Our Advertisers Represent Some Of The Most Unique Products & Services On Earth!


Mass Genocide - 27 BILLION
Pounds Of Rotting Flesh
By Ted Tweitmeyer

Mass genocide. What a great idea for the planet, right?
UT Prof Says Mass Death Imminent
(First Published 4-3-6)
Let's look at his bold claim closer using facts, more logic, a realistic outcome and less emotion. The squeamish might not want to read this nasty piece until after they have eaten their next meal.
* Define exactly what is to be gained by de-populating the Earth. What is it?
* Who or what group benefits from mass genocide? Only the evil richies?
* If everyone is DEAD, who will the evil richies rule? Themselves? Wildlife doesn't pay taxes! So the point is?
* How will millions of acres which which will quickly be overrun by wildlife, be better for the Earth? How many million acres of land do we already have today where few ever tread? The mad professor seems to ignore this fact.
* The professor made the statement that "humans are no better than wildlife."
So what's the point in improving one's quality of life? Apparently there is none.
* If the humans are gone and wildlife growth goes out of control and any species are threatened, will there be enough humans left to deal with the problem? Probably not - they will be too busy trying to simply survive as we shall see later. (More about this subject later.)
* Mass genocide he claims will result in for every person alive, they will have nine bodies to bury" is a bold blanket statement. If a mass toxin or spray is used for his genocide, there will NOT be sufficient time to bury all the bodies. Millions of corpses will be scattered over the land of all 50 states, which covers 9,161,923 sq km. (Source: CIA factbook.) There will of course, be higher concentrations in the cities - the very areas that the remaining humans will be wanting to move to because of the wildlife problem (more on that later, too.)
* The decaying bodies will cause a plaque of monumental proportions that will wipe out the remaing "select humans" who somehow are allowed to live or manage to escape death.
* If the bodies are not buried in time, numerous pests will quickly overrun the 9,161,923 sq km. Killer diseases like Rabies and other diseases will spread like wildfire and plague the land, and there would probably be no way to control it for many years.
* After the rotting corpses are consumed the wildlife will have developed a taste for HUMAN FLESH. It will then turn to the living humans for future meals. It won't be safe to go outside, ANYWHERE. Not even in the cities. A bite from any rabid rat, bat, cat, dog or other animal will be fatal if not treated quickly.
* Let's look at real morbid numbers that Professor Doomsday doesn't talk about:
a. If only 10% of the 300 million people in America survive, that will leave 270 million DEAD bodies.
b. If we use a conservative average weight for each person of 100lbs., this results in 27,000,000,000 POUNDS of ROTTING FLESH scattered across the continent.
c. That's 27 BILLION POUNDS of human flesh scattered over 9,161,923 sq km.
Now imagine the stink...EVERYWHERE. In the cities and in the country. There will be millions of Dogs, Cats, Vultures, Hawks, Eagles, Bears, Rats, Mice, Wolves, Foxes, Racoons and countless other scavengers feasting on the 27 BILLION POUNDS of rotting flesh and all the while reproducing at a dizzying pace.
And you think your kitchen trash can smells bad? Imagine the 27 BILLION pounds rotting on a 95 degree day.
* Why do we need colleges and universities anymore, if this is certain to happen? Why should anyone want to BETTER THEMSELVES over common wildlife? Why bother? So why is he still teaching?
The big mouth professor should go and practice what he preaches. This mad-man should arrange for media cameras to follow him around while he resigns from his job, and does himself in to shown an example for the 270 million people to follow. He should also plan to die in a field or forest, so that time lapse video-cameras will document how long it takes the local wildlife to consume his miserable body, and also show what type of wildlife consumes it.
But the nut-case professor doesn't seem to want to be the first one to punch his own ticket and set the example.
To the evil ones who might want to do this and who might be using this professor as a sock-puppet, I ask them to consider a line from the Original Star Trek series by Spock.
Spock said, "In time, you may find that having...is not the same as wanting."
I rest my case.
Ted Twietmeyer



This Site Served by TheHostPros