Prison Planet 21 Maggio 2008

Alarmists want to destroy the environment in order to save the environment

Climate change alarmists have never been apt to shy away from courting controversy with their dire forecasts of coming environmental apocalypse, but their latest "solution" takes the biscuit - they want to pollute the air with sulphur and cut down pristine beautiful old growth forests to stop global warming!

No you didn't read that wrong - scientists really are proposing to obliterate majestic canopies of forest that are hundreds of years old while pumping the upper atmosphere full of an acid-rain causing pollutant, changing the very color of our serene blue skies, all in the name of saving the environment.

"Australian scientist Tim Flannery has proposed a radical solution to climate change which may change the colour of the sky," reports The Age.

"Professor Flannery said climate change was happening so quickly that mankind might need to pump sulphur into the atmosphere to survive. The gas sulphur could be inserted into the earth's stratosphere to keep out the sun's rays and slow global warming, a process called global dimming."

Flannery says the process of adding sulphur to jet fuel in aero planes needs to happen within 5 years, but admits, "The consequences of doing that are unknown."

Oh yeah sure - makes perfect sense! We don't know what the actual consequences will be but let's just start dumping a compound that causes "substantial damage to the natural environment" into the atmosphere willy nilly in order to save the environment!



After all, New Scientist tells us that acid rain reduces global warming so why not accept a little environmental degradation in order to.....save the environment!

We can also look forward to enjoying the following goodies should Flannery's proposal gain support, all of which are associated with exposure to sulphur.

- Neurological effects and behavioral changes
- Disturbance of blood circulation
- Heart damage
- Effects on eyes and eyesight
- Reproductive failure
- Damage to immune systems
- Stomach and gastrointestinal disorder
- Damage to liver and kidney functions
- Hearing defects
- Disturbance of the hormonal metabolism
- Dermatological effects
- Suffocation and lung embolism

As we reported last month, Government scientists have already been experimenting with the feasibility of bombarding the Earth's upper atmosphere with microscopic glass particles to dampen the effects of "global warming," despite warnings that the process could damage the ozone layer.

But that's not enough. According to climate alarmists, to save the planet we also need to rip out its lungs - old growth forests.

Since trees absorb carbon dioxide - that evil gas that we breathe - but then begin to give it off as they age, why not just cut down all the trees and turn the planet into one big landfill? That's effectively what atmospheric scientist Ning Zeng recently told New Scientist magazine, urging the process of "thinning forests and burying "excess wood" in a manner in which its didn't decay could sequester enough carbon to offset all of our fossil-fuel emissions."

"Over its lifetime, a tree shifts from being a vacuum cleaner for atmospheric carbon to an emitter. A tree absorbs roughly 1,500 pounds of CO2 in its first 55 years. After that, its growth slows, and it takes in less carbon. Left untouched, it ultimately rots or burns and all that CO2 gets released," reports Wired Magazine.

Oh the horror! More trees, plants and crops growing and feeding the world due to increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere! We can't have that can we!

The solution: "Clear the oldest trees and then take out dead trunks and branches to prevent fires; landfill the scrap."



And you can trust the government and global corporations to re-plant fresh trees and not use the land to build a new multiplex cinema or a shopping arcade. Seriously, just trust them.

Wait a minute, I thought humans were responsible for CO2 emissions? No - now trees are evil and we must get rid of them. Obviously God got it wrong.

Global warming is a phenomenon that has not been observed since 1998 and will probably not be observed for the next 10 years, according to scientists who are being forced to respond to evidence of global cooling, but who assure us the deadly menace of man-made climate change will return.

Al Gore and his sycophants are proposing that to fight a non-existent problem, we must effectively poison and rape the earth in order to help save the earth.

In light of this contradiction, it's necessary to question who are the real environmental threats to the planet? People driving SUV's that emit the natural, life giving gas, the very thing we exhale, and the food that trees and plants crave, CO2 - or the folks that want to have airliners dump vast quantities of poison on us while ripping out the world's most precious and ancient woodland forests?

Source >  PrisonPlanet.com