he seen what is happening to economies around the world that have adopted these policies? Like Germany? U.K.?
Now, we can’t just blame Carney for a lack of vision. The NDP’s Jagmeet Singh has brought forth a similar plan that he thinks won’t hurt the consumer, one that won’t be passed down to the working people. It’s a slightly different path but leads to the same destination: higher prices for Canadians and a stagnating economy. What businesses would want to invest in Canada with all this regulation? Without business investment, we have fewer job opportunities, more unemployment, crime, homelessness, and people needing social assistance.
The Conservatives have been saying for a while that the carbon tax is harmful to Canadians and have been against it since it was proposed. That’s good. But they only go half the distance. If you have two holes in your boat, do you only repair one? It looks like the Conservatives are trying to play both sides, to have their cake and eat it too.
There is a second carbon tax, a hidden tax, called the Cap-and-Trade Systems, to which the Conservatives are turning a blind eye. It sets a certain amount of carbon that a manufacturer is allowed to emit. If it goes over that allowance, it pays a tax. This tax is passed onto the consumer of course - hence, a hidden tax.
The Conservatives don’t mention getting rid of this program. Why not? If you don’t speak out against it, you support it. So why do the Conservatives support this hidden tax? How many bureaucrats are we paying to run it?
Why does the carbon tax exist? To reduce emissions. Why are we trying to reduce emissions? Because we signed the Paris Accords, which has emission reduction targets, plus a requirement that developed countries send developing countries money to help meet their reduction targets.
By the end of 2024, Canada sent about $9.1 billion of taxpayer money to other countries.2 It’s set to reach $15.9 billion in 2031.3
Who voted to be part of the Paris Accords?
Liberals, NDP, Bloc, Green, and … the Conservatives!
All five of these parties say they will cut the carbon tax, but none of them discuss why it was implemented in the first place, and all of them have an alternate plan to meet the Paris Accord commitments - all of which will cost Canadians billions!
Which federal party has stated it will withdraw from the Paris Accords and revoke the cap-and-trade system?
The People’s Party of Canada! And only the People’s Party of Canada.
The PPC believes the climate is changing, and that it always changed and will always continue to change. We do not believe carbon is a pollutant. In fact, with increases in carbon these past decades, we have seen an increase in the greening of the earth - and not in already green areas, but semi-arid and arid areas.
Deserts are shrinking!4 This leads to more crops, which leads to lower prices, etc. Would you rather have it browning? Becoming colder? Shorter growing seasons? Less crop yields? More expensive food?
The temperature isn’t catastrophically rising.5 Sea levels aren’t catastrophically rising.6 Floods aren’t more frequent or more dangerous.7 The predictions of the ice caps being gone … they’re still here.8 9 We aren’t dying more from storms of greater intensity.10 Polar bears are not going extinct - quite the opposite in fact.11 Wildfires are decreasing, not increasing.1213
The number of hurricanes is not increasing in frequency or intensity.14 The coral reefs are doing better than ever, and it’s recognized that warmer temperatures would make them thrive even more.15 Economic damage from drought is at a record low.16 And finally, there isn’t a 97% consensus among scientists that human activity is causing the current global warming. That consensus is 0.3%.17
When will you stop letting the climate-fear porn be the reason to allow governments to extract taxes from you? Why are you letting the NDP, the Liberals, the Bloc, the Greens, and the Conservatives make you poorer? Consider all these lies you’ve been fed, been taught in school, been pushed by the government-paid-for legacy media. Do you really want to have less to give to your children? Can you afford not to act?
To learn more about the PPC’s Global Warming and Environment policy, click here. To learn more about other PPC policies, click here. To become a member, click here.
My name is Dave Annis and I’m the PPC candidate for the London Centre riding. Please note that if you become a paid subscriber (a one-off, monthly, or yearly), you will NOT get a tax receipt. If you wish to donate to my political campaign (you don’t need to live in my riding) and want a tax receipt (must be $20 or greater), you can do it three ways:
· Cheque: contact me at londoncentreppc@gmail.com to get an address and to whom to write out the cheque
· e-Transfer: ppcthamesra@gmail.com, and include your name, address, and contact email
· By giving cash at in-person events - the next one is Feb 15 at the London Central Library, 1:30-3:00 pm.
Click here for tax credit information.
Follow me on:
· Substack - see the button above!
· x/Twitter: @LondonNC_PPC
· Instagram: londoncentreppc
· Threads: londoncentreppc
· TikTok: londoncentreppc
Jan 23 •
Aug 1, 2024 •
Jan 29 •
RUMOURS Circulating out there...:
I may not agree with everything from the content producers I share.
Apply critical thinking and use discernment to
come to your own conclusions regarding the content !
You need to MAKE-UP Your own MIND!
What we think that we now know...
God Has A Plan For Your Life.
If You Pray To Find Out What That Plan is And Then Follow The Devine Inspiration, You Will Be Returning and Reporting Back to Him with Honor.
Possible Timing:
· In Aug. 2020 Trump rolled US Taxpayer dollars that had been going to the Federal Reserve since 1918, into the new US Treasury near Reno Nevada. The Federal Reserve – a privately owned family bank of the R*********s – had control of US Taxpayer dollars and was charging the US Government interest to use it.
· On Wed. 15 Jan 2025 Trump signed the classified “Gold Directive,” the C***l’s hidden vaults having been seized. Their gold, stolen for centuries, was now being returned to The People through the QFS.
· On Wed. 29 Jan. 2025 an Open Letter was published addressed to President Donald Trump and the US Congress asking them to recognize the Sovereign Nation of the Kingdom of Hawaii. There was 170,000 metric tons of Gold sitting in the Bank of Hawaii that cannot be used by any government entity until the Kingdom Nation is returned properly to The People. The request was accompanied by a plea to help the over 3,000 v*****s of the 2023 Kula and Lahaina Maui Hawaii Fires who remain homeless, many living on beaches since 2023. (Signed) Sir Don Kauli’a, Sovereign Regent, Kingdom of the Hawaiian Islands
· Month of Feb: The Plan Never Changed. It was Always February. The Chest Will Open Very Soon!” …John F. Kennedy Jr. on Telegram
· Mon. 3 Feb. 2025 the Quantum Financial System Activated Worldwide. Over $100 Trillion held in the Five Star Trust was authorized to be released to the new US Treasury (and back to The People). The monies came from the World’s largest d**g and t*********g money laundering ring. …Carolyn Bessette Kennedy on Telegram
· Sun. 9 Feb. 2025 the QFS becomes fully operational with intense military operations. …JFK Jr. on Telegram
· In Aug. 2025 the U.S. Treasury will send out a computer algorithm to each bank to zero debt balances in a Debt Jubilee. The banks will then zero out all mortgage debt, credit card debt, car debt, etc. On Wednesday, July 10, 2024 the Debt Jubilee was legalized by Trump. Citizens do not have to contact their debtor to ask for the Debt Jubilee. Watch for your new zero balance statement coming out sometime in August. …JFK Awakening on Telegram
Global Currency Reset
· Month of Feb: “The Plan Never Changed. It was Always February. The Chest Will Open Very Soon!” …John F. Kennedy Jr. on Telegram
· On Mon. 3 Feb. 2025 the Quantum Financial System was activated Worldwide. Over $100 Trillion held in the Five Star Trust was authorized to be released to the new US Treasury (and back to The People). The monies came from the World’s largest d**g and t*********g money laundering ring. …Carolyn Bessette Kennedy on Telegram
· Fri. 7 Feb. 2025 CRUCIAL ANNOUNCEMENT The Tier 4 B Internet Group is officially active. This is the beginning of a new era! The revolutionary ideas and the concept of NESARA are taking the final form of e*******n and implementation. It is our great honor to announce the launch of the Tier 4 B Internet Group. With the activation of the Quantum Financial System QFS the need of the specialized platform, administration and services were much needed. The utilization and the unification under the Tier 4B is making all of the systems flawless. If you want to secure your future and be among the smartest individuals you should most definitely join this group and stay informed about the updates. Let’s make our lives worthy and protect our financial freedom together. https://t.me/+2ll2W_nTJAUzMzJh …Commander in Chief on Telegram
· Sun. 9 Feb. QFS set to become fully operational with intense military operations.
· Mon. 10 Feb. 2025 should be a go for Tier4b (Us, the Internet Group) according to a high up source.
Global Financial Crisis:Sat. 8 Feb. 2025 The QFS Reclaims Stolen Wealth! …Final Warning on Telegram
· The Quantum Financial System (QFS) just delivered a MASSIVE BLOW to the C***l! Trillions in stolen silver, hidden in underground bunkers for decades, are being seized by military forces and integrated into the QFS. This is a turning point—HUMANITY’S LIBERATION from financial s*****y is happening NOW!
· As of February 2025, over $2 TRILLION in silver has been reclaimed! And this is just the beginning! Trillions in Silver Unearthed! Military forces have uncovered secret silver reserves hidden by the elites:
· Nevada – A decommissioned Cold War bunker held 3,000 metric tons of silver bars!
· Mexico & Guatemala – Stolen from local mines, 4,000 metric tons recovered!
· New York – Beneath a major bank, a vault holding 7,500 metric tons of unregistered silver was seized!
· Silver: The Heart of the QFS Reset: The QFS is about to explode silver’s true value—expect prices to SKYROCKET to $1,500/oz or MORE! This isn’t just currency—it’s the backbone of the quantum economy, powering Starlink, military-grade encryption, and advanced tech!
· Silver-Backed Certificates & Debt Relief Incoming! In January 2025, silver-backed certificates launched within the QFS! Redemption Centers are preparing for a MASSIVE ROLLOUT—citizens will soon be able to exchange fiat for silver-backed wealth! Unlike worthless paper money, each certificate is tied to real silver, guaranteeing security and financial FREEDOM!
· The C***l’s Sabotage EXPOSED! Mysterious refinery fire in Utah—a desperate attempt to destroy evidence! Cyberattacks on Redemption Centers—neutralized by Starlink’s quantum AI! F**e news calling it a “conspiracy theory”—a last-ditch effort to keep YOU blind!
· Starlink’s Operation SkyNet: Crushing the C***l! Military forces just intercepted a smuggling ship in the Pacific loaded with 800 metric tons of stolen silver. THE C***L IS LOSING CONTROL!
· March 2025: Silver Revaluation & NESARA/GESARA Looming! Financial insiders say the public announcement is imminent—the elites are TERRIFIED because their paper money SCAM IS COLLAPSING!
(Note: Only financial related content was included in this report. You can view and download the full report on Operation Disclosure Official. ~ Dinar Chronicles)
Source: Operation Disclosure Official
______________________________________________________If you wish to contact the author of a post, you can send us an email at voyagesoflight@gmail.com and we’ll forward your request to the author. If you have any questions about a post or the website, you may also forward your questions and concerns to the same email address.______________________________________________________
All articles, videos, and images posted on Dinar Chronicles were submitted by readers and/or handpicked by the site itself for informational and/or entertainment purposes.
Dinar Chronicles is not a registered investment adviser, broker dealer, banker or currency dealer and as such, no information on the website should be construed as investment advice. We do not support, represent or guarantee the completeness, truthfulness, accuracy, or reliability of any content or communications posted on this site. Information posted on this site may or may not be fictitious. We do not intend to and are not providing financial, legal, tax, political or any other advice to readers of this website.
THE END
תגובות