02/18/2016 / By Tara Paras
According to Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates, the formula for tracking CO2 emissions is as follows: CO2 = P x S x E x C, where:
P = People
S = Services per person
E = Energy per service
C = CO2 per energy unit
He then says that in order to get CO2 to zero, “probably one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty close to zero. …
“The world today has 6.8 billion people … that’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent,” he controversially declares.
What does Bill Gates really mean when he says, “if we do a really great job on new vaccines … we could lower [world population] by 10 or 15 percent?”
At first glance, the statement clearly implies that vaccines are a method of population reduction. The question is: How? Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, tries to let us in on the bigger, more controversial picture:
Let’s conduct a mental experiment on this issue. If vaccines are to be used to reduce world population, they obviously need to be accepted by the majority of the people. Otherwise the population reduction effort wouldn’t be very effective.
And in order for them to be accepted by the majority of the people, they obviously can’t just kill people outright. If everybody started dropping dead within 24 hours of receiving the flu shot, the danger of vaccines would become obvious rather quickly and the vaccines would be recalled.
Thus, if vaccines are to be used as an effective population reduction effort, there are really only three ways in which they might theoretically be “effective” from the point of view of those who wish to reduce world population:
#1) They might kill people slowly in a way that’s unnoticeable, taking effect over perhaps 10 – 30 years by accelerating degenerative diseases.
#2) They might reduce fertility and therefore dramatically lower birth rates around the world, thereby reducing the world population over successive generations. This “soft kill” method might seem more acceptable to scientists who want to see the world population fall but don’t quite have the stomach to outright kill people with conventional medicine. There is already evidence that vaccines may promote miscarriages.
#3) They might increase the death rate from a future pandemic. Theoretically, widespread vaccination efforts could be followed by a deliberate release of a highly virulent flu strain with a high fatality rate. This “bioweapon” approach could kill millions of people whose immune systems have been weakened by previous vaccine injections.
This is a known side effect of some vaccines, by the way. A study documenting this was published in PLoS.
The short answer is yes, seasonal flu vaccines do cause increased susceptibility to the H1N1 pandemic virus. In other words, seasonal flu vaccines could set up the population for a “hard kill” pandemic that could wipe out a significant portion of the global population (perhaps 10 to 15 percent, as Bill Gates suggested).
Conveniently, their deaths could be blamed on the pandemic, thereby diverting blame from those who were really responsible for the plot. As yet another beneficial side effect for the global population killers, the widespread deaths could be used as a fear tool to urge more people to get vaccinated yet again, and the entire cycle could be repeated until world population was brought down to whatever manageable level was desired… all in the name of health care!
The more people around the world are vaccinated before the release of the “hard kill” pandemic virus, the more powerful the effect of this approach.
Perhaps not coincidentally, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars into vaccine programs targeting people all over the world. One such program is researching the development of “sweat-triggered vaccines” that could use specially-coated nano-materials to deliver vaccines to people without using injections.
More interestingly, his foundation has also invested millions in sterilization technologies that have been called a “temporary castration” solution.
It seems that the actions of the Gates foundation are entirely consistent with the formula for CO2 reduction that Bill Gates eluded to in his TED conference speech: CO2 = P x S x E x C.
By reducing birth rates (through sterilization technologies) and increasing vaccine penetration throughout the world population (by using sweat-triggered nano-vaccines), his stated goal of reducing the world population by 10 to 15 percent could be reached within just a few years.(1)
Interestingly enough, this campaign to reduce global population through vaccines will obviously not impact people who consciously avoid such vaccines. And those people, by and large, tend to be more capable of discerning what’s good for their health.
Now, the question is: Do you really want to belong to the “10 or 15 percent” who get culled through global vaccine programs? Or are you smart enough to opt out, before it’s too late?