Topic: Bill Gates, Covid, Climate (Read 295 times)

warning "cars can kill..."

idiots: i got hit by a car.. i wont sue the driver instead ill sue the guy that warned me that i can get hit.


when idiots get told a warning.. ignore it. and when it then happens deny the cause, deny the event, deny the damage.. and just want to argue with the messenger.... it makes me think idiots are the next problem that need to be handled

There have been more than a few attempts to inform us masses for at least 15 years (*that I'm directly aware of), "we" weren't interested.

The transmissibility/virulence trade-off does intuitively make a lot of sense... the more deadly a thing is, the less likely an infected person is to pass it on to others. If someone is incapacitated with Ebola, they're very obviously sick and precautions are taken around them. Or they die and the virus dies with them. Compare with someone with mild Covid coughing and sneezing it out around the community.

It seems reasonable, but from the latest meta-analysis I've found, I don't think the evidence is yet conclusive. More study (or study of studies) needed!

What if his TED TALK in 2015, is an information he acquired (Backdoor) that he can't discussed in the mass, so he just put it as a warning instead. We can see it as an information only the powerful persons in the world handle, and as he is part of the worlds richest persons.

We can also conspired it as they have some round table consisting of powerful peoples, following a treaty of disclosing information and intentions, good or bad.

Ebola is not transmitted so easily as Covid19 does. Ebola is existing for a while and it's not moving from Western Africa. When it comes to Gates, conspiracy theories are around him because he is so much promoted by media. Gates thinks that, gates say this etc etc. So he is easy target for theories.

Why would he be enemy #1 of the USA? So he is more dangerous than some terrorist leader? I am not so sure about, it is his own country. He lives there, his family lives there. Why would he destory it? People just try to use him as a scapegoat. There are a lot of rich families working behind closed doors who are trying to influence things and no one reads about it.

I am an appreciator of Bill Gates and believe he's working to solve big global issues in earnest, from a point of reference and with methodologies  that have been successful for him

Didn't care for him when he was building Microsoft and gobbling up every other good piece of software (Netscape;-) but began to change my mind when watching him in the congressional hearings (20 years ago ?) and when he got Rotary over a major hurdle in getting people vaccinated (15 ish years).

His new book on climate change is in my wish list along with Vandana Shiva's: Oneness vs. the 1%: Shattering Illusions, Seeding Freedom


in relatable terms Bill Gates= Microsoft   Vandana Shiva= Linux/Ubuntu----->open source seeds, down to earth decentralized solutions



Vandana went up against Monsanto and is an activist in one of my areas of interest (water)

She's brilliant,  this one from 2015  is still relevant and totally worth the 30+ mins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u82iSLtylfQ&ab_channel=ValhallaMovement

Yes, I know. It's depressing. They don't listen to 'normal' people, and I just hoped that they might listen a bit more to one of the richest and most successful people on the planet, who is ultra-high-profile, and especially given his very public prediction of the Covid pandemic.

The fundamental issue is that governments are short-termist and are reactive rather than proactive. They're generally elected for just a few years before the next election cycle, and so have no incentive to fix anything that will become a problem in the future, even if there's 100% chance that it will become a huge, overwhelming problem.

The last bits are quite hilarious, lol. But seriously though, even without bill gates saying such things in the past, it is pretty easy to predict that these things are bound to happen sooner or later. And trust me, governments and big people know about this already but chose and still chooses to do nothing since they are not that affected. And until people on top try to do something about this, history will only be repeating itself and be even worse than before. I really do pity the generations to come.

We cant predict future based on his opinions. Very smart guy with very bad intentions. Like he cars about vaccine etc. He is no1 enemy of the USA.

Humans are pretty good to adapt and should manage to adopt to the new higher sea levels. I saw an documentary about Netherlands where they started to build houses on tubes which will rise over time with the sea levels. The biggest problems might be for the coast in poorer regions and people living close to big river, which are also going to rise in levels. With newer technology we might be able to fight it better.

That's informative, thanks.

I've remembered about one video that I've watched through a travel vlogger who's name is Drew Binsky. IIRC, he went to Kiribati and it's located on Oceania/Pacific Ocean. Due to the climate change/crisis which results to rise in water levels, paradise is about to drown.

And that's also the same with other nearby countries and islands on that location.

Global warming is real but how it can be stopped? We can't do much or we just to back to opd age to survive but I guess no one is going to be ready for this but still talking about global warming is real which goes to Bill Gates as well. Probably in the next two decades the sea level will rise and people in the coast line will go under water or will become refugees.

anyways back on topic
i dont see BG as someone thats doing any 'nano-bots' or 'lizard people mutations'

i just see him as someone thats grabs billions of dollars from government and non-government sources under the pretense of it being used for projects like covid/climate. and then only hands out 5% of it to actually go towards front line projects

he is always on the look out for the next global panic to syphon funds from
this does not mean the global panics are fake
this does not mean the solutions are fake
it just means that he profits in the middle of the global problem and the solution

covid is actually about 92-98% survival
however with interventions this 2-8% deathrate comes down to percentages you mention

yep social distancing, isolating and masks has reduced viral load amounts. meaning less of a severe fight to battle
also getting those remaining severe people to a hospital and given oxygen treatments and other stuff reduces it to your quoted amounts

but take for instance the incidences in the cruise ships a year ago and in nursing homes that dont follow social distancing and dont offer taking residents to hospital due to DNR. the death rate is 2-8% in those not having any medical/health precautions to mediate the risk

so thinking masks aint needed and hospitals are not needed due to your presumed 0.1%.. is wrong. its only now down to 0.1% because of the social restrictions, masks and healthcare

To be fair, Bill Gates was not the only one projecting that a global pandemic would happen killing millions. The world is pretty much due for a super virus that is highly transmissible with a high death rate.

All things considered, COVID has a 99.9 percent survival rate. Ebola, on the other hand, has a 50-60 percent survival rate. This could have been a lot worse.

But yeah, Bill Gates gets demonized a lot by the conspiracy theorists, nothing new.

sorry, little OT!

despite the conspiracy and the world accuses him off, I don't think Bill is a bad guy ^{(sorry I am neither a supporter of Bill nor a hater, I'm on Neutral's side)}

What concerns me here is why Bill has to lock comments on his personal Twitter, does it show he is unable to manage his emotions towards other people's criticism.  Bill should have faced them calmly.

https://ibb.co/b6Gw1Z8

As with most other conspiracies, I don't understand the reasoning behind this one. It seems illogical. Rate of population increase has been falling rapidly for the last half century, and is approaching zero. As with many things, rate of change gives you a better picture than total change.


_source

In many developed countries, birth rate is already well below the level to maintain current population level, and is projected to fall further.


_source

Certainly the climate crisis could mean problems given current population levels, or given any population levels, but the point is there is no population explosion anyway. Population is stabilising. Couple this with advances in genetic engineering, and drought-resistant crops, particularly some of the absolute miracles that are being achieved with CRISPR, and we already have some tools to help us somewhat against the worst ravages of climate change. Yes, if the worst case climate scenario does come to pass we may see some parts of the globe becoming uninhabitable, we would likely see large-scale population migration, and huge suffering and economic cost... but there's no need for management of a population increase that isn't even happening. That does nothing to address the problem or indeed any problem.

A friend of mine who's working for the government has told me about the depopulation. I've heard of that conspiracy many times years ago and I don't know if it's convincing me already. And with another article that I've read about Bill, here it goes.

--> https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/15/bill-gates-how-the-biden-administration-can-prep-for-future-pandemics.html

the way i see climate change

the water cycle is the cause-effect. not carbon

however industries like fossil fuel electric companies knew in 1990 that supplies are depleting fast and all coal will be gone by 2050. they needed to diversify but they dont want to pay the re-fit bill to do it.

same with real estate. running out of brownfield sites and not able to expand to greenbelt site. so although they can buy up area's of known floodland they dont want the responsibility and costs related to repairing houses that get flooded. so they dont want to pay the bill
theyll buy up subsidised land no problem but they wont buid unless they can get someone to pay for the upkeep
yep imagine it if when a new estate floods the company that bought the pre-build land had to then pay for all flood repairs for life.(never gonna happen)
yet many 'climate grants' go towards flood defenses for this cheap flooland

these things lead to shifting costs to governments/tax/insurance/grants under schemes that need to sound like its helping the wider populaton. and done so without implying blame for the initial cause

in africa and australia they are actually making their causes of problems known
africn starvation due to privatisation of wetlands and forcing people to live on drylands
australia showing how fertiliser and pesticide run off from land to ocean causing algae and also reef bleaching
but you wont hear much about it on Uk/US media. especially when its uk/US funding most 'climate' grants

so while BG is fund grabbing donatations from the north and then giving out 5% grants to the southern big industry projects like big agri and renewable energy. he is not dealing with the underlying initial cause.

yes electrical companies need to shift to 100% renewables by 2050... but not for reason you think
yep if you can fool idiots into only thinking about chemtrails and mutating humans into eugenic lizards then they wil be too busy to not realise the elites involved in these projects are getting richer whilst only alotting 5% to schemes that pretend to be making positive change.
there is no chemtrail or lizard people in reality. but its a good fantasy to keep the idiots distracted from the economic/resource syphoning