Alternative 3 was a British television programme broadcast by Anglia Television (ATV) in 1977. The programme was planned to be broadcast on April 1st that year but due to scheduling problems, it was eventually broadcast in June. Its original broadcast date was a big clue to its nature. According to its creators, Alternative 3 was designed and written as a spoof, as a fictional story posing as a serious science documentary. The only problem is, the programme seemed all too real and its warning about climate-change disaster, has only become more and more believable over the years. This article will review the programme and then investigate its accuracy.

Hard to believe

Alternative 3 begins by investigating a British ‘brain drain’, a mysterious exodus of leading British scientists and engineers. They are leaving the country, supposedly to take up lucrative new posts abroad, but are never seen again. Some of them send back regular postcards but when the relatives try and visit the places abroad where the person is supposedly living, they discover that their loved one is not living there at all; the correspondence was faked. The programme then moves into an even more sinister area. Senior scientists in the UK admit, to the investigative reporters, that mysterious but extremely powerful groups, at the top levels of government, have worked out that the Earth is heading for a climate-collapse due to the greenhouse effect (note that this programme was broadcast in 1977, fifteen years before Al Gore publicised the problem in his documentary, An Inconvenient Truth). The presenter explains that these groups have concluded that in the next century-or-so, only a small fraction of Earth’s current human population will be able to live on our planet’s surface, due to the climate collapse. These secret, powerful groups have assessed the grim situation and come up with three alternatives in how to deal with the looming, global disaster. They are as follows:

Alternative 1: A drastic reduction in the global, human population.
Alternative 2: The relocation of a fraction of humanity into underground bases and subterranean cities.
Alternative 3: The establishment of human colonies on the Moon and Mars.

The programme focusses on the third alternative, hence its title. It reports on the possibility that the Russians and Americans have agreed to work on Moon and Mars bases together. This would explain the strange lack of a major war between the superpowers for so many decades. The programme expands on this idea by suggesting that Russia and America have been developing a moon base on the far side of the moon. It also suggests that the British brain drain was because the cream of the scientific crop were being recruited to develop a Mars base and in some cases, they were relocating to the new base on Mars to continue their work developing a human colony. 

Alternative 3 had a huge effect on its TV audience. After it was aired, thousands of people wrote in, or phoned in, alarmed at the programme’s content. The programme made the national papers, with many of the U.K.’s broadsheets and ‘red top’ rags discussing the programme’s contents. Although its programme-makers repeatedly insisted that they had created a piece of fiction, many people became convinced that the programme’s writers had either knowingly reported on something they knew to be true and disguised it as fiction, or had unwittingly written something as fiction that was, in fact, hard fact. Here’s a copy of the programme on YouTube:

The 2007 DVD re-release of the documentary from SODA Pictures includes the original programme and also a very interesting interview with its writers. In the interview, the programme’s writers insist that they did write the programme as a piece of fiction… but they then go on to admit that at least one of its elements were impressively prescient. As one of them states, the idea that Earth’s climate would deteriorate due to the greenhouse effect was an idea only known in scientific research circles at that time. [This isn’t entirely true. In fact, the eminent physicist Edward Teller told a group of business and fossil-fuel executives in New York in 1959 that Earth was facing devastating climate-change.] One of the writers then admitted that he’d had to dig the theory out of the scientific papers and press releases to construct its nature and meaning.

The idea that Alternative 3 was only ever a spoof seems plausible but the effect it had on the population, and the way it was treated by television networks worldwide, is strangely revealing. There is also the problem of the strange events that took place in connection with the programme. In the interview, available on the DVD, one of the writers tells several fascinating stories. Firstly, the writer explains that ‘Alternative 3’ has never been shown in the United States. The U.S. networks refused, point-blank, to show it. Secondly, Alternative 3 was shown once in Australia; it caused an uproar. When the Australian Prime Minister found out about its broadcast, he passed a law that the programme would never be shown again in Australia. Thirdly, the programme was shown in Japan; it was very popular there and it was broadcast many times. Eventually, a Japanese television crew asked the writer if they could interview him, while he was working in the States. The writer agreed and later recommended that the crew stay at the Riviera in Las Vegas. The Japanese crew took his advice; they made a last-minute change to their hotel accommodation and stayed at the Riviera, rather than the MGM Grand. On the night they were going to stay at the MGM Grand, their original booking, the floor of their hotel burnt down. The Japanese crew then contact the writer, asking to interview him on the Saturday. The writer said he was busy that day, out on location, but he was happy to meet them on Sunday. The Japanese crew agreed and changed their flight booking back to Japan. On the Sunday, they found out that their original flight had crashed the night before. These events would have rattled anyone. As the writer states in the interview, by the time he met the Japanese television crew that Sunday, they earnestly believed he was at the centre of the biggest cover-up in history. Considering what had happened, it was hardly surprising.

Too many people

Alternative 3, being what it is, is a magnet for conspiracy theories. The tricky problem with this is that logically, when given such information, any reasonably-intelligent group of billionaire would get together and discuss what to do, especially if they discovered that the entire planet was heading for environmental meltdown. This extremely wealthy and well-connected group would, most likely, then conspire together to plan some way for them and their families to survive. It’s worth remembering what the eminent physicist Edward Teller told to assembled guests at a New York Symposium in 1959, entitled Energy patterns of the future:

“Ladies and gentlemen, I am to talk to you about energy in the future. I will start by telling you why I believe that the energy resources of the past must be supplemented. First of all, these energy resources will run short as we use more and more of the fossil fuels. But I would like to mention another reason why we probably have to look for additional fuel supplies. And this, strangely, is the question of contaminating the atmosphere. Whenever you burn conventional fuel, you create carbon dioxide. The carbon dioxide is invisible, it is transparent, you can’t smell it, it is not dangerous to health, so why should one worry about it? Carbon dioxide has a strange property. It transmits visible light but it absorbs the infrared radiation which is emitted from the earth. Its presence in the atmosphere causes a greenhouse effect. It has been calculated that a temperature rise corresponding to a 10 per cent increase in carbon dioxide will be sufficient to melt the icecap and submerge New York. All the coastal cities would be covered, and since a considerable percentage of the human race lives in coastal regions, I think that this chemical contamination is more serious than most people tend to believe.”

Teller was almost entirely correct. The only mistake he made was the ’10%’ value. Before the Industrial Revolution, carbon dioxide concentrations in our atmosphere were around 280 parts per million. They are now over 400 parts per million. Apart from this miscalculation, Teller was absolutely right to warn about our ice-caps melting and New York becoming submerged. What he probably didn’t know at the time was the seriousness of the feedback mechanisms, such as thinning sea ice, release of methane from permafrost, fires in parched landscapes removing trees etc. These all accelerating the warming. Tragically, I don’t think we can stop the slide into environmental catastrophe. Even if new technologies were introduced into the market and adopted by an increasing number of people, they cannot be distributed and used fast enough to stop runaway climate change. If everyone on the planet immediately stopped their current lifestyles and lived as monks, we might stop the coming disaster but such a change is practically impossible. We need to prepare for the kind of future described in the book Climate Wars.

As a result of Teller’s talk, very senior people in the United States became aware of our planet’s impending climate catastrophe. The interesting question is; what would they have done about it? They might have ignored it but the people at the top of the power hierarchies in our world are usually clever and resourceful people, as well as being ruthless and self-serving. If they studied the problem, they would, most likely, have written down several options in how to deal with the climate-change threat:

A. Drastically reduce worldwide fossil-fuel use. B. Drastically reduce the world-wide population C. Build underground bases to survive the coming meltdown. D. Leave Earth entirely and colonise another planet.

Option A, giving up fossil-fuels, would have rendered most of them penniless, and so it’s no surprise that never happened.

Option B, drastically reducing the world population, is an appalling concept but it’s rational to believe that at least some of the extremely wealthy people on our planet are willing to commit mass-murder. For example, Theresa May, the previous Prime Minister of Great Britain, stated in Parliament that she would willingly kill people with a nuclear weapon to protect Britain.

With the four options as a guide, it’s scary to think what some of the ultra-powerful on our planet would do behind the scenes. These people would have been aware that the world’s population has been growing at an incredible rate, as shown in the accompanying Wikipedia graph (which is so extreme in its growth it’s hard to believe). These secret leaders would also have known, once the analyses were completed, that climate-change would cause an accelerating reduction in crop yields, usable agricultural land etc. The most likely consequence of these combined trends is that food shortages would creep upwards, then accelerate, causing spiralling prices, government tariffs and then finally military intervention. As we’ve seen with Covid-19, exponential growth, or decay, is a tough beast to get to terms with, psychologically. We’re not very good at understanding how fast the change occurs. We think things are still fine and in-hand but in fact, we’re on the edge of a cliff. Right up until the moment that chaos sets in, many people still think everything is fine. The following video explains this concept very well:

Are the power-elite of our world planning to wipe out 99% of us? One reason that these secret leaders, if they exist, are not committing worldwide genocide might be that it’s a horrible thing to do… but some readers might not be convinced of this; they may not have much faith in the power-elite’s morality. Another reason these secret leaders might not wipe most of us out it is because they need workers for their factories and to buy their goods; they need their drones or helots. The problem with this reasoning is that technology and automation have rendered many jobs obsolete, especially low-skilled jobs. If the power-elite were particularly Nazi-like, we could guess that they might want to eradicate, for example, all dark-skinned people, all elderly people, all chronically unwell, fat or disabled people. In other words, everyone, effectively, who does not look like an Aryan warrior. By strange coincidence, as climate-change has become obvious for all to see, we’ve been hit by a global pandemic. It is a highly infectious disease that has particularly attacked dark-skinned people, elderly people, chronically unwell people and fat people. Some readers might react to this comment by saying that Covid-19 was just an unfortunate result of contact with bats and/or pangolins. In response to that, I recommend my article on the science about Covid-19’s origins; that article explains the scientific evidence that SARS-Cov-2 was not natural, as supported by several senior virologists. Then again, it seems more likely that it was just a terrible accident… but then again, the handling of the epidemic by global institutions only increases the suspicions. The WHO, the British Government and the United States Government all made decision that increased the spread of the disease, rather than contained it. The WHO’s insistence that plane-travel wouldn’t affect the spread of the disease, the comments by many Western media outlets that the disease was no worse than seasonal flu, statements made by medical doctors that masks would actually make things worse, Boris Johnson’s comment that we should just ‘take it on the chin’, all these occurred in early in the spread of the disease. This could all be put down to incompetence. In the end, it is very much the reader’s decision.

Fortunately, many people did work hard, and bravely, to contain SARS-Covid-2, although that process is still ongoing. We, the human race, are very resilient. History keeps showing that it’s not that easy to reduce our numbers; we’re pretty good at surviving. In truth, the power-elite probably worked this out a long time ago. It is therefore likely that any powerful group who took Teller’s warning seriously would have abandoned Option A, mentioned above (giving up fossil fuels) and Option B (drastically reducing the world population) and studied Options C & D in detail (underground bases and off-world colonies). If these powerful people did seriously study these options, then they would have almost certainly made plans that helped themselves, their families and whoever they regarded as being in their ‘tribe’, in other words, the people they believed were worthy to join their ‘lifeboat’. It is highly likely that their plans would not involve the rest of us. Us common folks, i.e. the 99%, would be left to suffer the climate disaster. Did those secret, wealthy elite make this decision? To work out what this abstract ‘power-elite’ group may or may not have done, we need to do some more investigation. Fortunately, several people have already done this work for us.

Digging up the evidence

Jim Keith wrote many books, during his life, on the issue of very powerful people in the Western World carrying out dark, entirely illegal programmes against the general population. Not surprisingly, as a result, he is referred to by the general media as a ‘conspiracy theorist’. This, sadly, is an irrational, propagandist term designed to destroy a person’s credibility and dismiss their work as of no value. It is also a useful trick for anyone who wishes to stop the general public paying attention to that person’s work. It is true that some writers, who are referred to as ‘conspiracy theorists’, do produce unreliable material but it would be rational and objective to simply refer to their work as ‘poorly sourced’, ‘lacking thoroughness’ or ‘filled with inaccuracies’. For myself, whenever I hear that someone is being referred to as a conspiracy theorist, I am more likely to read their material. I may find, when I read their work, that it is inaccurate or irrational but in most cases, I’ve found such work to be at least as accurate as much of our ‘respectable’ information, especially on any controversial topic.

Jim Keith was very interested in the Alternative 3 television programme. He wrote a book around the programme, entitled Casebook on Alternative 3: UFOs, Secret Societies and World Control. The book is fascinating, alarming and depressing, in equal measure. I won’t go into its details but the beginning of Chapter 21: Control, sums up his research fairly well:

What is ultimately important about Alternative 3 is not that it sets much of its grim script on the Moon or Mars, or beneath “ice of Arctic” as Leslie Watkins says; those are merely locales that humans currently inhabit or will soon be erecting Golden Arches in. What is important is the explicit pointing to government and ruling class atrocity and human subjugation, and the warning it contains. Alternative 3 is a scenario of the victimisation of humankind – which I presume includes you – by power-hungry men who have abandoned any consideration of morality or what is “right” and have replaced it with a mad, “scientific” or philosophical lust for power. If you haven’t gotten the idea that this world is run by a criminal elite lacking the slightest concern for the welfare of mankind, then you haven’t been paying attention.

It would seem that Jim Keith, after much investigation, firmly believed that a power-elite was in existence and that they were exactly the sort of people who would make plans to save themselves and abandon the rest of mankind to climate apocalypse. In his book, he examines the alternative 3, the plan to colonise the moon or Mars. He puts forward evidence that the US Military have been operating a highly-classified and highly advanced space-programme, entirely hidden from the public and Congress, since at least the 1960’s. The fruits of this secret space programme has been the establishment of a colony on Mars, among other marvels. Keith can only produce witness statements, as to this possibility, and so it is only an alleged theory.

Could the US Military have a Mars or Moon colony? The plausibility of such a programme depends very much on whether the US military is far more technically advanced that the civilian world of physics. If they have developed a different, and more accurate description of physical laws, of the physics of fundamental reality, compared to civilian physics, then they would have a huge advantage; they could produce ‘science-fiction’ technology. They could have created vehicles that our civilian scientific establishment would falsely believe to be impossible, such as anti-gravity craft. This scenario, I think, has actually happened. My article, The Michelson-Morley Mistake, explains how this fork in the road of science may have occurred, over a century ago. Signs of this split can also be seen in the seeming impossible behaviour of UFO craft witnessed by credible observers, as several books explain. I review these books in my secrets of anti-gravity book review.

Sadly, Jim Keith is no longer able to write more material on the subject of a secret power-elite. To quote the Wikipedia page about him:

In September 1999, Jim Keith fell from a stage and broke his knee at the 1999 Burning Man Arts Festival held from August 30 – September 7 at the Black Rock Desert in Nevada about 120 miles north of his hometown of Reno. On September 7, he entered the Washoe Medical hospital for knee surgery and died in the Intensive Care Unit shortly after surgery was completed when a blood clot released and entered his lung. The coroner’s report listed cause of death as “blunt force trauma.” Cryptically, Keith stated just before being put under anaesthetic, “I have this feeling that if they put me under I’m not coming back”. He is survived by two daughters.


Let’s move on to the underground bases solution, referred to as Alternative 2 in the Anglia programme. There is a lot of evidence that underground bases do exist in the United States. There are bases under Cheyenne Mountain and several other places; a fact that is generally known and not contested. I mention these bases in my article on surviving climate change. There are also eye-witness reports that far larger bases exist in the United States. These have been created with advanced technology and the massive, classified budgets and other money that effectively has gone missing from the US defence budgets. The disappearance of trillions of dollars in military ‘holes’ is now an open fact. According to an academic study, the US Military lost trillions of dollars over a ten-year period. In other words, the Pentagon could not account for where trillions of dollars had gone from their budgets.

One person, Philip Schneider, did state where some of that money had gone. He explained in several talks that he had been a senior engineer working on US Military Deep Underground Military Bases or DUMBS. His testimony is astonishing but unfortunately, again, as far as I know, we only have his word for what occurred. The evidence, on video, of the serious damage done to his body that he said occurred during his work adds credence but is again not concrete support. Here is a youtube video of his talk:

As far as I’m aware, Philip Schneider can’t tell us more about his work as he was found dead in his home after talking repeatedly about attempts on his life.

As the above reports show, any attempt to find out if the plans in Alternative 3 are occurring invariably run into a dilemma. If we only refer to respectable sources and non-classified reports, then there is no sign that anything is going on. Unfortunately, this approach is avoiding the elephant in the room; that any work down by a very powerful group, connected to the military, would not appear in these sources anyway. Logically, considering how our world works and our current situation, a very powerful group, connected to the military should be doing this work. If we accept this logical inevitability, then we have a duty to try and find information about projects that are classified and secret, which means that we have to rely on whistleblowers, at least while they’re alive. The material we gather may seem wild and baseless, and it will probably play into the conspiracy theory label, but we need to do it regardless. In the end, it’s our choice.


Alternative 3 was a fascinating documentary programme. It may have been purely a spoof, or it may have been a clandestine release of clues and ideas posing as a spoof. If it was just a spoof, it was a surprisingly prescient and revealing spoof. This isn’t much of a conclusion, I admit, but, in some ways, it’s the only logical conclusion that was ever likely to happen. Powerful, well-connected people in our world do know about the coming climate apocalypse. They have vast resources and links to the military. There is also evidence that they don’t care at all about the rest of us and even if they did, they are likely to conclude that they can’t help the rest of us, as there’s far too many of us on this planet to survive what’s to come. It’s therefore logical to conclude that they have developed a plan that will inevitably only benefit them. It’s also logical to conclude that they don’t want us to know about it. This conclusion sounds grim but I think there are long-term positives. I think that we, the human race, will continue, whatever happens, in one form or another. We will also learn from our mistakes. Even if the power-elite survive climate meltdown in their secret underground bases, they will eventually share the Earth with people who survived the climate disaster purely through their own bravery and wits. These groups will probably mingle. A new generation will be created, many of whom will then separate from their more callous brethren; they’ll follow a better path. Those people are our future. We’ve got this far as a species and I think we will get past the coming catastrophe too. My apologies if that sounds too optimistic and positive! 😉