This little video caught my attention. It was shared by Mr. G.L., and I thought I'd pass it along. We hear alot about climate change (such a general statement it cannot really be contradicted, it's so general). It caught my attentioon because we hear often about "rising CO2" levels. What we seldom hear is something I learned in elementary school, that, curiously, I never seem to hear whenever the subject comes up in public talk shows of the issue: plants - without exception - breath carbon dioxide, and exhale oxygen. Animals breathe oxygen, and exhale carbon dioxide. It's a symbiotic relationship. Well, with rising CO2 levels, it stands to reason that far from baking the planet and turning it into a desert, that plant life should increase, scrub the atmosphere, and produce more oxygen. This little NASA video seems to be coming to a similar conclusion: the Earth isn't dying; it's sprouting life...


  1. Well, yes. What is actually supposed to be increasing is uncertainty and variety. To try to clarify with an analogy: my last (and best) drawing teacher told us that photographs always truncate the range of values – of lights and darks – by about 10%. This is why people look heavier and why the images are flatter. The range and variety of conditions is expanding, something we’ve been seeing in cramped New England for a while now (during the early 2000’s I lived in a New Hampshire town where every couple of weeks a kamikaze squirrel would attack our transformers the way that Swiss Badger did).

    That’s also the problem I have with the idea of Weather Control. The level and competence of the control Mr. Global has over for example technology (where only lawful activity seems vulnerable to government control and the head of Computer Associates went to jail for installing – I believe it was Mandriva Linux on a laptop while the movers and shakers seem to be moving back to the technology used by Tracfone in its low end phones as it is more secure). The intentional creation of these weather effects would exactly have the non-linear effects which would make our coasts for example more dangerous than they are.

    This is not news. It’s a transitional phase Scientists and Analog Magazine have been predicting since he sixties.

  2. TPTB want to confuse methane with carbon. The deadly stuff that might kill all live on Earth is methane not carbon. Carbon is what prevents snowball Earth and might bring life back to the Sahara and make Antarctica and Greenland green again. Though temperatures at the Equator might go up but if the deserts turn green that would offset that.

      1. NorseMythology, I believe Nathan has bought into a psyop which is a combination of ‘NASA never went to the Moon’ and ‘the Earth is really flat’. Both psyops. Together, they yield ‘no satellites’…

        There is also a tie-in with Google’s ranking of pages. Google has decided to add a ‘subjective factor’ to their page-ranking and thus whether, say, Dr. Farrell’s site appears on page 2 or page 87. There are now certain subjects which ‘automatically’ classify your site as untrustworthy, and move you to the bottom of the stack. ‘No Moon Landing’ is one. ‘Flat Earth’ is another. Most conveniently, most of this particular psyop-talk is occurring at truther or conspiracy sites. Zap! (What a coincidence!)

        Nathan may be unwittingly causing Dr. Farrell’s site to be bottom-ranked. Other sites which have countered this psyop have banned those posts for self-protection.

        Dr. Farrell, are you listening?

        1. which makes sense of doc’s keeping an open and QUIET mind when it comes to declaring who did what on 911.

          interesting point to take nathan. it takes some nuts to recognize one might be wrong about having been wrong to believe what we were trained to believe.

          ie, what if we were wrong to believe the original reports about a moon landing and then what if we were wrong to believe the follow on arguments about how the ussa never went to the moon?

          in other words, what if we’re right that our understanding of moon landing missions as nasa and the ussa have told us is wrong? what if kubrick really produced those beautiful faked videos that made us all think the ussa was number one in space?

          what if kubrick’s the shining really was just one long complaint about being overworked, underpaid and horribly isolated for not be allowed to talk about any of his work with anyone he cared about?

          and what if it was all a psyop on a psyop on a psyob and now we’re trying to sort out all these lies with what – more lies? so instead of being definitive and stating that the earth is this or the moon is that, why not slow the roll and stick to what we can prove?

        2. which reminds me, the van allen radiation belt argument is interesting in terms of getting humans past it.

          i remember getting similar arguments from people stating that the moon was an artificial (as in engineered and built) object. built either by aliens or men. their number one point of argument was that the orbital and rotational speeds are too ridiculous to be a coincidence of nature. the fact that we only ever see one side of the moon because it rotates at just the right speed as it orbits the earth at just the right speed? something like 1/400?

          got me going when i read a bit more on electric universe theory and that the moon was electrically locked in phase to the earth which is electrically locked in phase with the sun. and on. er, electromagnetically.

          now i know so little on such subjects that i admit i have no idea what is true and what is not. i do know what’s more plausible in my mediocre mind though.

          and i’ll take refraction over gravitational lensing anytime.

          1. ZDB, here you go. See top of page. Good photos:

            “Now, many years later China photographed the [Moon] landing sites with a probe.”

            Also on that page: “FACT: APOLLO ASTRONAUTS CARRIED DOSIMETERS, AND NONE RECEIVED MORE THAN 40 MILLISIEVERTS OF RADIATION FROM THE VAN ALLEN BELTS, WHICH IS AN AMOUNT FAR BELOW ANYTHING DANGEROUS. This is because the radiation in the Van Allen belts is proton and electron radiation, which is easily blocked by even polyethelene, and not nearly as dangerous as neutron radiation.

            YOU READ THAT RIGHT: NASA and all other nations use simple Polyethelene – the stuff garbage bags are made of – for radiation shielding in their spacecraft because as it turns out, the high number of hydrogen atoms in polyethelene makes polyethelene a great shield for the type of radiation astronauts face. Is three millimeters of plastic too much to launch?”

            “They say you can’t get through the Van Allen belts, while never admitting the huge rockets of the time got people through the radiation zones in absolutely no more than an hour and 40 minutes, which resulted in a net exposure of a total of 40 millisieverts, when it takes a whole sievert to make someone sick.”

            Much more good stuff on that page. He got really hammered by the psyop people, and responded in detail…

          2. nice thank you. doesn’t surprise me about the poly. reminds about the breather they made on apollo 13 (?) that involved alotta duct tape.

            j stone cracks me up. it all puts me of a mind that nasa and ussa put up the conspiracies on moon landings and laid out arguments for black sheeple to argue with white sheeple for indefinite eons. after all isn’t that what Five Eyes is for? or was for before domestic spying become the new normal?

            just like the layers of stories on every event. they sometimes don’t eliminate pertinent facts fast enough. either way they sure do cook enough messed up layers in the cake to keep us from ever tasting the truth in the good layers.

          3. ZDB, I was taking aerospace engineering in college during the Apollo years. Talk about being at news central! I even got to stand under a Saturn 1B rocket on its launch pad, down at Kennedy. Those exhaust bells are big! (Pre 9/11 days; more innocent…)

            Engineers had to be clever in those days, because weight really was an issue.We almost didn’t get to the Moon because a Saturn 5 would ‘only’ lift X pounds. X plus a hundred pounds wouldn’t complete the mission. Thousands of engineers worked like dogs to shave pounds and ounces in every conceivable way. As it was, Armstrong only got to the Moon’s surface with seconds of lander fuel remaining. Now THAT was pushing boundaries!

            In one way, we couldn’t get back to the Moon on a Saturn 5, today. Our current culture is too risk-averse. That would translate into tons-more on the rocket. Nope.

            The Apollo-era people were well-aware that they were on the ‘bleeding edge’, but chose to do it anyway…

          4. If the lunar module used field propulsion it would be shielded from the belts. And the moon rings like a bell. Both Dr. Farrell and Richard Hoagland have lots of good writing on these two topics.

          5. gosh i flew in college a few years after you. if i only had a brain, i’d a transferred into engineering.

            i knew about the fuel issues. from a pilot’s perspective, they were all pros. aka combat/test pilots. what good is a vehicle that hasn’t been taken to her limits? how good a pilot is one who doesn’t feel and know those limits?

            i was involved not at all and i’m proud of the precision level those guys reached to get that timing down. it’s amazing what you can see when you look. it’s amazing what you can do when you work. it’s amazing what else you can do when you put a little e w deming and y berra into your work. yoda comes to mind – even though he’s a poor mr global media version of real geniuses who’ve come by our way for generations.

            unfortunately these geniuses get ignored at our own risk. please tell me you never worked for morton thiokol.

          6. ZDB: No, I never worked for Morton Thiokol. USAF and then various Boeings. (If you’ve ever flown in a Boeing 737-300/400/500, I helped aerodynamically-design it’s wing leading edge as part of a larger group.)

            I will never forgive Richard Nixon (the powers behind him) for aborting the Moon program. I once stood in front of the PRODUCTION Saturn 5 down at Kennedy that was scheduled for Apollo 18, I believe. The PRODUCTION Saturn 5 rusting-away over at Houston was to be Apollo 19. What a waste; I’m still p1ssed…

  3. I do believe the earth is getting greener which makes sense, however if anybody thinks that so called NASA video above the earth with their so called satellite is real you have some serious problems

  4. Mr Global frowns, pauses to consider his options, and says to himself, “Now, how can we tax plants?”

Comments are closed.