Killing Animals to Stop Global Warming

Killing Animals to Stop Global Warming
June 9, 2011 by Kel Kelly

Yes, we are now at that point. The Australian government is proposing to kill Camels in the wilds of the country in order to reduce methane output. Experts say the camels are a menace: they are doing damage to physical property, trampling vegetation, and invading remote settlements. Thus, it would be good to kill them. The government would pay sharpshooters in the form of so-called carbon credits.

This makes one wonder how the word existed without global warming being at the "tipping point" for tens of thousands of years while camels, as well as numerous other methane-emitting animals existed.

It also sets a precedent. For whatever animals are a menace, and can be traced to damage or nuisance of one form or another, let's just kill them all. We could start with the cows (thus reducing our supply our food supply).

Similarly, we could kill groups of people who are seen to be a menace or nuisance. After all, humans are emitting methane as well, and leaving huge carbon footprints (thankfully­or we'd all be dying of starvation, cold, heat, or disease).

After all, one Australian medical expert has called for a $5,000 tax on all children born, and an annual carbon tax of up to $800 per child, due to the supposed negative effect on the environment each person produces. The environmental group The Voluntary Human Extinction Program, which has the slogan, "May we live long and die out," consists of volunteers who have made decisions to remain childless, so that other species can live instead. The group's founder states, "As long as there's one breeding pair of homosapiens on the planet, there's too great a threat to the biosphere." A University of Texas biology professor claims that humans must die for earth to live, and states that disease "will control the scourge of humanity. We're looking forward to a huge collapse." These people certainly must be the life of the party at summer cookouts. Do you doubt that they would support government action (government force) to advance their cause?

(See page 379 of my book for supporting documentation of these facts)