Here’s how vaccines work. We study a germ. We call this particular one: Gary. [growling noises] Believe it or not, that is absolutely how they teach the class on vaccinations in every medical school across the country. Basically, we take a disease. We modify it, and we put it in some inert substance, and inject into you and your body recognizes it over and over again and fights it. But Bill Nye has completely and totally oversimplified this to make you think it’s a good idea. Here’s the part of this little 1st grader’s textbook example you didn’t cover, Bill. First of all: aluminum. What happens when you inject it when you’re a baby? Has there every been a safety test on it? Never. Not in the history of man have we ever said “What is it that happens when we inject aluminum?” We don’t care, Bill. Gary gets a little shot of aluminum in there. So we’re going to take mercury… we’re putting it inside of Gary here. Most toxic substance, by the way, that’s not radioactive.
All part of the plan to legalize Geoengineering, that has been going on for forty years over our heads. All lawsuits to halt GE will be made mute…because it will be legal to spray us like bugs in a very sick sociopathic lab experiment on all.
- Experts will test the feasibility of ‘solar geoengineering’ to stop global warming
- Material will be pumped into the stratosphere to reflect the sun’s rays
- Researchers will test a range of materials that could be used at scale in future
- But scientists have warned of the potential ‘catastrophic’ consequences
Harvard researchers are set to test aerosol sprays that could be used to combat climate change.
The controversial technique could one day be used to block incoming solar radiation and cool down Earth to combat the effects of global warming.
The first-of-its-kind experiment could begin as early as next year and will pump small amounts of material into the stratosphere to reflect the sun’s rays.
But scientists have previously warned that the results of changing our own climate could be ‘catastrophic’.
Scroll down for video
Pictured are some of the geoengineering strategies put forward by climate researchers in the past. Harvard scientists will test pumping aerosols into the stratosphere (top left of image) as early as next year in an attempt to fight global warming
WHAT COULD GO WRONG?
In 2014, researchers warned of what might happen if climate engineering stopped after a few decades for technical or political reasons.
‘For several methods we saw a rapid change in the simulated climate when climate engineering ended,’ said Dr David Keller from the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research in Kiel, Germany.
For example, if after 50 years the sun’s rays were no longer partially blocked, Earth warmed by several degrees within a few decades.
Dr Keller said: ‘This change would be much faster than the current rate of climate change, with potentially even more catastrophic consequences.’
During testing, the team will analyse a variety of aerosol materials that could be used at scale in future.
But the researchers claim that they will not fire more than 1kg (2.2lbs) of any substance into the stratosphere during testing.
The idea has stirred controversy in the scientific community, even among those who believe it could effectively tackle global warming.
‘The idea that you could even think about adjusting the temperature of the planet is terrifying,’ Frank Keutsch, one of the Harvard scientists leading the study, told Seeker.
‘But the consequences of climate change are also quite terrifying. This is a very serious subject.’
Quackery is the promotion of fraudulent or ignorant medical practices. A quack is a “fraudulent or ignorant pretender to medical skill” or “a person who pretends, professionally or publicly, to have skill, knowledge, or qualifications he or she does not possess; a charlatan or snake oil salesman”.
April 8th, 2017
Via: Mayo Clinic:
Many patients come to Mayo Clinic for a second opinion or diagnosis confirmation before treatment for a complex condition. In a new study, Mayo Clinic reports that as many as 88 percent of those patients go home with a new or refined diagnosis — changing their care plan and potentially their lives. Conversely, only 12 percent receive confirmation that the original diagnosis was complete and correct.