Yellings
Curating the big picture
|
 Live updates from selected sources, latest at top..
The madness of Science
Dimming the Sun
- First Bill Gates, gloating that he makes 20 to 1 return on his
investment in "Vaccines" (term used loosely), made the African
continent dependent on HIV suppressing drugs so they carry on as
they were and the entire population now has it bar a few
percent. Think about it -- would be much better to change
behavior and stop the spread, but this way the create
dependency. We don't buy the idea that Gates actually wants them
all dead, but if he did, all he would have to do is make a
shortage of his drug. Madness.
- Then Bill gates wants us all dependent on ant- Covid drugs.
- Now he wants to dim the sun.
The earth is overpopulated, and we do have too much CO2 in the
atmosphere, but by some marvelous coincidence, that means plant life
flourishes. More sun, more CO2, more photosynthesis. He reverses
that and, yes, even a scientist might be able to figure out we start
getting hungry. We haven't studied it yet, but are glad some
have here - quote..
Eminent scientists have expressed
grave concerns about Gates' scheme. United Nations climate
policy adviser Janos Pasztor warns, "If you make use of this
technology and do it badly or ungoverned, then you can have
different kinds of global risks created that can have equal, if
not even bigger, challenges to global society than climate
change.
"Governments need to engage in this discussion
and to understand these issues," he added. "They need to
understand the risks — not just the risks of doing it, but also
the risks of not understanding and not knowing."
One clear risk of blotting out the sun is
interfering with the process of photosynthesis, without which
plant and food crops could not survive and all human and animal
life would be endangered.
Sequestering CO2
Sadly, sequestering CO2 was also exposed as dangerous
and moronic over the years but they just came back and started
doing it again. Why? We want carbon out of the atmosphere - we
don't want to remove 2 atoms of oxygen, which were already in the
atmosphere. That's foolish and dangerous. Now this -- The earth is
cooling itself through a natural reaction to overpopulation. We do
need to depopulate, but naturally - not some evil
pretend-scientist.
A friend posted this article in Sept 2019
Let's make Greta happy! ALL the planet, not just the
Amazon, needs to re-forest.
If the average weight of a tree is 10 tons, and we grow 100
billion trees, then that is 2000bn* tons of CO2 taken out of the
atmosphere. We put 40Bn tons of CO2 into the atmosphere annually.
Earth has 3200 bn tons of CO2.
For perspective -- Germany alone has ~90 bn trees (well done!) so
100 bn is not a big target, and we also save tree species.
References:
https://lovebackyard.com/how-much-does-a-tree-weigh/
(so heavy tree reaches 10T over ~50 yrs)
https://en.wikipedia.org/.../Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s...
https://www.quora.com/How-many-trees-are-in-the-Black...
https://www.cbsnews.com/.../carbon-dioxide-emissions.../
(38Bn tons)
Greta is right - it is so important we stop
politicizing the problem, stop silly techno fixes, and start a
simple achievable common sense solution.
*NB: the 2000 bn tons CO2 we remove is over 50
years (as trees grow) and so happens to negate the 40 bn tons we
put in annually. Double the tree target and we reverse recent
years too.
Also need to mention the equation is based on 1
ton tree = 1 ton of carbohydrate = 2 tons of carbon dioxide.
The doubling is because photosynthesis releases
the safe 2 oxygen atoms back into the atmosphere where they
should be. This is infinitely better than sequestering and thus
losing the O2 forever.
A chemist needs to revise the ratios depending on
specific atomic weights etc.
LET'S DO THIS!! THAT IS NOT MANY TREES TO
PLANT!!!
Update:
It seems The guardian agrees with me.. https://www.theguardian.com/.../planting-billions-trees...
🙂
More Another guardian
story (similar) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/19/planting-billions-trees-save-planet
|