Category Archives: Science

Female Behavior, Shit Tests, and The Selfish Gene


One shit test too many: Anglo women have pushed men over the edge

If there’s one thing a man learns about women when he literally beds hundreds of them in his own personal anthropological experiment trying to find out what makes females tick (as well as his own taste for hedonism—heh) it’s that there are no unicorns. Those with powers of keen observation and rational analysis notice women are naturally gifted with the innate behavior the philosopher Schopenhauer called dissimulation, that is the tendency to conceal their true thoughts and feelings.

When a man watches female behavior instead of listening to their words patterns begin to emerge. One of the most important patterns a man might notice is that the most powerful force in the universe is hypergamy, not compound interest as Einstein humorously stated. Hypergamy is of course the human female’s tendency to marry up (never down) in social status. Oxford-educated anthropologist Robert Briffault knew this in the 1930s, but of course Utopia-seeking Western social engineers completely ignored what made society stable in mad pursuit of magic theories that were going to fix everything.

Their egalitarian notions of some sort of sexual equality were doomed to failure, and the failure was baked right into the cake. Briffault wrote:

The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.

That simple sentence, followed to its logical conclusion could have stopped the impending sexual disenfranchisement and subsequent disengagement of Western men from their own nations.

Briffault knew if a woman can’t use a man for something—money, social status, power or all three—she wants nothing to do with said man no matter how attractive a man he might be or how altruistic he is. A perfectly equal society is a society in which women have ZERO attraction to men, because men in such a society would be bereft of the qualities that make them attractive to women in the first place. Feminism was destined to create chaos from its inception.

Women will do anything for the seed of a top dog. Just watch as they literally faint in old videos of The Beatles and turn into total whores whenever a dominant male enters the room, or orbit actors like DiCrapio. Guys like DiCrapio look and act like douches but have the key female-attracting intoxicants: money, status, and power. (If you want to see what it’s like to be an alpha male and see the power of hypergamy in full swing, go to a country in which you have high social capital and watch how differently you are treated than when you’re in America or Europe. But, bear in mind women’s interest in you as a human being is purely an illusion.)

Feminism fails to account for the fact that removing money, status, and power from men will ultimately unleash chaos on society.

Of course, the fact the world is melting down is based not only on Utopia-seeking sociological behavior that ignores fundamental principles of anthropology. Politicians and social engineers also ignore the primacy of a relatively new concept in science known as The Selfish Gene (which incidentally led George R. Price, one of its discoverers to suicide). They formulate hypotheses about a “perfect world” then try to simulate the real world using Game Theory (not the game theory of the manosphere) which reduces people to mathematical equations social engineers then plug into computer models. These models currently tell politicians the solution to all the world’s ills is to throw everything up in the air, destroy national identities and borders, and pretend ethnic and sexual differences don’t matter in fantastical sort of New World Order that is destined for catastrophe.

The Utopians most crucially missed the implications of The Selfish Gene on male/female relations.


Female enigmatic, selfish behavior is coded into their genetic makeup

The Selfish Gene

If it’s been said once, it’s been said a thousand times, nice guys finish last. But why is it that women choose dominance every time over niceness, dooming notions of sexual equality to dismal failure?

The Selfish Gene theory could explain the tendency of women not only to marry up, but to completely disregard the bottom 4/5 of men as potential suitors as The Pareto Principle suggests and eyewitness evidence in any club in America will illustrate. Here’s a simple definition of The Selfish Gene:

A lineage is expected to evolve to maximize its inclusive fitness—the number of copies of its genes passed on globally (rather than by a particular individual).

This theory is bad news for men in a sexual market that has shifted to look more like a jungle than a civilization since the advent of “women’s liberation” a.k.a. feminism. The Realtalk translation of that very effete sounding definition of The Selfish Gene works out to: Women want to fuck the winners, and they will fuck over the losers.

Women have evolved to disregard and even harbor contempt for “inferior” DNA. In a cruel world in which survival of the fittest has been the rule from day one over 4 billion years ago when life began to form in the slime, being a nice boy doesn’t cut it. Women, more than men, are beholden to the influences of The Selfish Gene, and though we may lament its effects on our sexual and familial prospects as men there are sound biological reasons women have evolved to be ruthless when it comes to choosing sexual partners.

It all comes down to survival of the genes.

Even though the following information is regularly hidden in academia because it doesn’t fit the West’s cultural narratives, studies of sexual behavior have led to quite the stunning revelation that harems are quite a normal part of human history. And indeed, it seems this tendency of women to orbit dominant men while using weaker men for resources is becoming the norm once again in the 21st century world in which cultural mores designed to keep women’s sexuality from destroying society have blindly been discarded in a vain pursuit of making “a better world.”

As reported on my blog in June in The History of Harems: Women Orbit, Too, anthropological studies have found evidence that harems have been quite the norm throughout most of history:

Here are some other parts of the world in which women were in harems of a dominant man rather than the one and only of hapless Beta males, the exact type of male they show open contempt towards today:

  • Egypt: Pharaohs demanded to be in the constant company of numerous beautiful girls.
  • Sri Lanka: King Kashyapa had a harem that numbered 500.
  • Mexico: Montezuma had 4,000 concubines when he met Cortez.
  • China: One emperor had 2,800 concubines.
  • Africa: Junior wives and concubines orbited Chieftans.
  • Mongolia: Genghis Khan fathered so many children 1 in 200 men have his DNA today.

The University of Wisconsin showed the practice of maintaining harems is far from unusual in history. It surveyed 1,000 historical societies to find out how common polygyny has been, and the findings are astonishing: Just 18% of historical societies were monogamous. Half of rest of the 82% had occasional polygyny and the other half had it all the time. If nothing else, this historical fact helps show why women have such contempt for Beta males – they are not as valuable for providing material things as high status men.

So women (like men, but moreso) are driven by coding from selfish genes, women want dominant men and don’t care about the rest (incidentally this is the rule in other species as well), and they do not think about the consequences of their actions on the long term viability of the civilization they’re in. They’d rather be in a harem with a dominant man than the “one and only” of a nice boy. The West was unique in that it had evolved to offer males a seat at the table of the human family via culturally enforced monogamy. That offer has since been rescinded.


Utopian dreams are turning into dystopian hell

What Does It All Mean

The world we are heading into, rather than being an altruistic world envisioned by liberals and other clueless dupes is going to be an increasingly unstable world as men vie with each other in contests to be top dog for the sexual and reproductive advantages. Women benefit, and arguably the human genome benefits because the strongest genes survive, but civilization loses and it loses big as primitive sexual forces and survival instincts are unleashed on a soft, delusional society.

This, more than anything else explains why women are welcoming rapists into cucked nations in Europe and outbreeding in increasing numbers in the U.S. It’s a giant civilizational shit test courtesy of selfish genes, of which women are more controlled by than men, who have greater powers of logic and reasoning.

The West’s attempts at making a better world in pursuit of the ultimate fulfillment of its Spenglerean Prime Symbol of Infinity, in the modern sense a strange ideology that sees world socialism as the be all, end all to humanity’s problems will end in tragedy. This is especially true in that it is blindly meddling with the primal forces of nature. It seems our “wise” leaders have thrown the dice one too many times in a delusional dream to bring about a “better world” but have unwittingly unleashed primitive forces (like The Selfish Gene and concepts Freud also worried about) that will destroy it.

It all boils down to liberalism being a giant Utopian dream that failed, and instead of taking us all to heaven as it claimed it would, it is casting us all into hell.

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month. This The New Modern Man article originally ran on Return of Kings.


False Advertising: Women Hide Their True Faces with Makeup

Are you sure that chick your with is hot? Or is it all paint and plastic?

Are you sure that chick your with is hot? Or is it all paint and plastic?

Maybe first dates need to involve going swimming. The deception is real, gentlemen.

If ever there was a palpable demonstration of women’s innate tendency to dissemble – disguise or conceal themselves and their true feelings – it plays out with the unbelievable amount of makeup Western women wear. A man doesn’t know what kind of creature is really under there until all the war paint is washed off. Just look at the demonstration above. That chick goes from a 4 on a good day without makeup to a 7 or 8 with it. (She loses points for having a flat chest).

Obviously, wearing makeup is a woman’s attempt to raise her sexual market value, no matter what women say. (As always, watch what women DO not what they SAY). Makeup is such an obsession that American women spend nearly $500 billion a year on cosmetics. They then laughably say they don’t want to be judged on physical beauty, proving both the concept of the hamster rationalization and female susceptibility to groupthink correct at the same time.

Psychology today has its own theory about why women wear makeup.

Beyond any attractiveness measures, cosmetics may help women create certain favorable social perceptions. Indeed, a recent experiment revealed that women pictured wearing cosmetics were evaluated as healthier, more confident, and even having greater earning potential than the same women wearing no makeup.

Make no mistake, social creatures they are, women have been enhancing themselves in an attempt to catch the eye of an Alpha male and to stay competitive with other women for thousands of years. The history of cosmetics goes back at least 6,000 years and involves every society on earth. Much to the chagrin of feminists, biologically and psychologically women know their appearance is what counts to men, and men could give a rat’s ass about their college degree and all the YouGoGrrl careerism they’re flaunting. It always has been and always will be this way.

Makeup hides women’s facial flaws and enhances their two most important facial features: eyes and lips.

Science confirms what we in the manosphere already know. The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology found women wear “romantic red” lipstick to attract men. Specifically, red lips subconsciously advertise to potential mates that another kind of lips are also of high quality. Current Anthropology did a scientific study and found females wear makeup to advertise their fertility, hide their age, and retain neotany, or juvenile features in the adult animal. In other words, old women want to be able to compete with nubile 20-year olds. It’s the desperate female attempt to fight the effects of The Wall and the loss of social capital and power.

It all goes back to youth, fertility, and beauty, the holy trinity of female sexual market value. Of course, the sexual market is the granddaddy of all other markets. Even the New York Daily News got the memo:

Women know this intrinsically and they understand that the mouth and eye region are the two most powerful parts of the face for communication. This is why women innately seek to highlight their eyelids by wearing mascara and eye shadow, and their lip region by wearing lipstick and lip liner. The additional of color to these importance facial areas increased the non-verbal femininity cues perceived by others.

But, as Western women’s attitudes make them repellent towards most men, are they overcompensating by wearing too much makeup? The Atlantic found an interesting little nugget:

People thought the [American] models looked best when they were wearing just 60 percent as much makeup as they had applied.

The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology did a study of makeup and attractiveness and found a plausible reason why Western women cake it on:

Taken together, these results suggest that women are likely wearing cosmetics to appeal to the mistaken preferences of others. These mistaken preferences seem more tied to the perceived expectancies of men, and, to a lesser degree, of women.

So, women are wearing too much makeup, and they’re doing it to meet the perceived expectations of men. Yep, we have a case of overcompensation here since bitchiness and frigidness and carousel riding drives quality men away. Feminism has not been kind to women, especially the dupes that believe in it.

Alicia Keys has been pushing a no-makeup campaign in an effort to stay in the headlines

Alicia Keys has been pushing a no-makeup campaign in an effort to stay in the headlines

Foregoing Makeup

Some women like Mila Kunis (Jackie on That 70s Show) are calling for women to post no makeup selfies and eschew makeup, no doubt in a bid to get attention in the cutthroat and sociopathic PR game. Alicia Keys also put out the Strong, Independent Woman propaganda when she did a photo shoot without makeup.

[I was] the strongest, most empowered, most free, and most honestly beautiful that I have ever felt.

Keys has even started a no makeup campaign and has created controversy because of it. Read: As her star fades, this is her attempt at staying in the news. Keys posted this after her recent makeup-free appearance at the VMAs.

Y’all, me choosing to be makeup free doesn’t mean I’m anti-makeup.

Whatever. Feminists want women to stop wearing makeup altogether and here we are just trying to find some balance between no makeup and face fraud. Why must women choose one extreme or the other in so many things they do rather than trying to achieve a sense of balance?

A little makeup goes a long way. It’s just that makeup application become such a deceptive art in modern times a man can be dating a dog without knowing it. Nothing wrong with being sexy and alluring, but when it gets to the point the woman with the makeup looks nothing like the one without it, we have a problem.

When I worked in the news business it was amazing to see our female “stars” without their face paint on. Well, maybe amazing isn’t the word for it. It was horrifying. Every single female anchor easily got their SMV cut in half without makeup on.

It certainly is interesting to know what’s lurking behind all those cosmetics. Just be prepared when your “catch” takes them off. Women have been wearing so much makeup for so long when a man sees her true face he’s almost as horrified as when a woman stops acting and her real personality comes out.

Time for a swim?

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.

The Chrysler Turbine Car Reflects Bygone Era of American Greatness

Chrysler achieved the feat of putting a jet turbine engine in a car in the 1960s

Chrysler achieved the feat of putting a jet turbine engine in a car in the 1960s

Imagine, a jet-powered car. Chrysler made it a reality back in the 1960s, even though the idea was unfortunately short lived. The Chrysler Turbine is just what the name says – a jet turbine powered car. It’s quite a remarkable engineering feat, and not only reflects an era when not only the chrome was thick and the women were straight (Michael Savage’s great line) but an era when American car companies were fearless instead of gutless.

Jay Leno has one of the last surviving Turbines. You can watch Leno driving his Turbine around as well as demonstrating a cool, vintage technical video about how the Turbine works on YouTube. It sounds like a jet sitting on the tarmac when he fires it up and whisks away in it. Leno says of the Turbine:

Most were destroyed by Chrysler for tax and liability reasons, which is a shame, because to this day everyone who rides in a Turbine says, “Whoa, this feels like the future!” You turn the key and there’s a big whoosh and a complete absence of vibration… I think it’s the most collectible American car—it was so different. Most of all, the Chrysler Turbine is a reminder that all the cool stuff used to be made in the U.S. I hope it will be again.

The jet engine theme carries over to the rear of the Chrysler Turbine

The jet engine theme carries over to the rear of the Chrysler Turbine

Other than a couple handfuls of survivors (nine in total), all Chrysler Turbines were recalled and crushed. Perhaps because a turbine engine, once realized and after a few generations of engineering could likely eliminate the need for most mechanics. The turbine engine only used 1/5 of the number of moving parts as a regular car engine, and turbines are dead reliable as they power jet aircraft all over the world. Of the 1.1 million miles of driving accumulated by testers, downtime on the cars stood at only 4% and was the result of owners incorrectly using leaded gas. The Chrysler Turbine could also use just about any type of fuel, an engineering feat that surely upset the Seven Sister oil companies of the day. Gasoline, kerosene, jet fuel, vegetable oil, and even Tequila – as demonstrated by Mexico’s then-President Adolfo Lopez-Mateos – could power the Turbine.

The Turbine is all the more impressive since Chrysler engineers worked hard to have cool exhaust coming out of the back of a very hot engine, and succeeded as exhaust gas temperatures were LOWER than other automobiles of the day. Also in the “cool” department, the Turbine does not have a traditional “coolant temp” gauge, it has an inlet temp gauge which reads 500, 1000, 1500, and 2000 degrees Fahrenheit. Performance and fuel economy from the engine was good for its day, and continued refinement of the design would have no doubt advanced the design.

Other than the engine, everything else about the Turbine is pretty much stock 1960s Chrysler, except the body of the car which was manufactured in Italy. Its design is not gaudy but elegant, another impressive achievement in an era in which automotive styling could in your face. The project was totally abandoned by 1977.

The Chrysler Turbine is a symbol of time when America was self-confident in its ability to do just about anything, like put a man on the moon, and the car reflects that pride. It also reflects the ballsy nature of men who ran corporations back then. They were fearless and willing to try new ideas instead of rehashing old ideas in pursuit of quarterly profits. How unfortunate for us the micromanagers and bean counters took over.

The fear of failure is worse than failure itself. Something we should remember as men and as a nation. While the car was never a commercial success, perhaps because it was so costly, the idea was sound and continued development of the Turbine should have continued. The shelving of this idea by Chrysler means the dominance of a 100-year old design, the internal combustion engine continues to this day. How many more great ideas were shelved because of the influence of big oil companies?

For now, all we can do is enjoy this little slice of history and wonder about what might have been.

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.

The Carousel Effect: DNA from Previous Sex Partners Could Affect Future Offspring


The DNA from previous sex partners has been shown to influence offspring from future fathers in other species

If the controversial revelations in Sperm Wars revealing the harsh truths about just how tricky women’s fertility can be and how promiscuous the history of the human species has been were not enough, here’s another bombshell that just dropped. When a woman breaks up with a man she has had sex with, or is a frequent carousel rider, there’s speculation among genetic researchers based on genetic testing that something of her former partners could affect any future offspring she has with her new partner. Call it nature pre-cucking Captain Save-a-Ho.

The idea is referred to as telegony, and has been around since Greek times, but was struck down around a century ago by modern science. However, science is always moving and changing. Shockingly, a new study from Australian researchers and reviewed by English researchers reveals ancient wisdom may challenge the accepted wisdom from the ministers of promiscuity and the pro-carousel brigade. As reported by Medical Daily:

[Telegony] was first proposed by the Greek philosopher Aristotle and was accepted as science until the early 1900s when it was disproved and replaced by more modern genetic theory. Unfortunately, the theory was largely used as a fear tactic to prevent women from copulating with different races or lower classes, but the study suggests the theory may have some elements of truth — for flies, at least.

Pro-feminist propaganda aside, even that article admits the hypothesis may have some legitimacy in humans. It just can’t bring itself to criticize the 1960s idea that women should sleep around as a way of “empowering” themselves. Amazingly, in flies, the traits of males the female has previously mated with can be transmitted to future offspring sired by other males. Dr. Angela Crean, lead researcher on the gene research project a the University of New South Wales in Australia explains:

We found that even though the second male sired the offspring, offspring size was determined by what the mother’s previous mating partner ate. Our new findings take this to a whole new level — showing a male can also transmit some of his acquired features to offspring sired by other males.

Of course, this finding has a long way to go from being proven to be the case in humans. However, just as a Marxist lobotomy removed many of the teachings and ancient wisdom from the Overton Window of acceptable discourse, ideas taken for granted in the Bible that forms the basis of the world’s three major religions, could the traditional prohibitions on female promiscuity be validated once again, this time by science?


Research shows genetics of offspring may be more complicated than just a simple sperm and egg

What About Mammals

Beyond flies, there is precedent for the effect of telegony occurring in other mammals, the Class humans belong to. Crean continues:

There is no evidence of such effects in humans, but there has not been any research on this possibility in humans. There is a potential for such effects in mammals. For example, there is a lot of fetal DNA in maternal blood during pregnancy, and this could potentially play a role in such effects. There is also evidence in mammals that seminal fluid affects offspring development, so semen from one male could potentially influence the development of eggs fertilized by another male (which is what we think is happening in flies).

So, whether it be demographics showing a dying population (and a spiritually dead one at that) in the West, religious prohibitions on female carousel riding going back 5,000 years, or emerging science showing that female promiscuity might just be affecting the genetic material of future offspring she has with any future Beta male once she gets off the carousel, there are a lot of negative effects when it comes to a culture letting women run wild, well beyond the sexual jungle and disincentive for male participation it creates.

There are tantalizing suggestions that the first father of a woman’s children may determine at least some of the traits of all of her children. It truly could be first come, first served in nature. And another scientific dagger in the heart of women’s lib, beyond the fact Oxford anthropologist J.D. Unwin revealed any society that does not practice monogamy ultimately declines in his seminal but totally ignored (today) work Sex and Culture. Crean goes on:

We know that features that run in families are not just influenced by the genes that are passed down from parents to their children. Various non-genetic inheritance mechanisms make it possible for environmental factors to influence characteristics of a child. Our new findings take this to a whole new level – showing a male can also transmit some of his acquired features to offspring sired by other males.

Call it nature cucking Betas and men who don’t dominate their partner’s sexuality. This is amazing research, and lends credence to the idea of K-selected societies practicing female chastity while r-selected societies do not. Dr. Stuart Wigby at Oxford University told the press:

This particular mechanism would be unlikely to apply to mammals such as humans because of differences in reproductive physiology compared to insects. However, other researchers have suggest that mechanisms exist that could in principle result in telegony in humans; for example because mothers carry fetal DNA in their blood during pregnancy.

Reality, once again it seems, could be stranger than fiction. Another reason to avoid long term commitments with Tinder and carousel-riding discards, as if a man needed more reasons.

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.

Ozone Layer “Hole” Big as Ever: Was It All Just Another Myth


It seems Mother Nature will be alright without crushing government interventions

Remember the infamous ozone “hole” that was supposed to fry the planet with lethal doses of UV radiation all because of human-produced CFCs? Nearly 30 years after the banning of CFCs by the Montreal Protocol the hole is bigger than ever. The fourth largest hole on record just occurred just last October, just after the frigid Antarctic winter. Well, hole is actually a misnomer as it’s really a slight seasonal thinning of the ozone layer over Antarctica. Most troublingly, the appearance of the ozone hole out of nowhere in 1978 coincided with the expiration of an important big business CFC patent even though this organic compound had been in use since the 1930s!

In any case, the political sophists who write articles for mass consumption for the lamestream media, maybe by accident, at least went so far as to give us a half truth about how the ozone hole forms. This revelation interferes with not just one, but two major scares being pushed by corrupt government officials and adherents to the environmental religion. The Weather Network wrote:

Why did the ozone hole grow so large this year? It was a combination of just how persistent ozone-depleting chemicals are in the atmosphere, and just how cold the atmosphere got over Antarctic during the past month.


The ozone hole peaks during the Antarctic winter (June-September in the Southern Hemisphere)

What? The ozone hole is dependent on cold temperatures? Yes. It is also a function of the lack of sunlight for 6 months over Antarctica as ozone is an unstable molecule that regularly falls apart and becomes regular old oxygen. Ozone regenerates from atmospheric oxygen only in sunlight. Some scientists now say the ozone hole has likely always been there, and it does show a correlation with changing seasons – at polar latitudes a correlation with 6 months of sunlight and 6 months of darkness. It is also correlated with temperatures that are much, much colder over the South Pole than the North Pole. Further, the fact the atmosphere got so cold as to help destroy ozone goes against the “hotter planet than ever” global warming polemic. So, there are major problems with yet another leftist doom and gloom narrative brought on by the ozone-destroying extreme cold over Antarctica.

Clyde Spencer explains how the ozone generation-destruction cycle is deeply connected to sunlight, seasonally changing temperatures, and the seasonal presence or absence of the Antarctic polar vortex. Additionally, the Antarctic polar vortex is much stronger and more persistent than the Artic polar vortex – meaning the often Antarctic is “cut off” from areas of the atmosphere where ozone is being generated.

From my reading on the subject, the bulk of Earth’s ozone is created in the equatorial stratosphere. It moves polewards both because of a lesser partial pressure of ozone at higher latitudes, and also because of equatorial heating and cooling at the poles. In any event, ozone has a relatively short half-life, and in the absence of sunlight, there is no new ozone created at the poles in the Winter to replenish what naturally decays. As I remarked in a previous post, anomalously high concentrations are routinely recorded outside the Antarctic circumpolar vortex. I’m not sure of the exact mechanism that stalls the migration, but the evidence is visible. As to the photolysis and catalytic destruction when the sun first comes up over the horizon, I’m pretty sure it happens, but the effect is probably overemphasized. The Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer was unable to measure Winter ozone levels because it required sunlight, something in short supply over the South Pole in the Winter. So, what we see is during the earliest possible measurements, there is low ozone which continues to decrease in concentration until the vortex breaks up and the ozone sitting outside the vortex can mix with the depleted air. Once the sun gets high enough in the sky, it is capable of actually producing some ozone over the pole, although it is by then also supplemented by ozone from lower latitudes as it is free to migrate into that area in the absence of the vortex.

The above explanation was left as a comment to an excellent article by Dr. Tim Ball entitled The Ozone Scare Was A Dry Run For The Global Warming Scare. Dr. Ball explains this idea in that article:

There is not now and never was a “hole in the ozone.” The phrase was a public relations construct to mislead and exploit fear as the basis for a political agenda. The procedure used in the exploitation of environmental and climate for a political agenda is to take normal patterns and events and present them as, or imply, they are abnormal. It works because most people don’t know what is normal. Global warming became the largest exploitation of this practice, but it was based on the knowledge gained from reported ozone depletions over Antarctica. The ozone deception served as a forerunner, a practice run, for the global warming deception to follow.

The global warming deception is one of the linchpins to global government, as revealed by Lord Christopher Monkton in his reporting of what is actually being discussed at the annual global warming conferences. Contrary to counter propaganda telling us what a success global governments’ ozone layer intervention was that’s being put out this summer, the hole has not been fixed by eliminating a cheaper, more effective and easier to use refrigerant called Freon. And as we will see, its replacement Puron is anything but pure.


One of the biggest ozone holes ever recorded just happened over Antarctica, contradicting the old narrative that it would be in the process of disappearing by now

Record Ozone Hole After Last Winter

Despite the fact the ozone hole expanded to a 4th largest on record extent of 28.2 million square kilometers just last winter, propagandists and sycophants adhere to a narrative that the ozone hole is slowly healing. The consumption of ozone depleting substances has plummeted since 1987, yet now we are supposed to believe the chemicals are “long-lived” even though the people pushing the ozone hole polemic said the hole would fade away by 2030 to 2050. We are only 13.5 years away from 2030, and if anything the size of the hole has stabilized. Illustrating the media echo chamber in full effect, and the predilection of media to take the “official” word claiming the sky is purple in the face of evidence from the peons telling them that it’s blue, the National Geographic says its right on pace with the expected timeline, in the face of contradictory evidence.


The size of the ozone hole has stabilized around an average of 20-25 million km for 25 years

Vox (another echo chamber blog) reported just this month the ozone hole is healing despite the size hole stabilizing around a large mean over the past 20 years, and the fact we just had one of the largest holes on record. This graph using data from NASA and the European Environment Agency shows the hole has stabilized around a mean of 20-25 million square kilometers since 1992.

The data pre-1992 is highly suspect because CFCs have been used worldwide and released into the atmosphere since the 1930s, so why did the hole just magically appear in 1978 out of nowhere? Perhaps because a major chemical company needed a crisis? The critical DuPont manufacturing patent for Freon (“Process for Fluorinating Halohydrocarbons”, U.S. Patent #3258500) was set to expire in 1979. That is quite an interesting coincidence! Nonetheless, leftists are doubling down on their narrative that humans are bad and a gigantic, crushing, oppressive government is needed to save the world.

The new government-approved “environmentally friendly” Puron refrigerant is a potent greenhouse gas that was developed as a replacement in an age in which we are supposed to be worried sick about global warming. (Notice how PR flacks mangle words like “pure” into a product that is anything but pure!) The Marxist media never brings the fact up we are mass producing a greenhouse gas far stronger than CO2 as an “environmentally friendly” replacement. The duplicity and hypocrisy is astounding.

The important concept to take away from all this is there are a lot of questions that need to be raised about the ozone hole scare, as well as the seemingly unending list of scares that could have been invented out of whole cloth by a corporate-government complex that lives and dies by the adage you have to create problems to create profit. Scaring the shit out of the population also helps a corrupt government legitimize itself as it gets the public to trade away freedom for the illusion of safety. (75% of the population of the United States now realizes its government is corrupt in the latest Gallup polling data.) As Mark Twain said, It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. Not to mention the vanishing ice age and acid rain environmental crises of the 1970s and 1980s.

It looks like have been had yet again in the age of propaganda. But, people are quickly waking up from the mass delusion created by the centralization of communication centered around the Television Age. The creation of problems like this for the fun and profit of psychopathic government officials and CEOs begs the question: How deep does this ozone… er… rabbit hole go, Alice?

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »