Green agenda proponents claim that their stance is science-based, but it has nothing to do with science. It’s more of a religion to its proponents, and if we follow the path the climate alarmists dictate, it could lead to the end of civilization as we know it.
The Netherlands offers the most extreme example, where the government’s efforts to control emissions threaten the very livelihood of Dutch farmers.
The regulations, introduced last month, would limit the amount of fertilizer farmers can use on crops, and limit the livestock they can keep. In extreme cases, farmers may be forced into selling their land to the government.
"The honest message … is that not all farmers can continue their business," the government said in a statement announcing the new controls.
Queensland, Australia Sen. Malcolm Roberts speculated what the government’s goal was.
"This is the end path of climate change activism. Eventually everything has to be stopped, even our food supply,” he said. “Dutch farmers are protesting new rules that will close farms and force them to kill off livestock to curb 'emissions.'"
The Netherlands is the largest exporter of meat throughout the European Union.
Breitbart’s John Hayward suggested that mass hunger may be the ultimate objective for the green movement.
"From a political standpoint, poor and hungry people are easier to control," he said. "They don't own capital, so they have no stake in economic freedom. They can easily be made dependent on government handouts."
The notion of a hungry population even received the United Nations’ seal of approval. It published, then later deleted, a paper titled, "The Benefits of World Hunger."
But an archived version is still available.
"We sometimes talk about hunger in the world as if it were a scourge that all of us want to see abolished, viewing it as comparable with the plague or aids," the paper began.
"Hunger has great positive value to many people. Indeed, it is fundamental to the working of the world’s economy. Hungry people are the most productive people, especially where there is a need for manual labour."
That’s not science. We study science to discover how things work, and to use that knowledge to make life better on Earth — not to make it worse.
Swedish teen climate alarmist Greta Thunberg also demonstrated that the green agenda is anti-science.
She threw a tantrum when the European Union announced plans to invest further in natural gas and nuclear power plants.
"Tomorrow the European Parliament will decide whether fossil gas and nuclear will be considered 'sustainable' in the EU taxonomy," she wrote last week. "But no amount of lobbyism and greenwashing will ever make it 'green.'
We desperately need real renewable energy, not false solutions."
Her statement denies the climate worshipers’ own "science" — that carbon emissions are the cause of society’s woes. Of all fossil fuels available, natural gas is by far the cleanest, and nuclear plants emit zero carbon dioxide.
And that’s by their science — the one where climate alarmists like Al Gore attempt to stifle all objection by claiming "the science is settled," a statement that geologist Gregory Wrightstone finds laughable.
"That's just not how science works," Wrightstone, who’s also executive director of the CO2 Coalition told Newsmax. "Science works on controversy, and discussion, and argument."
He explained that contrary to the alarmists, CO2 is at historically low levels.
"We're at 420 [parts per million] today. The average for all of Earth's history is 2,600 parts per million,” Wrightstone, who wrote "Inconvenient Facts: The Science that Al Gore doesn't want you to know,” said. “It’s gotten as high as seven or eight thousand."
The real danger is excessively low CO2 levels, because "at 150 parts per million plant life can't survive, and that's the real climate catastrophe," he said.
Environmental pioneer, Dr. Patrick Moore, a co-founder and former director of Greenpeace agrees. Moore, who wrote "Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom" told Newsmax, "As far as I can see, the idea of phasing out basically all fossil fuels and achieving a net zero of carbon emissions is one of the stupidest ideas that any group has ever come up with."
He explained that increased CO2 emissions are "beneficial for nature and humanity" in the form of "a large increase in the growth of food crops and forests around the world. This is called the ‘greening of the Earth’ or ‘the CO2 fertilization effect.'"
Moore, who also serves on the CO2 Coalition’s board, described the relationship between vegetable and animal life on Earth. He explained that "plants take in carbon dioxide and water and make sugar (glucose), giving off oxygen," whereas "animals take in oxygen plus sugar, plus starch and oils that plants make from sugar, and give off CO2 and water."
And the use of fossil fuel supercharges that cycle.
Early into his administration, President Biden set a goal of "reaching net zero emissions economy-wide by no later than 2050."
Wrightstone said that in such an instance, "we would have to predict societal collapse because of the role that fossil fuels play in our society today."
He added: "If you want to live cold, dark, and hungry, you would probably encourage going to net zero."
The green movement isn’t about science — it’s a religion, a cult, and is about control.
Michael Dorstewitz is a retired lawyer and has been a frequent contributor to Newsmax. He is also a former U.S. Merchant Marine officer and an enthusiastic Second Amendment supporter. Read Dorstewitz's Reports — More Here.
© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.