The National Geographic Channel documentary “Aftermath: Population Zero” describes what would happen on earth if all human suddenly disappeared. First aired on March 9, 2008, it is close to a similar History Channel special “Life after People,” which first aired on January 21, 2008. This film does not seek to identify he cause of our departure, but simply states that everyone vanishes. The program instead details how all traces of human civilization would be erased by nature. With two cable channels airing similar documentaries in such close time, we have to ask ourselves, why? Analysis of this film reveals a not-so-hidden message about global warming, the “green” movement, population reduction, and even the New World Order.
First, “Aftermath” serves as propaganda for man-made global warming. (Neglecting the fact that the number of scientists rejecting it continues to grow.) It repeatedly complains about cars pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. “Every gallon of gas they burn send nineteen pounds of carbon dioxide into the air. This greenhouse gas can pollute the sky for the next hundred years.” Even if carbon dioxide was a problem (which it isn’t), cars are not the only source. Yet they are repeatedly attacked as the primary source of global warming. “In their last year on the road, cars pumped seven billion tons of carbon dioxide into the air, more than one ton for every person on earth. This greenhouse gas accounted for half of the impact humans had on global warming.” Is this an attack on the private ownership of vehicles? Carbon dioxide is a natural gas. Humans and plants exhale it, plants inhale it. Plants need it to grow, and this film’s producers are forced to admit this. The above quote continues: “But now, the carbon dioxide will be cleaned up faster than ever before. In spring, new plants and leaves need carbon to grow. They draw it out of the air, naturally cleansing a polluted planet….All these new plants allow nature to soak up greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide faster than when humans were here.” The man-made global warming propaganda is repeated through the program.
Other themes are also repeated. We are repeatedly told that the world would be cooler and quieter without us. Cooler, not in the global warming sense, but in the sense that our body heat, black asphalt, and black roofs are no longer causing additional heating. Also, the cities will be quiet, the oceans will be quiet, and whales will be more able to find mates. In other words, the world will be better off without us. This world without humans is repeatedly called the “new world.” Quotes include “This new world is filled with new opportunities.” and “Our impact on the climate is declining. The changes are being felt all around this new world.” Is this “new world” really the New World Order? Is this vision of the world without humans a picture of what the New World Order wants? The elites want to reduce the population by up to 90%. Calling the world without humans a “new world” may be the New World Order expressing their goal of depopulation.
This film portrays humans as the enemy. We are the cause of pollution, global warming, destruction and the deaths of animals. “Man-made global warming still affects the world’s oceans, even thirty years after people stopped polluting them.” “Humans may be gone, but we’re still contributing to this destruction.” We are treated as if we were a disease, as the film asks “If we vanish, could the earth recover, even erase all evidence that we ever existed?” With man gone, cattle and chickens are no longer being slaughtered for food, the program boasts. Mankind is the enemy. Mankind is destroying the earth, killing the animals, and polluting the skies with “deadly” carbon dioxide.
Enter the so-called “green” movement. Environmentally friendly buildings and “sustainable” development are only the surface. There is nothing bad that can be said about wind power, solar heating, and recycling. But one of the core goals of the establishment’s “green” movement is revealed in this documentary. In describing New York after humans, the film states “Manhattan turns from grey to green…[Times Square] is being engulfed by a blanket of green. Nature is reclaiming the world, city by city.” One goal of environmentalism is the forced removal people from their lands and cities to allow these to re-wild, or return to their natural state. In “Aftermath,” London becomes a marsh, and Paris a swamp.
More shocking than forced relocation is the notion of mass depopulation. The elites have often stated the “need” to reduce the population by 80, 90, even 95%. It appears that this agenda is now being brought into the mainstream. We are told that humans are polluters who cause global warming breading more polluters who cause global warming. The implication is that we need to stop expanding our numbers, and shrink them. The world cannot sustain the current population levels, we are told. But what about God’s mandate to “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” (Genesis 1:28). Reproduction is discouraged by the promotion of homosexuality and abortion. However, this only slows population growth, but does not decrease the population.
How do the elites plan on getting rid of billions of people? “Aftermath” provides no clues. Perhaps a plague, perhaps nuclear war, perhaps something else. But it is becoming clear that the global warming myth is the driving force to convince the public that we are over-populated, and that some of us, those who use more than our allotted “carbon footprint,” do not deserve the right to live. When we have used up our lifetime carbon allotment, it is time to die. “If we vanished, could the earth recover…” In order for the earth to heal itself, we need to leave. “Aftermath” ends with the following narration: “Earth is resilient. In time, it cleaned up every mess we left behind. All we had to do was get out of the way.” Herein is the final solution to the global warming “problem:” we all must die.
(Views: 2524)