 I have a question about different bills signed between so-called developed nations and Bharat. What I came to know recently was that by 2030, Bharat is supposed not to produce a certain number of CO2 or carbon print. It's supposed to be replaced with renewable energy like solar or windmills and things like that. I've seen that like windmills, whichever area they are being put, it's just a disaster for the environment around it, for all the beings who are living in that area. So the question is why these nations are forcing developing nations to reduce their carbon print, whereas they have done that all these years and suddenly they realise that, okay, the others shouldn't be doing it. Well, there are many geopolitical reasons for this. They're not very rational. That whole climate change movement is just simply not based on science. That whole fear of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is not an enemy. The whole plant world depends on carbon dioxide to be alive. It can't possibly be the enemy it's made out to be. The whole wind energy lobby is producing electricity at a price which is far greater than the so-called fossil fuels, which are not always fossil fuels. And that wind energy lobby is causing a lot of damage to the world, one on a political level but also simply as you put it through the installation of all these wind turbines, environmental damage, they don't want to look at the science and the United Nations, all those various commissions will always bring science that suits an agenda which is to prevent developing nations like Bharat, India, from working with fossil fuels and the non-fossil, so-called fossil fuels and also growing through that. In fact, there's more deaths and damage caused by that lobby against fossil fuels than by the fossil fuels themselves. Way more. The science says it all. I mean, these papers are available to read everywhere. So anyone in their right senses, if they actually study the science, will clearly say there is something afoot which is strange. There are lobbies behind all of this which are trying to do something which has no basis in science. It just does not, but the price you pay for these experiments is very, very high. And I don't think these countries, these poor countries can even afford to sign those agreements because they won't be able to live up to them unless wind turbine companies are ready to put turbines everywhere in every village in India. At 664,000 villages in this country, are they ready to put a turbine in each village? I don't think so. And to demonize carbon dioxide, I don't understand that because there is no basis in science. Actually, what is happening is it's the movements in the sun that cause the climate change far more than all of the rest of it. And that's what the science says. All the independent scientific papers that are not supported by foundations and NGOs that want to push a certain agenda will say that it is clearly the movements in the sun that are causing the climate change. And what do they mean by they want a certain temperature? What temperature are they going to measure as being the right temperature so everyone is satisfied? These are all, there is a political machination behind it and there are lobbies and there are groups that want to push these new energy forms. They are actually amazing. I mean, wind energy has it's a fascinating way to produce energy, no question about it. But it is not economical, it is not environmental friendly. That's the fact. I know personally a few sites on the Mumbai-Banglore Highway. I have seen those places where they have this wind turbine. What I gathered is that the area where they are installed, the land is not anymore fertile. There are no birds, the trees are not growing in that area anymore. It's not an economical form of energy creation. The cost of setting them up, I mean look at those turbines. They are not a little donkey, they are windmill. I mean, they are like these huge constructions. And this demonizing of carbon dioxide, in fact there are many scientists who speak about it and you can read their papers. And these are real scientists they are not bought and paid for by the lobbyists. They are real scientists. And they unanimously say this. The climate change has an enormous amount to do with the sun itself and its movements and its behavior. Over centuries you can measure this. You can read historians and what they wrote about temperatures and there were very, very, very cold temperatures which suddenly over a period of 50 years or more rose. So I don't know why India has signed something like this because it's not going to be able to live up to it. It's going to mean that everyone who cooks in those huts all over the country in all those 164,000 villages are going to have to stop using coal for example. It's not feasible. It's going to result in more deaths than the climate change. It already has resulted in far, far more lives lost. This whole policy pushed through by all these people there's something transformative happening in the world today. One cannot look at all this from a logical rational point of view and start measuring the carbon dioxide. The things to measure are not the carbon dioxide. There are other parameters to measure, not the carbon dioxide. It's not as harmful as it is posited to be. And the fact that human beings limited by their logical rational approach are pushing through an agenda which is more dangerous for other human beings than if they would try to move in the direction of the expansion of consciousness because the more the consciousness expands the less a person destroys the environment. Period. That's a law of nature. It's a law of physics. And that has to be taken into account too. Tomorrow the more transformative a population is the more they can do things with energy which people can't even imagine today. And while I'm not against the development and the further experimentation with wind energy, with all of that we should continue those experiments but to impose that kind of quasi-knowledge and semi-scientific information on a large public, a large population. It's a very small minority that has these ideas and it has suddenly been absorbed as being something that everyone has to swallow. I don't think these countries who have signed such things are going to be able to live up to it anyway. I hope that they don't make their populations lose their lives because of having signed these accords. And it's interesting you bring this up today because there was this electricity failure and we are living with electricity. I mean there are those who don't want to live with electricity but it is a romantic idea not to want to live with electricity. I'll light my little candle and be happy, you know. We need energy and for India to agree to something like this I hope is a political strategy that they can revoke at some point. I mean I trust the Indian government to have a plan which is not harmful to the people. Not just of India, it's not about a political entity. It's about the poor people of the world. The poor will suffer, they will die if this is pushed through. They'll die of hunger. Then my point is, so what if everything is full of carbon dioxide in 100 years or that everything is cold? We have to think about now, we cannot make people starve because of an agenda of an elite few which has no scientific basis. It doesn't have science backing it. It just simply doesn't. There's a time to read even one of those papers by professors from universities like Harvard, like Stanford some of whom have actually left those institutions because of the corruption and have then pursued their own investigations to reach findings that are based in much more truth than the other ones who are bought and paid for. So it's a tough time actually in this whole climate policy. The world is okay, plants need carbon dioxide. Nobody is going to die because of the oceans rising a little bit. All those wealthy people with their homes at the beach can learn swimming and the poor of the world cannot be sacrificed on this climate policy, this climate madness, this climate religion.