Walter Russell - af mange regnet for den mest geniale videnskabsmand i
moderne tid - forudsagde allerede i 1954 at udnyttelsen af atomkraften
ville forårsage ødelæggelse af plantens ilt.
AN EARLY WARNING
August, 1954. "It will not take many years to utterly destroy the...
encircling protective walls which surround this planet and protect the
earth from burning up by the sun's hot rays," Walter and Lao Russell,
Newsletter of the University of Science and Philosophy.
April 6, 1989. "Scientists reported yesterday that for the first time
they have detected an increase in "biologically relevant" levels of
ultraviolet radiation reaching the ground as a result of the ozone
hole over the Antarctica. This is the first indication that the
depletion of ozone... is beginning to cause the potentially harmful
effect that has long been predicted."
(Washington Post)
-------
(udpluk - hele teksten kan læses her:)
http://www.philosophyforum.com/forum/walter-russell/683-article-macrobiotic-genius-walter-russell.html
eller
http://tinyurl.com/37byje
By John David Mann
The "Ozone War," as it came to be called, was principally responsible
for ushering in a new era of planetary policy. Fifteen years later,
the ponderous gears of human response are finally grinding into
action. Aimed at coping with the infamous "ozone hole", a spate of
local and global policy-making is pushing its way forward in an
unprecedented atmosphere of international cooperation.
Rep. Al Gore (D-TN), the seasoned environmental advocate who helped
uncover Love Canal and has stalked the Greenhouse effect for years,
recently introduced legislation to ban production of CFCs (the
chemical generally thought responsible for the ozone crisis) within 5
years. As Gore observed this February: "The political sentiment is
changing very rapidly... I think people are mad about this and ready
for dramatic action."
But are they the right actions? Not according to Walter Russell, who
predicted the ozone dilemma 35 years ago -- a full 20 years before the
Rowland/Molina research made headlines -- and ascribed it to an
entirely different cause. If Russell's views were correct, then the
chlorine chemistry of CFCs is not the prime culprit, and no one is
looking in the one direction that matters most. In fact, according to
Russell, there is one overarching solution to the atmospheric
emergency: stop making nuclear stockpiles -- immediately.
The year is 1954. Sherwood Rowland's ozone prognosis is two decades in
the future; Three Mile Island is a quarter century still to come. To
most of us, the "Greenhouse effect" connotes little more than a better
way to grow tomatoes. The word "ecology" scarcely exists in the
mainstream lexicon........Three years later the Russells publish a
book, Atomic Suicide?, whose principle message is that the development
of the nuclear weaponry and industry, if allowed to continue, will
eventually destroy the planet's oxygen: "The element of surprise which
could delay the discovery of the great danger, and thus allow more
plutonium piles to come into existence, is the fact that scientists
are looking near the ground for fallout dangers and other radioactive
menaces. The greatest radioactive dangers are accumulating from eight
to twelve miles up [in the stratosphere]. The upper atmosphere is
already charged with death-dealing radioactivity, for which it not yet
sent us its bill. It is slowly coming, however, and we will have to
pay for it for another century, even if atomic energy plants ceased
today." (Atomic Suicide?, page 18.) Later in the book, they predict
that the oxygen-destroying effects of radiation would not be noticed
"until the late seventies."
It was an uncannily accurate forecast: ozone depletion was first
noticed over the Antarctic in 1982 -- and scientists have since
concluded that it first appeared in 1979. But then, as now, the
Russells' voice received little notice.......
So, then, what would happen? In Russell's estimation, the lighter
pressures of the stratosphere would retain the majority of radioactive
fallout, and would be the first region that would reveal the wholesale
destruction of oxygen. That's oxygen, not just ozone: if played
through to the end, the last act of the nuclear drama would see the
disappearance of all oxygen on the planet, whether as ozone, water or
the O2 we breathe. In this context, the ozone hole, as serious as it
is in its own right, emerges as an early warning sign..........
As the centerpiece of this effort, Dr. [Timothy] Binder is
coordinating a thorough scientific effort to test, verify and document
radioactivity's role in ozone depletion. Combining an exhaustive
review of existing literature with new laboratory experimentation, the
project owes its impetus in part to Binder's frustrated efforts to
obtain accurate data from past observations.
Last year, to explore mainstream views on the possible radiation-ozone
connection, Binder visited the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) in Boulder, Colorado, where he spoke with NOAA
researcher George Mount. He was told, "Oh, yes, we know that radiation
destroys ozone, but we don't consider it significant." Pressing
further, Binder learned of an earlier "insignificant" government
finding: "during the bomb tests in the 60s [before the ban on
atmospheric testing drove the detonations underground] they found a 2
percent reduction in ozone." Given the current alarm over a global
reduction of 1.7 to 3 percent, 2 percent would certainly seem to us to
be "significant." Binder was told that a review of this data was in
process; when he later tried to obtain this information in print, he
received reports with figures that contradicted Mount's statements.
Commenting on his investigations, Binder offered this conclusion: "As
the government is now reviewing the old data on the 60s' testing, it
sounds like they are reconsidering the nuclear connection to ozone
destruction, but don't want to tell [us] about it yet.....
--
Rado
Protester imod EUs intelligent design resolution:
http://www.petitiononline.com/id108/petition.html