So Bill Gates want to spray dust into the sky to control the Earth's temperature?
The radical-leftist-billionaire-fear-monger Bill Gates is working with scientists to determine if they can control temperatures by spraying chemicals into the atmosphere to partially block the sun.
Here's the news item:
Microsoft's MSFT +1% billionaire founder Bill Gates is financially backing the development of sun-dimming technology that would potentially reflect sunlight out of Earth's atmosphere, triggering a global cooling effect. The Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPEx), launched by Harvard University scientists, aims to examine this solution by spraying non-toxic calcium carbonate (CaCO3) dust into the atmosphere — a sun-reflecting aerosol that may offset the effects of global warming.
What a nice concept. I wonder how they determined what the right temperature is on Earth since it has fluctuated cyclically and naturally for billions of years? What if they screw up and lower the temperatures too much?
How would they spray the chemicals into the atmosphere if we get rid of jet fuel, which they also advocate?
Why is Biden proposing that we spend so much money on airports since planes will be worthless and the travel industry will be destroyed if we get rid of crude oil?
What would happen to President Trump, Sen. Ted Cruz, or Florida's Gov. Ron DeSantis if they claimed they could control the temperatures by putting other chemicals in the atmosphere instead of destroying the oil industry? They would be destroyed by the media and other Democrats. They would be called anti-science and stupid. They would be silenced and canceled by the social media tyrants.
Another day, another story to indoctrinate and scare the public as the media and other Democrats seek to destroy the oil industry and promote massive government spending and taxes as they infest the public with some version of the Green New Deal.
This article says CO2 is at the highest in 3.6 billion years, as if we have even had accurate measurements throughout that time, and that the last time CO2 was these high temperatures were seven degrees higher and sea levels were 80 feet higher.
Does anyone truly believe we have accurate measurements for CO2 the last 3.6 billion years?
Therefore, an accurate headline would be: "Scientific data from NOAA shows that humans and fossil fuel use have kept temperatures 7 degrees cooler and sea levels 80 feet lower than the last time CO2 was this high."
How can that possibly be unless all the predictions have just been based on manipulated, inaccurate computer models instead of facts?
According to NOAA, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is now similar to a time when the Earth was about 7 degrees hotter than it was in the pre-industrial time period and sea levels were nearly 80 feet higher than they are today.
In 1974, after around 30 years of significant global cooling, the once-esteemed Time Magazine had an article where "experts" were worried about a disastrous coming ice age.
Monday, June 24, 1974
The changing weather is apparently connected with differences in the amount of energy that the earth's surface receives from the sun. Changes in the earth's tilt and distance from the sun could, for instance, significantly increase or decrease the amount of solar radiation falling on either hemisphere—thereby altering the earth's climate. Some observers have tried to connect the eleven-year sunspot cycle with climate patterns, but have so far been unable to provide a satisfactory explanation of how the cycle might be involved.
Man, too, may be somewhat responsible for the cooling trend. The University of Wisconsin's Reid A. Bryson and other climatologists suggest that dust and other particles released into the atmosphere as a result of farming and fuel burning may be blocking more and more sunlight from reaching and heating the surface of the earth.
Something they worried about was that farmers and fuel-burning were putting particles in the air that were partially blocking the sun. That appears to be exactly what Gates and other supposedly smart people are suggesting — controlling a minor, cyclical increase in temperatures. Isn't it idiotic to suggest a solution when that solution was previously listed as a disastrous problem?
So the public should remember that the science is settled: global warming and cooling, floods and droughts, polar vortices, snowless winters, too much snow, minor storm activity, and major storm activity are all caused by oil, coal, humans, and rising CO2.
I hope everyone now understands how science works. Essentially, facts and scientific data don't matter — only the agenda.
And the solution, no matter what the supposed problems are, is always to transfer more freedom, money, and power to the government so it has more control over us.
As Biden and the Democrats intentionally mislead the public about what is in the leftist slush fund COVID and infrastructures the COVID relief bills, he repeatedly says help is on the way.
Contrast that with the great president who cared about all the people. President Reagan said the nine most terrifying words are "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."
What do we replace rubber tires and asphalt with when we get rid of oil?
How do we defend ourselves against Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran if we get rid of oil since they won't?
How many businesses, farms, individuals, families, and banks will go under when houses, vehicles, trucks, farm equipment, planes, road equipment and all gas-powered machinery becomes worthless? The wealth gap will increase massively since the poor and middle class will suffer tremendously from this intentional destruction.
Where do we dispose of all this worthless stuff? Won't that greatly harm the environment?
How do we mine, produce, transport, and install all the wind turbines and solar panels when there are no longer gas-powered machines?
Where do we dispose of all the worthless solar panels, wind turbines, and flammable pollutant lithium batteries when they wear out? Won't that greatly harm the environment?
Aren't the environmentalists worried about all the wildlife that wind turbines and solar panels kill?
Indoctrination is a dangerous thing, whether it is about climate change, voter laws, Russian collusion, or systemic racism.
When journalists are indoctrinated, they will never ask Gates, nor purported greenie billionaires such as Tom Steyer, Michael Bloomberg, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg, nor greenie pols such as Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden, John Kerry, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and AOC, nor anyone else for scientific data to support their intentional destruction of America.
Either they don't care or they will just repeat whatever they are told. Either way, it is dangerous for the American people to participate in the indoctrination, instead of asking questions and doing research.
Do journalists truly believe that the party that continually lied that you could keep your doctor, keep your plan, that your premiums would be substantially lower, and that there is no crisis at the border can control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity if we get rid of oil and hand over trillions to the government? If so, they probably still believe the lying fifty former intelligence officials who claimed that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation. Why haven't we heard from these lying officials after the election of the current radical leftist? The answer is that the media never cared about the truth — only about power for leftists and their agenda.
Image: Pixabay, Pixabay License.
To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.