New Zealand - Vaccine and COVID-19 Deaths

New Zealand, like its south Pacific neighbour, Australia, has been one of the nations that has imposed the strictest lockdown regimes among its developed and somewhat less developed economy peer group.  New Zealand has also been quite efficient at vaccinating its population when compared to its peers as shown on this graphic:

 

 

New Zealand with its population of of 4.873 million is small by global standards and, as such, has seen relatively few COVID-19 deaths as shown here:

 

...and here:

 

... and here:

 

New Zealand has had a total of 28 deaths from/with COVID-19 since the beginning of the pandemic and, at its peak, had a peak daily new confirmed COVID-19 death rate per million people of 0.27 back in April 2020 with the death rate being essentially zero for most of the remainder of the pandemic.

  

With New Zealand having so few COVID-19-related deaths, it is interesting to see what the impact of the nation's vaccination program has been, particularly adverse events related to the administration of the vaccine.  Through the New Zealand Medical Devices Safety Authority or MEDSAFE, the New Zealand government has been issuing Safety Reports outlining adverse events following immunization or AEFIs with COVID-19 vaccines.  In Report #31 dated October 21, 2021, MEDSAFE notes the following AEFIs by reporter types so that the public is able to ascertain the validity of the reporting:

 

The Safety Report also notes the following:

 

Up to and including 2 October 2021, a total of 86 deaths were reported to CARM (the Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring) after the administration of the Comirnaty vaccine. Following medical assessments by CARM and Medsafe it has been determined that:

 

31 of these deaths are unlikely related to the COVID-19 vaccine

26 deaths could not be assessed due to insufficient information

28 cases are still under investigation.

1 death was likely due to vaccine induced myocarditis (awaiting Coroner’s determination)

In the week ending October 2, 2021, there were 11 additional deaths reported.

 

While the administration of Pfizer's Comirnaty vaccine is, in the words of the New Zealand government "unlikely" (but not with 100 percent certainty) to be related to the vaccine in 31 deaths or 36 percent of the total, it is interesting to see that there have been 3.1 times as many deaths coincidental to the administration of the vaccine as died from the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself.  At this point, the data does not necessarily point to the vaccine causing the deaths but given the thousands of deaths that have been reported in conjunction with the COVID-19 vaccines on both the VAERS and Eudravigilance databases in the United States and Europe respectively, it doesn't seem to be unreasonable that New Zealand could well be experiencing more deaths from the vaccine than from the virus itself.

The World's First Credit Card Linked to Climate Change

With the global climate change narrative ramping up and the fact that governments have realized that they are capable of controlling their citizens, an interesting development from 2020 looks like it has the potential to significantly impact the "sweaty masses".

 

Doconomy claims that it is a "banking service with a conscience" as shown here:

 

Doconomy, a privately owned company in partnership with Finnish bank Ålandsbanken, was founded in  Sweden in 2018 by Johan Pihl and Mathias Wilkstrom, two Swedes who launched a financial technology (fintech) company with a "mission to solve the climate crisis through behavioural change".  Their solution to carbon emissions by individuals was to set up a suite of banking tools which allows people to "compensate the planet" for their purchases through carbon offsetting since approximate 60 percent of carbon emissions are linked to consumption of goods.

In 2019, Doconomy launched its DO Black credit card in April 2019, which helps people track their personal carbon footprint.  The DO Black card is the first credit card in the world which cuts off further transactions once a user exceeds their carbon limit.  Here is a quote on how the system works:

 

"So how does it work? Doconomy uses the Åland Index to calculate the carbon impact of each transaction, which is developed by the Bank of Åland using data from Thompson Reuters, Sustainalytics and the WorldBank’s Mitigation of Climate Change Working Group. It is also partnering with Mastercard and UNFCCC to launch its credit cards.

 

Consumers will be able to ‘carbon compensate’ for carbon emissions related to their purchases. This means donating to UN-certified emission reductions projects, or investing in sustainability funds.

Retail partners must also pay for their climate impact by rewarding customers with DO-credits. There’s a caveat for consumers: these credits must be used to ‘climate compensate’ or to contribute to personal savings, but they can’t be used to buy more!

In doing so, Doconomy is radically rethinking the provision of credit: credit cards have always encouraged overspending. Doconomy’s credit cards hope to achieve the opposite. 

 

Here is a video from Docomony regarding the DO Black credit card, issued in cooperation with Mastercard and the United Nations:

 

Notice the pledge above the signature line on the DO Black card:

 

 

Here is a screen capture from Doconomy's website noting the input from the World Economic Forum in the top left corner:

 

In case you can't read it, here is the quote from the WEF, an organization that represents the will of the wealthiest consumer class on earth:

 

"Everything we put in our shopping basket comes at an environmental cost."

 

The WEF offered more details on its support for the DO credit card as shown here:

 

....and here:

 

"The DO card tracks the CO2 emissions linked to purchases to calculate the carbon impact of every transaction. The aim is to encourage people to actively reduce their carbon footprint and demonstrate the impact that small changes can have on the environment.

 

The card uses the Aland Index as the basis on which it calculates the carbon footprint of each product purchased. Users can set a maximum value for their carbon spend and learn how to compensate for their carbon footprint by contributing towards schemes to reduce or remove greenhouse gas emissions. 

 

A savings product also offered by the company offers an interest rate that includes investment in climate-friendly projects.

 

The card itself is made from bio-sourced materials, and printed with air ink - ink manufactured from recycled carbon in air pollution."

 

Let's look at some additional products from the company.  Doconomy is allowing consumers to better understand the impact of their consumption with the 2030 Calculator as shown here:

 

 

Docomony and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have worked together to launch a Lifestyle Calculator to allow consumers to understand how their lifestyle affects the climate:

 

 

It also has launched the world's first water impact calculator for every purchase, allowing consumers to measure both the CO2 and H2O impact of every transaction as shown here:

 

Obviously, Docomony is very serious about climate change.  Unfortunately, their novel, first-of-a-kind credit card, which cuts off users' spending once it reaches a predetermined carbon footprint could be the opening salvo in a new normal where the consumption of goods by the serf/organ donor class is controlled by the hyperconsumer ruling class (think - social credit score).  My suspicion is that governments will take it upon themselves to set the carbon emissions limits for us, all in the name of saving the planet by reducing our personal carbon footprint...for the benefit of the wealthiest, meat-eating, private jet-owning, supercar-using class, of course.  The very fact that the World Economic Forum is backing this project should give us pause to ponder its ultimate implications on all of us because they aren't going to be positive.

India's Experience with Ivermectin

Back in May 2021, a fascinating article appeared on the World Health Organization's website.  Given that WHO is more-or-less following Bill Gates' COVID-19 pro-vaccine narrative, this article is of particular interest.  Given a recent comment offered by a reader regarding my recent posting on the confusion surrounding the use of ivermectin as a solution to the COVID-19 pandemic , I felt that this information was particularly pertinent.

 

Here is the article:

 

As background, Uttar Pradesh is located in the far northeast corner of India and is located on the border with Nepal.  It has an estimated population of 241 million people (2021 estimate), roughly one-sixth of India's total population.  To help battle the COVID-19 pandemic, 141,610 Indian government teams circulated through 97,941 villages throughout Uttar Pradesh for a five day period beginning on May 5, 2021 as the pandemic seemed to be out of control with planning support and training for the effort being provided by the World Health Organization.  The members of each team tested everyone with COVID-19 symptoms using Rapid Antigen Tests. 

  

Here is the key sentence in the article:

 

"Those with symptoms are tested and given medicine kits and information on quarantining and isolation, both at home and in hospitals."

 

While the article does mention that people without COVID-19 were urged to get vaccinated to prevent transmission of the virus, it is interesting to note that those who were tested because they were showing symptoms of COVID-19 were given "medicine kits".  

 

Unfortunately, the WHO article doesn't tell us what is in these medicine kits, however, an article on MSN (Microsoft Network) dated May 12, 2021 which is sourced from The Indian Express, an Indian media company which publishes newspapers in a selection of major Indian cities, provides us with two of the contents of these kits as shown on this screen capture:

 

 

Here is the original article from The Indian Express:

 

Here are some quotes from the news article with my bolds:

 

"A year after the country’s first Covid-19 cluster, with 5 cases, was reported in Agra district, the Uttar Pradesh government has claimed that it was the first state to have introduced a large-scale “prophylactic and therapeutic” use of Ivermectin and added that the drug helped the state to maintain a lower fatality and positivity rate as compared to other states.

  

Citing the results from Agra in the month of May and June last year, following which the use of Ivermectin, a medicine to treat parasitic ailments, along with Doxycycline was introduced as a protocol across the state for both prophylactic as well as treatment purposes, the state Health Department said it would conduct a controlled study once the second wave of the pandemic subsides...

  

Uttar Pradesh was the first state in the country to introduce large-scale prophylactic and therapeutic use of Ivermectin. In May-June 2020, a team at Agra, led by Dr Anshul Pareek, administered Ivermectin to all RRT team members in the district on an experimental basis. It was observed that none of them developed Covid-19 despite being in daily contact with patients who had tested positive for the virus,” Uttar Pradesh State Surveillance Officer Vikssendu Agrawal said.

 

He added that based on the findings from Agra, the state government sanctioned the use of Ivermectin as a prophylactic for all the contacts of Covid patients and later cleared the administration of therapeutic doses for the treatment of such patients.

 

Claiming that timely introduction of Ivermectin since the first wave has helped the state maintain a relatively low positivity rate despite its high population density, he said, “Despite being the state with the largest population base and a high population density, we have maintained a relatively low positivity rate and cases per million of population”. 

 

He said that apart from aggressive contact tracing and surveillance, the lower positivity and fatality rates may be attributed to the large-scale use of Ivermectin use in the state, adding that the drug has recently been introduced in the National Protocol for Covid treatment and management. “Once the second wave subsides, we would conduct our own study as there has been an emerging body of evidence to substantiate our timely use of Ivermectin from the first wave itself,” Vikasendu told The Indian Express.

  

Isn't that interesting?  Given that ivermectin is almost never used in cases of COVID-19 in the developed world, India's experience with the anti-parasitic drug has been a great success as you can see on this graphic:

 

From a peak of 37,944 daily new cases of COVID-19 on April 24, 2021, Uttar Pradesh saw its daily new cases drop to 694 on June 7, 2021 and a further drop to only 11 new cases on October 20, 2021.

 

In closing, here is a graphic from Our World in Data showing how India's successful use of ivermectin has resulted in a daily new confirmed COVID-19 case per million load that is far lower that other major developed economies where ivermectin is not widely used as a treatment option:

  

Doesn't this make you wonder why the developed nations of the world are so reluctant to use ivermectin in the battle against COVID-19?  I suspect that some of you already know the answer to that question.  Given that Microsoft covered India's successful use of Ivermectin back in early May 2021, it simply must be true since they are part of the technocracy that is very carefully guarding the COVID-19 narrative so that the useless eaters are not exposed to disinformation of any type, particularly regarding treatments that do not involve experimental vaccines.

The Confusing Message About Ivermectin

Since the early days of the pandemic, one drug that has been used to solve the "COVID-19 puzzle" has been the object of scorn from the left-leaning mainstream media since it doesn't involve the use of expensive, experimental vaccines brought to the world by Big Pharma.  This has become particularly evident since Joe Rogan brought his use of ivermectin during his experience with COVID-19 to the forefront, creating a sh!tstorm of criticism from the mainstream media which gleefully refers to ivermectin as "horse paste" or "horse dewormer".  In this posting, I want to provide a bit of interesting trivia about ivermectin which actually appears on the website of the National Institutes for Health of which Fauci's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) is a part, one of 27 Institutes or Centers which make up the NIH.

  

Let's open with this information on ivermectin from the NIH website regarding the use of the "wonder drug" in humans:

 

"There are few drugs that can seriously lay claim to the title of ‘Wonder drug’, penicillin and aspirin being two that have perhaps had greatest beneficial impact on the health and wellbeing of Mankind. But ivermectin can also be considered alongside those worthy contenders, based on its versatility, safety and the beneficial impact that it has had, and continues to have, worldwide—especially on hundreds of millions of the world’s poorest people. Several extensive reports, including reviews authored by us, have been published detailing the events behind the discovery, development and commercialization of the avermectins and ivermectin (22,23-dihydroavermectin B), as well as the donation of ivermectin and its use in combating Onchocerciasis and lymphatic filariasis.  However, none have concentrated in detail on the interacting sequence of events involved in the passage of the drug into human use....

 

Ivermectin proved to be even more of a ‘Wonder drug’ in human health, improving the nutrition, general health and wellbeing of billions of people worldwide ever since it was first used to treat Onchocerciasis in humans in 1988. It proved ideal in many ways, being highly effective and broad-spectrum, safe, well tolerated and could be easily administered (a single, annual oral dose). It is used to treat a variety of internal nematode infections, including Onchocerciasis, Strongyloidiasis, Ascariasis, cutaneous larva migrans, filariases, Gnathostomiasis and Trichuriasis, as well as for oral treatment of ectoparasitic infections, such as Pediculosis (lice infestation) and scabies (mite infestation).  Ivermectin is the essential mainstay of two global disease elimination campaigns that should soon rid the world of two of its most disfiguring and devastating diseases, Onchocerciasis and Lymphatic filariasis, which blight the lives of billions of the poor and disadvantaged throughout the tropics. It is likely that, throughout the next decade, well over 200 million people will be taking the drug annually or semi-annually, via innovative globally-coordinated Mass Drug Administration (MDA) programmes."

 

In reading the entire article, ivermectin has successfully been used in humans for nearly three decades and, since 1988, has not just been used as "horse paste".

 

With that in mind, let's now look at with this tweet from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration from August 2021:

 

 

Here's another weigh in on ivermectin from the FDA:

 

As a viable and preferred option to ivermectin, not surprisingly, here's what the FDA recommends to prevent COVID-19 even though none of the vaccines prevent transmission:

  

"The most effective ways to limit the spread of COVID-19 include getting a COVID-19 vaccine when it is available to you and following current CDC guidance."

 

The World Health Organization has also weighed into the ivermectin controversy as shown here:

 

 

According to the WHO's guidance, ivermectin is only supposed to be used to treat COVID-19 within clinical trials.

  

Now, let's look at what the NIH has to say about ivermectin in this table regarding the characteristics of antiviral agents that can be used to treat COVID-19:

 

While the table from the NIH outlining three antivirals which are either approved or under evaluation as treatments for COVID-19, it is, nonetheless, quite interesting to see that "horse paste" makes the list as a potential treatment and would appear to have minimal adverse events associated with its use compared to the myriad of adverse events associated with the use of the mRNA vaccines currently being heavily promoted by public health officials and governments around the world.  Given the haste to which the COVID-19 vaccines were brought to market, it is interesting how slow the drug approval agencies are to provide clearance for the use of the decades-old ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19, particularly since the use of the drug was proposed by Dr. Pierre Kory during a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing on December 8, 202 as shown here.

 

Is is any wonder that the general public is so confused about the most effective treatment options for COVID-19 when even the United States government seems to have difficulty keeping their own narrative straight?  But, then again, how would Big Pharma profit from a drug that costs a few dollars per dose?  Just like other options for treating COVID-19, ivermectin has been turned into a political football, pitting the right against the left.  

China and Hypersonic Glide Vehicles - Resetting Washington's Global Hegemony

A recent article on the Financial Times website provides us with a glimpse of the evolving multipolar reality and how the United States is rapidly falling behind.  In this posting, we'll take a brief look at the event that triggered alarm in Washington and how Beijing views the American attitude toward its accomplishment.

 

Here is a screen capture of the article in FT:

 

Here are some brief quotes with my bold:

  

"China tested a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile in August that circled the globe before speeding towards its target, demonstrating an advanced space capability that caught US intelligence by surprise.

 

Five people familiar with the test said the Chinese military launched a rocket that carried a hypersonic glide vehicle which flew through low-orbit space before cruising down towards its target. 

 

The missile missed its target by about two-dozen miles, according to three people briefed on the intelligence. But two said the test showed that China had made astounding progress on hypersonic weapons and was far more advanced than US officials realised. 

 

The test has raised new questions about why the US often underestimated China’s military modernisation. “We have no idea how they did this,” said a fourth person."

  

Let's look at some background information on hypersonic missiles aka hypersonic glide vehicles as found on the Satellite Observation website:

  

1.) What is a hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV)? 

 

"Whereas a supersonic vehicle flies above the speed of sound (Mach 1, around 1000km/h or 650 knots), a hypersonic one flies above Mach 5. But it not only the speed that makes hypersonics attractive: indeed, ballistic missiles routinely achieve speeds of up to Mach 25 and are 1960s technology. The true appeal of hypersonics is the combination of speed and maneuverability, which makes them extremely difficult to defend against, and allows for compressed engagement timelines against elusive targets."

 

Here is a video on hypersonic glide vehicles/weapons from The RAND Corporation:

 

2.) How detectable are hypersonic glide vehicles/weapons?

 

"Hypersonic glide vehicles are something entirely different (than ballistic missiles). They are launched by a ballistic missile and are completely unpowered after separation. However, instead of flying on a predictable ballistic arc like traditional reentry vehicles, they dive back in the atmosphere. There, they experience drag, which slows them down. However, due to their shape, they also experience aerodynamic lift, which allows them to glide on the atmosphere, and counterbalances their weight. Thus, they can fly as far if not further as a warhead on a ballistic trajectory launched on the same booster.  The first benefit of such a trajectory is that they stay closer to the ground, as their altitude is around 30km to 100km, so it is harder to detect them from the ground: radar and optical sensors being blocked by the curvature of the Earth, they can approach their target without being detected until the last moment, which makes defending against them much more complicated as shown on this graphic:

 

The maximum radar detection range against a vehicle flying at 30km is 700km. Also, because of they maneuverability, glide vehicles do not have to fly on a straight line: they can take the long route around radars or interceptors to avoid engagement, or to hide their true target."

 

Currently, China, Russia and the United States are involved in HGV research with China widely being viewed as the leader in the field as quoted here:

  

"China is one of those countries that is focused on both fields. It is widely acknowledged to be the leader in the field of hypersonic systems, having already fielded such weapons in the form of the DF-17 hypersonic glide vehicle.

The DF-17 HGV made its first public appearance at a military parade held in China’s capital Beijing in late 2019. The weapon appears to use a standard ballistic missile booster in its first stage for the initial boost of a glide vehicle, which is used to attack a target following reentry.

The DF-17s at the parade were mounted on a wheeled, five-axle transporter-erector-launcher. This makes the system road-mobile like much of the ballistic missile arsenal of China’s People’s Liberation Army. This could potentially complicate any attempt by an adversary to strike the systems prior to launch.

U.S. government sources have said China carried out several tests of HGVs, including the DF-17, since 2014. The DF-17 is the first system of its type known to be operational in the world, although several other nations including the U.S. are developing similar systems.

 

In addition, China is also believed to be developing an air-launched HGV, with a video briefly posted on Chinese social media in October last year showing a People’s Liberation Army Air Force Xi’an H-6N bomber landing at an air base carrying what appeared to be a boost-glide HGV — or at least a mock-up used for carriage and other flight tests."

 

Here is a video showing China's DF-17 from the aforementioned 2019 military parade:

 

With that background in mind, let's look at what China had to say about Washington's response to its latest test of its homegrown HGV as quoted from the Global Times, the Chinese Communist Party's mouthpiece with my bolds:

 

"The Financial Times (FT) quoted on Saturday several sources saying that "the Chinese military launched a rocket that carried a hypersonic glide vehicle" in August and judged it to be a "nuclear-capable hypersonic missile." According to the FT article, the missile "flew through low-orbit space" and could help China "negate" US missile defense systems which are designed to target the fixed parabolic trajectory of a ballistic missile. The progress of the Chinese military has "caught US intelligence by surprise," the report said.

 

The US generally has the ability to monitor global missile launches. If the FT report is to be believed, it means that there is a key new member in China's nuclear deterrence system, which is a new blow to the US' mentality of strategic superiority over China. According to the FT, the China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology announced the 77th and 79th launches of the Long March 2C rocket, but there was no announcement of a 78th launch. The report believes the 78th "secret launch" may be to test the above-mentioned hypersonic missile.

 

It is meaningless to discuss the credibility of the FT report. But it is important to note the unstoppable trend that China is narrowing the gap with the US in some key military technologies as China is continuously developing its economic and technological strength. China doesn't need to engage in an "arms race" with the US - it is capable of weakening the US' overall advantages over China by developing military power at its own pace.

 

In the long term, the comparison between the military powers of China and the US will be in the following paradigm：The US' overall military advantage will be maintained, while its air force and navy have higher quality and its global deployment and projection capabilities will be unmatched by China's. Meanwhile, China won't have any will to globally challenge the US' dominant position in military sphere, and the US shouldn't worry about losing its military hegemony."

 

The op-ed piece goes on to note that China has no intention of launching a nuclear race with the United States and that it has no intention of building a nuclear force to rival that of the U.S. despite what American lawmakers would have us believe. China's military buildup will focus on the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea as quoted here:

 

"It is inevitable that China will take an upper hand over the US military strength in these areas thanks to the geographical proximity and the continuous increase of China's input. Chinese society has not only strong expectations for this, but also strong determination and corresponding ability to realize this reversal. The US' conventional military superiority around the world will not translate into a guarantee of superiority in these regions."

 

Here is a closing quote from the op-ed:

 

"The future strategic balance between China and the US cannot be achieved by carrying out an extreme "arms race." The two sides need to rebuild a certain strategic mutual trust, which is the key to forming a security buffer zone between China and the US. Can't major powers with different political systems cooperate with each other to achieve a win-win result? Must one overwhelm the other? As China and the US prepare for the worst, we must not give up. Both sides must explore a political and security framework that can accommodate the major long-term interests of both countries for the benefit of both countries and the world at large and never yield in that."  

 

With China's latest test of its high tech weapons, it is clear that the global balance of power, particularly in the Far East, is shifting quickly and that any threats that the United States poses to the historical relationship with China and Taiwan and China's territorial claims in the South China Sea will be met with force.  While American educators and legislators squabble over political correctness in the education system, particularly when it comes to mathematics, China is using its superior science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) educational framework to achieving its goal of military superiority with great success.

Addendum October 21, 2021

Just to keep my readers posted on the latest developments, here is a letter from Senator Lindsey Graham regarding China's test:

How Bill Gates' Investment Portfolio Shows His Climate Hypocrisy

Bill Gates, the world's foremost untrained climatologist (among other skills) has made it quite clear to the useless eaters that the world will not survive if we don't wean ourselves from fossil fuels and transfer the economy to a green energy future.  That said and as is often the case, Bill Gates says one thing and does quite another as you will see in this posting.

  

Let's start out with some background.  While Bill Gates is now not officially linked to Microsoft, having retired from his position on the company's Board of Directors in March 2020, he is still a substantial shareholder, holding a greater percentage of the company's stock than key insiders as shown here:

 

With Gates' historical links to Microsoft in mind, let's look at one of their products, Microsoft Azure.  Azure  was originally known as Windows Azure and was release to the pubic in February 2010.  Here is the lead page from Azure's website:

Customers innovating with Azure included Chevron, ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell as shown here:

...and here:

Now, let's switch to another aspect of Bill Gates.  Cascade Investments LLC is a Washington-based holding company which is controlled by Gates and contains the assets outside of his Microsoft holdings.  Here are the holdings currently held by Cascade Investments:

 

In his latest Schedule 13D SEC Filing for Cascade, we find this:

 

Gates currently owns 77,787,431 shares of Canadian National Railway or 11 percent of the company's total shares issued after apparently transferring 14.1 million shares to ex-wife in early May 2021 as part of their divorce settlement.  In addition, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation holds an additional 13,907,283 CN shares as shown here:

Now, let's take a closer look at Canadian National Railway. This is one of CN's core businesses:

 

Note that one of the products being shipped by CN is oil from Canada's tar sands which are widely regarded as some of the dirtiest oil in the world by climate change promotors.

Here's more about CN and its links to tar sands products:

 

Here is an excerpt from the company explaining what Canapux are:

"CanaPux™ technology is an innovative and safe way to transport extra-heavy crude, also known as bitumen in Canada. The extra-heavy crude is blended with polymer to form a solid pellet that can be transported to global markets using the same infrastructure as coal or petroleum coke. At the end of their journey the pellets can be re-liquified and the polymer can be separated and reused."

Here is an excerpt from its most recent investor presentation from July 2021 showing the company's heavy involvement in fossil fuels:

 

So, given Gates' very significant investment in a company whose business model is heavily reliant on the transportation of those nasty greenhouse gas-creating substances and his investment in Microsoft and its Azure product which is designed to help oil companies become more efficient, we can clearly see another case of hypocrisy when it comes to Gates' public views on global climate change that he is trying to foist on those of us who should be eating weeds and insects so that there is plenty of beef for him to partake of without further damaging Planet Earth.