by Susanne Posel
July 23, 2012
The hoax of man-made climate change has
reached a new low.
Alarmists are now supporting the UN
scheme to dump iron into our oceans claiming that this will bury CO2
and reduce the impact of global warming.
Alarmist scientist Dave Reay, a senior lecturer in carbon management
at the University of Edinburgh, comments:
“If the 50 percent figure for algal
bloom biomass sinking to the deep ocean is correct then this
represents a whole new ball game in terms of iron fertilization
as a geo-engineering technique.
Maybe such deliberate enhancement of carbon storage in the
oceans has more legs than we thought but, as the authors
acknowledge, it’s still far too early to run with it.”
Back in 2010, the Intergovernmental
Oceanographic Commission (IOC), which is part of UNESCO,
study that approved of ocean fertilization as a “preventative”
measure of sequestering CO2 in the deep oceans.
Dr. Michael Lutz, lead author of the study, said:
“This discovery is
If, during natural plankton blooms, less carbon
actually sinks to deep water than during the rest of the year, then
it suggests that the Biological Pump leaks. More material is
recycled in shallow water and less sinks to depth, which makes sense
if you consider how this ecosystem has evolved in a way to minimize
Ocean fertilization schemes, which resemble an artificial
summer, may not remove as much carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as
has been suggested because they ignore the natural processes
revealed by this research.”
Geoengineering techniques have “unintended” consequences and mostly
negative effects on our environment.
Victor Smetacek, professor at
the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in
Germany, who has led research teams supporting ocean fertilization
“The time has come to differentiate: some geoengineering
techniques are more dangerous than others. Doing nothing is probably
the worst option.”
The Royal Society, a globalist think-tank,
released a study in 2009
that surmised that cutting man-made CO2 emissions is the first
priority over safely dealing with our changing environment.
Geoengineering, although a drastic measure, is justified because
different attempts to mitigate carbon in our atmosphere will solve
all of our problems.
John Shepard, professor and head scientist of the study on
“It is important that we continue to research
these technologies but governance of this research is vital to
protect the oceans, wider environment and public interests.”
In 2004, a team of scientists
released 7 tons of iron sulfates into
the ocean near Antarctica.
This caused plankton to bloom
exponentially. After monitoring the project for a month, the
researchers concluded that with the bloom of plankton they could
assume that large amounts of CO2 had sunk to the depths of the
The scientists turned the Antarctic region into a giant “test tube”.
Victor Smetacek, of the Alfred Wegener Institute in Germany, said:
“I am hoping that these results will show how useful these
Smetacek says ocean fertilization should be controlled by the UN.
also believes that private corporations should not be allowed to
conduct experiments unless mandated by the UN. Under current
treaties for carbon credit tax schemes, this mode of sequestering
CO2 should be combined with solar geoengineering efforts.
has been funding David Keith’s Carbon Engineering
corporation while funneling millions of dollars into solar geoengineering experiments. Making money on the actual scheme as
well as the manufacturing, Gates claims this inexpensive method of
slowing down global warming effects.
Keith disregards his peers who
assert that this action will alter earth’s natural weather patterns
while environmental groups decry that geoengineering nullifies their
efforts to purport their campaigns to convince the public that
man-made climate change is directly causational to human emissions
their study, the researchers claimed that this experiment proved
the ocean fertilization could be effectively used to sequester CO2
in the ocean and be used on a regular basis as a viable
geoengineering technique. They now plan to use ocean fertilization
to bury 1 gigaton of CO2 annually as greenhouse gas emissions rise.
These alarmists use the fear of climate “tipping point”.
scientists continue to use the ocean waters in the Arctic as
experimentation grounds, they disregard the problems they could be
Professor Rosemary Rayfuse, expert in International Law and the Law
of the Sea at the University of New South Wales, Australia, asserted
that ocean fertilization is not approved under carbon credit
regulatory schemes and sale of its offsets on unregulated markets
results in fraud.
The “dumping” of CO2 into the oceans amounts to polluting the
Rayfuse, citing the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) stated
“There is no point trying to ameliorate the effects of climate
change by destroying the oceans - the very cradle of life on earth.
Simply doing more and bigger of that which has already been
demonstrated to be ineffective and potentially more harmful than
good is counter-intuitive at best.”
John Cullen, an oceanographer with Dalhousie University in Halifax,
Canada, has analyzed the data on ocean fertilization and
He concludes that these experiments are dangerous on
large scales that globalists are insisting take place. We will be
polluting our oceans and this will have drastic consequences on
ocean life and the delicate balance of our biosphere.
In essence, if ocean fertilization is pursued, they scheme would
cause an Ice Age because of the effect of extreme cooling on our
This week it became clear just what the consequences of ocean
sequestering and other forms of geoengineering would be.
According to NASA satellites,
an iceberg the size of Manhattan broke
from the Greenland glacier. Alarmists are claiming that this proves
man-made global warming is real; however since the globalist
scientific community have been polluting the oceans in the Arctic,
it is quite possible that they have created the problem they claimed
Scientists are looking to take advantage of the oceans to justify
natural cycles and contributions to the Earth’s climate, while
simultaneously finding new ways to exploit this resource for their
Under the guise of using plankton for CO2
sequestering, data is being entered into computer models to see how
this new integration can be used to maximize carbon credit profits.