Anti Fed Ed Warriors, what is the NSF? That’s short for National Science Foundation. NSF is a United States NGO (non governmental organization). NSF is also a huge part of the UN (United Nations) and the CCSS Machine. (*Note: I’ve included all my previous articles connecting the NSF to the UN.)
So, what’s the latest from NSF? How does it connect to education? What can we do to stop this?
These questions are answered below. I hope all the evidence will help you educate others about this harmful misinformation.
Cold Hard Fact #1:
The truth is often referred to as ‘cold hard facts‘. Why? These are pieces of information which are of no slanted opinion, but evidence. That evidence can either be accepted, as painful as that might be, or it can be twisted to suit an agenda. It’s the latter that the NSF has operated in for years, especially in education.
Cold Hard Fact #2:
Warriors, back in 2016, the NSF rolled out a “Big 10” List of agenda points, according to this recent website announcement.
Warriors, did you see the price tag for each of the 10 Ideas? A whopping $30 million each. That’s a total of
$300 million TAXPAYER dollars, my friends..based off junk science, not the truth.
Cold Hard Fact #3:
What are the Big 10? Warriors, long term ‘research’ projects. Based, not on fact based science, but what’s become quasi-science. In other words, whatever supposed research which carries on the CCSS Machine/UN agenda. Don’t believe it? Look below:
Cold Hard Fact #4:
Warriors, from the email alert I received, it appears the NSF is hyper focused on Idea #5, the “New Arctic”.
Sorry, I have to ask this..when did the “Old Arctic” go away? Is it not, in truth (cold hard fact) the SAME Arctic as we’ve always had?
Here’s an excerpt to somehow justify why NSF wants to pour $30 million dollars into this,
“Arctic temperatures are warming faster than nearly everywhere else on Earth, with some models predicting that continued warming could produce an ice-free Arctic Ocean by mid-century. The rapid and wide-scale changes occurring in response to this warming portend new opportunities and unprecedented risks to natural systems; social and cultural systems; economic, political and legal systems; and built environments of the Arctic and across the globe. Gaps in scientific observations and the prevalence of interdependent social, natural, and built systems in the Arctic make it challenging to predict the region’s future. Understanding and adapting to a changing Arctic will require creative new directions for Arctic-related research, education, workforce development, and leveraging of science, engineering, and technology advances from outside the Arctic.“
The underlying goals for Big Idea #5? To have the general public understand how we must be forward-thinking and use every available opportunity to recreate how we live, learn, and, work to support a new and changing Arctic region. What will be used to help us understand? STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and, Math)! Warriors, as I’ve proved in cold hard fact based research before, STEM is the #1 tool of the UN’s SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) to force education (all ages, all choices) to become THE ‘change agent’ for how we work, where we work, where we live, how we live, and, what we believe!
Warriors, let’s pause for just a moment. Let’s remember that much of the conversation and actions centering on climate change involves 5G and other technology which are creating more damage to our world than the supposed rise/fall in temperatures. Our federal government is tripping over itself to enforce as much UN-led climate change rhetoric as humanly possible.
(Source for the above screen shot and further information)
If you’re curious about some of the questions connected to these lofty NSF plans for the Arctic, go here. You’ll be able to see even more CCSS Machine and UN led BS.
Closing:
Warriors, here’s an idea I’m sure you’d like to pass on to those elected to carry out our wishes, how about ending NSF funding altogether? It’s one of the biggest wastes of our American tax dollars to enforce globalism, don’t you think?
