U.N.: Fewer People Would Be Better

                 According to Infowars.com, certain United Nations officials believe the human population should be reduced in order to effectively combat climate change. To whit, Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, or UNFCC (what happened to the third ‘C’?), had a conversation in 2013 with Climate One founder Greg Dalton regarding fertility rates in  various populations.

                Referring to the fact that some scientists project that the Earth’s population will rise to 9 billion by 2050, the question was asked, “is that figure locked in?”

                “We can definitely change those numbers,” Figueres said. Oh? Maybe that’s why the U.N. has essentially stood by and watched genocides unfold in various areas such as the Sudan. “We should do everything possible…” (to change those numbers) she stated. Maybe the UNFCC could sponsor a few abortion clinics.  Wasn’t it Genesis 9:7 that stated, “be fruitful and increase in number (go forth and multiply)…but make sure you don’t go overboard, I mean, enough is enough, right?”

                How comfortable would you be if your safety and/or health depended on a relief or humanitarian organization that honestly believed the best thing for the planet would be for there to be far fewer people alive?

                I’m guessing she doesn’t want far fewer United Nations officials, though. Odd. 

                Who gets to pick who goes away and who doesn't get to arrive on the scene?

                Figueres has previously described the UNFCC’s goal as “a complete transformation of the economic structure of the world.” Is that all? Why am I worried? She has also stated that a Chinese style communist government is better suited than the U.S.’s Constitutional system to fight global warming.

                Really? China is the world’s biggest polluter of the oceans, skies and land. Many people in China’s vast cities wear a mask on a daily basis to protect their lungs from the dense smog. The U.S. just embarked on a massive- and massively expensive- campaign to reduce greenhouse gas emissions dramatically in the next couple of decades, in part to coax the rest of the world to follow suit.

                It’s not about global warming or climate change.  Those are just convenient tools with which to dope up the masses and dupe them into relinquishing their freedoms. It’s about control. Mixed in with her blatantly idiotic statements is one that matters. She really does want, “a complete transformation of the economic structure of the world.”

                And we’re worried about climate change?