We use cookies to provide an improved user experience and make ourselves visible to searches. By continuing to use our website, you agree to their use. See ABOUT menu for more. Click here to Hide.
Up Vote Contact About
Live updates from selected sources, latest at top..

The madness of Science

Dimming the Sun

  1. 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.
  2. Then Bill gates wants us all dependent on ant- Covid drugs.
  3. 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.

(so heavy tree reaches 10T over ~50 yrs)
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.
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

All original and/or non-cited material in Yellings.com is copyright and, for avoidance of doubt, should be assumed to be fictional. Our linking to external sources is not an endorsement. See About menu for more information. Thank you!