SETTLED SCIENCE IS MORE ABOUT RATES OF RETURN ON INVESTMENT THAN ANY SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH. Science Is Never Settled, For It Is Always In A State Of Flux As New Discoveries Challenge Old Beliefs. But when it comes to challenging the money men and their right to reign on this globe, then the plebs need to know this is settled as far as they are concerned, and morons are enlisted to take up their cause by claiming things like "We want action on climate change"; something they are prepared to do unwittingly free of charge on the bankers behalf.

 

🌍 The Real Roots of Climate Finance: How Edmund de Rothschild Engineered a Global Control System

In today’s world, climate change dominates political discourse, corporate agendas, and educational systems. But few stop to ask: Where did this movement originate? Was it an organic, science-driven response to environmental concerns—or something else entirely?

To trace the real origins of the global climate finance system, we must revisit a largely forgotten yet critical event: the Fourth World Wilderness Congress, held in Denver, Colorado, in 1987. It was here that Edmund de Rothschild, scion of one of the most powerful banking dynasties in history, proposed a revolutionary idea: the environment could become the basis for a new economic system—one that would centralize global governance under the guise of saving the planet.

🧠 From Conservation to Financial Control

Edmund de Rothschild was no mere philanthropist. He was a strategist with a keen understanding of how to convert ecological language into fiscal policy. In 1987, he proposed the creation of a “World Conservation Bank”, a supranational institution that would use natural resources as collateral for debt. In essence, countries rich in biodiversity but poor in cash could secure loans—not with gold or currency, but with forests, rivers, and carbon sinks.

This idea wasn’t just innovative; it was transformative. It reframed environmental stewardship as a financialized system: ecosystems were no longer sacred spaces—they were assets to be measured, traded, and leveraged.

🏦 Birth of the Global Environment Facility (GEF)

By 1991, Rothschild’s proposal took concrete form. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) was launched by the World Bank, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Its mission? To provide grants and loans for environmental projects around the world.

On paper, the GEF was created to fund biodiversity conservation, climate adaptation, and sustainable development. In practice, it became a vehicle to centralize control over natural resources and implement a new kind of financial order, one based not on productivity, but on carbon accounting and ecological “debt.”

Carbon, once considered a neutral and necessary component of life, was rebranded as a toxic pollutant. Under this framework, countries and corporations could be taxed for their emissions and rewarded for sequestration—creating a carbon economy where nature itself became a regulated commodity.

📉 From Air to Asset: Carbon as Currency

The concept of carbon credits emerged directly from these developments. Countries could now buy and sell permission to pollute. Those who couldn’t meet emission targets could pay others who had reduced their emissions—or claimed to have done so. This birthed the global carbon market, a system managed not by environmental scientists, but by banks, trading platforms, and bureaucrats.

The Kyoto Protocol (1997) and later the Paris Agreement (2015) built upon Rothschild’s framework. Under the Paris Agreement, virtually every nation on Earth committed to net-zero targets and emission tracking—often enforced by unelected global bodies and backed by financial penalties.

🧬 Rothschild and Maurice Strong: Architects of Eco-Governance

Rothschild didn’t act alone. His vision was championed and implemented by Maurice Strong, a Canadian oil magnate-turned-environmentalist and the mastermind behind the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. Strong played a pivotal role in launching Agenda 21, a comprehensive plan to reshape land use, energy consumption, and economic behavior across the globe.

Together, Rothschild and Strong created a blueprint for eco-governance: a form of technocratic control in which global bodies would dictate environmental policy, regulate national economies, and manage natural resources—all in the name of sustainability.

While marketed as ecological salvation, this system amounts to top-down control over food, land, water, and energy. Nations, especially in the Global South, are now required to submit to carbon audits, adopt international land management practices, and take on new forms of debt—all managed by global financial elites.

🔍 Propaganda, Compliance, and the Manufacturing of Consensus

One of the most effective tools used to enforce this new order has been the manufacture of consensus. The phrase “the science is settled” became a mantra not of science, but of political messaging. Genuine scientific debate was silenced. Dissenting voices—be they climatologists, geologists, or economists—were de-platformed, defunded, or discredited.

This tactic is eerily reminiscent of the propaganda methods employed by Joseph Goebbels and Edward Bernays: repeat a simple message often enough, and the public will believe it. Climate science, once an empirical field of inquiry, was transformed into a tool for emotional manipulation and policy enforcement.

Meanwhile, tech platforms, international agencies, and corporate media act as gatekeepers of acceptable knowledge. Questioning the carbon narrative now risks professional ruin or digital erasure—even as new evidence continues to emerge challenging the mainstream models.

📊 Environmentalism as a Control Grid

The system Rothschild initiated has now expanded to include:

• Carbon taxes

• Emissions trading

• ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) compliance ratings

• Digital IDs and land registries

• Climate surveillance systems

In essence, the environment has become the Trojan horse for global technocratic governance. The power to regulate carbon emissions is the power to regulate all human activity, from farming and energy use to transportation and population growth.

Today, under the banner of “net zero,” we see calls for bans on gas vehicles, reduced meat consumption, and the rationing of electricity and water. These are not isolated policies—they are the logical outgrowth of a system envisioned in 1987, where environmental policy and financial control merge into one mechanism.

📌 Conclusion: The Green Mask of Empire

The environmental movement has been hijacked—not by tree-huggers, but by bankers. Edmund de Rothschild’s 1987 proposal was not about conservation—it was about conversion: converting the environment into an economic lever, and ecological fear into financial opportunity.

By turning air into a taxable commodity and biodiversity into bankable collateral, the climate agenda has become the foundation of a new world order—one managed not by democratically elected leaders, but by technocrats, financiers, and UN-aligned institutions.

True environmental stewardship remains vital. But if we care about justice, sovereignty, and truth, we must unmask the climate banking system for what it is: not salvation, but submission through deception.