THE MAD SCIENTIST – April 21, 2009
According to “treehuggers”, the global warming fear mongers have succeeded in scaring America’s kids and spoiling their innocent years of youth. When polling 250 males and 250 females in their pre-teens, nation-wide, they learned that kids were fearful of the earth’s demise at the worst and at the least, that the earth won’t be a safe place to live by the time they grow up.
28% fear that polar bears and penguins will become extinct. (Where did they get that from?)
67% of girls 9-11 and 57% of girls 6-8 years old worry that the earth won’t be as good a place to live when they’re adults. 60% of boys aged 9-11 and 43% aged 6-8 have the same worry.
50% of kids say hurricanes and tornadoes are the natural disasters they fear most. There are plenty of kids who have experienced these horrifying weather events and they would quite naturally become fearful of them. However, some kids may have been exposed to climate change movies like, “The Day After Tomorrow”, which regularly airs on TV, especially around Earth Day. It’s a sure bet they’ve been shown the falsumentary, “An Inconvenient Truth” in school.
If you know a child in this age group, you might ask them if they’ve been shown the movie or the Al Gore falsumentary. Then ask them how fearful they are (or are not). Children often keep these kinds of fears to themselves and the parents aren’t aware.
It’s inexcusable for the government to use the public schools to frighten our children and rob them of a carefree childhood. Remember 6 to 11 years old is pretty young to be worrying about the Apocalypse invented by the conspiracy millionaires. Is there nothing the government or the United Nations won’t exploit to grab power and more money?
Why do politicians always use the children to push over their ideologies? Generations past were frightened by the possibility of Soviet nuclear bombs flying into the U.S. My generaton was taught to get under our desks in that event. (yes, really) I remember “fallout shelters” being built around America. In defense, that was a much more real threat than global warming. Later generations were told that oil would run out and we’d be left in the cold. Then there was the scare of over-population with the earth being unable to grow enough food to feed everyone. Kids worried about starving to death. None of that has happened, but the kids fretted over it anyway. They trusted the teachers and politicians who spread this stuff, based on junk science. Boy, that’s an oxymoron. Junk and falsehoods aren’t science.
I saved the best for last. In the 1970’s, we were all treated (should I say mis-treated?) to the scare of global cooling. We were told that there would not be enough food to feed earth’s population. Efforts were made to pursuade the government to take action to stop this climate change, giving earth 10 years. Sound familiar? Al Gore gave us 10 years before the end.
Some scientists wanted to cover the Arctic ice cap with black soot and/or divert Arctic rivers to combat cooling. AREN’T YOU GLAD THAT WAS NEVER DONE? http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm (Newsweek article, “The Cooling World”, April 28, 1975, 34 years ago and it never happened!)
As if the adults running this country and at the U.N. never learn from the past, there are scientists suggesting that we “spew a layer of pollution deliberately into the atmosphere as a shade from the sun’s rays to cool the planet.” If you think this is a crack-pot idea, as I do, you will be shocked to learn that it was proposed by a Nobel laureate, no less. (No, it wasn’t Al Gore.) It was Paul J. Crutzen, of Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Chemistry. Reaction to the proposal at the annual U.N. conference on climate change was “a mix of caution, curiousity and some resignation to such massive and drastic operations, as the Chief U.N. climatologist describes them. Serious people are taking Crutzen’s idea seriously. This weekend at Moffett Field, California, NASA’s Ames Research Center hosts a closed-door, high-level workshop on the global haze proposal and other geoengineering ideas for fending off climate change.” http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=17953
From the same article (above), another 1995 Nobel prize winner in chemistry for his work “uncovering the threat to Earth’s atmospheric ozone layer, suggested that balloons bearing heavy guns be used to carry sulfates high aloft and fire them into the stratosphere.”
GOD SAVE US FROM OURSELVES!
These new ideas are as crazy as the old global cooling idea to cover the Arctic with black soot.
The article futher states that, “while carbon dioxide keeps heat from escaping Earth, substances such as sulpher dioxide, a common air pollutant, reflect solar radiation, helping cool the planet.”
FOR PETE’S SAKE! They just outlawed sulfpher dioxide in the 1990’s during the Clinton adminstration! That was the first “cap and trade” rip-off in this country, helping Enron capitalize on their brain child of trading emission credits, which are in the plans for America again with regard to carbon dioxide. Did the Clinton adminstration cause global warming by reducing sulpher dioxide in the 90’s. There’s less of it to reflect the sun’s rays and keep the earth cool.
Naturally, I don’t believe that because I believe in fluctuating climate cycles, not man-made.
If you aren’t frightened enough by this to inundate our politicians with objection letters to global warming hysteria, then read the next quote.
“Tom Wigley, a senior U.S. government climatologist, followed Crutzen’s article with a paper of his own October 20 in the leading U.S. journal Science. Like Crutzen, Wigley cited the precedent of the huge volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines in 1991.
Pinatubo poured so much sulfurous debris into the stratosphere that it is believed it cooled the Earth by 0.5 degrees Celsius (0.9 degrees Fahrenheit) for about a year.
Wigley ran scenarios of stratospheric sulfate injection — on the scale of Pinatubo’s estimated 10 million tons of sulfur — through supercomputer models of the climate, and reported that Crutzen’s idea would, indeed, seem to work. Even half that amount per year would help, he wrote.
A massive dissemination of pollutants would be needed every year or two, as the sulfates precipitate from the atmosphere in acid rain.”
If you were alive in the 90’s, you remember all the scare tactics used to rid us of acid rain.
People, you must pressure your elected officials to stop the madness.