By now — you will all agree that — we’ve heard it all.

The good, the bad, the evil… and the pure nonsense. But nothing stands taller than the lies we are fed by the media regarding global warming — flashy headlines after flashy headlines.

Over the past couple of years, we have seen an endeavour from the media and from the so-called health organisations to boost veganism, while at the same time food manufacturers are developing more and more meat-free junk. The same manufacturers that are already selling us junk (ultra-processed manufactured food products — UPFs) with the cheapest ingredients they can get their hands on. Skin, ears, tales, belly fat and other unwanted animal parts end up in products such as cottage/shepherd pies, lasagna, and other products using mince, including sausages.

How do they trick us to buy these? Good marketing (including well-studied labels showing a happy animal and grass. Most animals used in those products have never seen the light of day and have lived in overcrowded facilities and in very poor sanitary conditions. The same applies to products using farmed fish.

That is only looking at meat-based products.

If we only knew what was inside those UPFs, we would run a mile. Especially, if we knew of the extended list of intentionally and non-intentionally added ingredients, including cancer-causing pesticides.

Adding highly-addictive ingredients completes the best tools manufacturers have at their disposal (e.g., wheat, dairy, sugar and more). Masking the awful taste with enhancers like MSG, your tastebuds won’t see a thing, and you’ll want more.

Do you still wander why our global population is fat and sick?

What have cows got to do with it?

We all know that world leaders, delegates, scientists, and climate activists gathered in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, for the 27th United Nations Climate Change Conference (or COP27). The aim was to jointly address climate change and its impacts.

Most VIPs (let’s call them that) flew there on private jets and were fed wagyu beef (at a cost of $100), a $50 seafood platter starter, and a $40 salmon concoction, all of which had to be imported from thousands of miles away. They also had the option for 90-minute bottomless cocktails for $125.

Thousands of delegates also had to be flown from their countries of origin, be fed and hosted in hotels nearby, participating in a huge amount of food waste, regular waste and detergents to wash the sheets and their towels, and the very toxic chemicals used to clean their rooms and bathrooms daily.

Considering that it was a 12-day event, I let you imagine the mountain of waste this event has created, the plastic pollution, and where it has all ended…

Considering that online events have considerably increased in recent years, it would have been much wiser to promote an online event that would have cost less on the earth's resources and be less damaging to the environment and our health. Instead, we are told that it is the cow’s fault.

COWS PRODUCE NATURAL GASES THAT ARE PART OF NATURE AND SO ARE RECYCLED IN THE EVER GOING CYCLE OF LIFE.

The extremely toxic chemicals chemicals released into the atmosphere from the private jets, the chauffeured cars and the rest, are man-made, meaning that they are not part of nature and cannot be recycled. Instead, they may pollute and accumulate in the atmosphere — the air we breathe every single second of every day — and poison us slowly, but steadily.

As climate change activists persist in advocating for reduced consumption of meat and seafood to mitigate the environmental impact, it's worth noting that at the COP26 event in Glasgow, Sir Patrick Vallance, the UK's Chief Scientist Adviser, encouraged individuals to modify their dietary and travel choices.

Animal Rebellion, an organisation dedicated to both animal and climate justice, expressed strong dissatisfaction with the menu, particularly in light of the ongoing cost of living crisis, describing it as a significant disappointment.

Nathan McGovern, a volunteer with the charity for the past year, said, "These so-called leaders are swanning off to Egypt and there's no real action going to be taken, just lots of words. The scientists are coming to the conclusion that we need to be switching from an animal-based diet to a plant-based food system. These world leaders need to look like they believe them. This just looks like do what I say and not what I do.”

McGovern also criticised the presence of items like salmon, which were fished in the Atlantic Ocean, thousands of miles away from Egypt. He added: 'North Africa has some brilliant plant-based foods, like falafel and couscous. Why do they need to ship in Salmon from the Atlantic?”

A spokesperson for The Vegan Society had this to say: 'It's really disappointing that such a significant climate change event as COP27 is serving up high environmental impact meat and fish sourced from another continent. This is a real missed opportunity for world leaders to connect the issues of diet and climate and lead by example in showcasing a delicious, low impact, plant-based menu to highlight how such changes can make a huge difference to the future of the planet.'"

The Climate Change Committee (CCC), an advisory body to the government on emissions targets, has previously recommended a reduction of 20 per cent in meat and dairy consumption by 2030, and a 35 per cent decrease by 2050, as part of the effort to reach the UK's net zero target.

It is estimated that animal agriculture contributes approximately 5.8 per cent of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions.

Now, we know that this is a lie. Because, those natural gases are reabsorbed by the grass, trees, and algae from the oceans, none of which is possible for most man-made pollutants and warming gases, such as sulphur hexafluoride – also known as SF6 – which is thousands of times more warming than CO2, a natural gas that is essential to life and to plants and algae for their survival. The issue with SF6 is that it has the ability to trap infrared radiation, which means it’s far more potent at warming the Earth’s atmosphere than CO2 over long periods.

Still today, around 81% of the electric system in the UK contains thousands of tonnes of SF6. The Netherlands have not used SF6 for many decades, so if the UK government wanted to be a leader of change, it would have done it decades ago.

It may take 300-3,000 years for SF6 to disintegrate (if ever). All the while, it is accumulating at extremely dangerous levels in the atmosphere. Thus, it is likely that future generations will suffer its effects for many centuries to come if the production is stopped today.

Back to the COP27…

The conclusion of COP27 marked a significant milestone as it concluded with a groundbreaking accord aimed at offering financial support to nations facing severe climate-related challenges like floods, droughts, and other environmental catastrophes.

This move received widespread praise due to its historical significance and the acknowledgement by countries of the imperative need to allocate financial resources in response to the losses and damages resulting from the devastating impacts of climate change. This agreement included the establishment of a dedicated fund and the essential financial mechanisms to support it, marking a pivotal moment in climate diplomacy.

WHERE DO YOU THINK THE MONEY WILL COME FROM?

YOUR WALLET!

We will be taxed more.

Another excuse to tax us more as if the government needed any more, all the while they grease the hands of their donators and those who ensured their spot ‘in power’.

Another factor included in the report of the COP27 is to hold businesses and institutions to account. This is not only laughable but will never be done. They wouldn’t shoot themselves in the foot, literally. The mega-rich of the world own all the major companies of the world, the banks and the pharma companies. They are also the biggest contributors to waste and pollution. They are also responsible for the destruction of the topsoil (they also own the companies that manufacture chemical fertilisers, herbicides and GMO seeds).

Would companies like Amazon stop their delivery services, having fleets of vehicles on every corner of every big city? I doubt it…

Yet, they charge customers and sellers the cost of delivery, so they can claim that with the money they plant some trees somewhere in the world to offset their carbon emissions.

The UN states on its website: “This new phase of implementation also means a new focus on accountability when it comes to the commitments made by sectors, businesses and institutions.”

Let’s see how accountable they will be and what is the UN going to do about it…