Insane Environmentalist Shot and Killed in Discovery Channel Building

A man named James Lee was shot and killed by police after taking a gun in the building after releasing a ‘manifesto’ urging the Discovery channel to promote human sterilization as well as the disassembling of world economy’s to leave room for “non-human” animals. The 43 year old Lee also wrote that the ‘planet does not need humans’.  Below is the original manuscript from Lee’s website (misspellings included):

The Discovery Channel and it’s affiliate channels MUST have daily television programs at prime time
slots based on Daniel Quinn’s “My Ishmael” pages 207‐212 where solutions to save the planet would be
done in the same way as the Industrial Revolution was done, by people building on each other’s
inventive ideas. Focus must be given on how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human
children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution. A game show format contest
would be in order.
All programs on Discovery Health‐TLC must stop encouraging the birth of any more parasitic human
infants and the false heroics behind those actions. In those programs’ places, programs encouraging
human sterilization and infertility must be pushed. All former pro‐birth programs must now push in the
direction of stopping human birth, not encouraging it.
All programs promoting War and the technology behind those must cease. There is no sense in
advertising weapons of mass‐destruction anymore. Instead, talk about ways to disassemble civilization
and concentrate the message in finding SOLUTIONS to solving global military mechanized conflict.
Civilization must be exposed for the filth it is. That, and all its disgusting religious‐cultural roots and
greed. Broadcast this message until the pollution in the planet is reversed and the human population
goes down!
Immigration: Programs must be developed to find solutions to stopping ALL immigration pollution and
the anchor baby filth that follows that…. FIND SOLUTIONS FOR THEM TO STOP THEIR HUMAN GROWTH
Saving the Planet means saving what’s left of the non‐human Wildlife by decreasing the Human
population. That means stopping the human race from breeding any more disgusting human babies!
You’re the media, you can reach enough people. It’s your resposibility because you reach so many

Develop shows that will correct and dismantle the dangerous US world economy.
Humans are the most destructive, filthy, pollutive creatures around and are wrecking what’s left of the
planet with their false morals and breeding culture.
For every human born, ACRES of wildlife forests must be turned into farmland in order to feed that new
addition over the course of 60 to 100 YEARS of that new human’s lifespan! THIS IS AT THE EXPENSE OF
THE FOREST CREATURES!!!! All human procreation and farming must cease!

james lee

james lee

My Pollution Solution

Now here’s my plan, set up an international organization that collects money from each polluting country based strictly upon carbon emissions multiplied by a coefficient which is related to a country’s GDP and perhaps the longitude (since countries farther north need to use more fuel just to survive). As it is now, developing or poor countries are basically begging money from richer countries for their own use to put towards reducing their own emissions. The reason this won’t work is that in my estimation most of these poorer countries have leadership of questionable integrity especially when given essentially blank checks to be used towards lowering emissions, while many of their people can’t even afford food to keep themselves alive. Instead, there should be a third party to implement effective systems to reduce carbon emissions. The third party will be completely transparent, and have no prerogatives to appease one country over the other or award contracts to one company over another.

Joining would be completely voluntary, but would yield benefits such as technology-sharing in clean energy technologies, and also a certain amount of peer-pressure should arise from those who decide not to join. The money will be used for mitigating the effects of global warming wherever on the globe it is more economical or effective. Certain methods, which have been speculated upon yet not yet proven, include spraying minuscule water droplets into the atmosphere over the ocean to reflect the sunlight before it hits water… The point being, if there is any active way to reduce the problem, money will be used to do this. The proportion of work could be based on a country’s contribution – say the United States contributes 30% towards the fund, then 30% of the effort will be concentrated on reducing pollution or mitigating its effects inside the U.S.

Sure, this sounds like another large and wasteful bureaucracy, yet for some reason the problem is apparently not able to be tackled by traditional organizations such as the United Nations or country governments, who squabble amongst themselves… As of today, China and the United States lead the world in pollution production. Although there has been a parade of hand slapping from the EU and environmental groups, real change is not expected in the near future. China said it would reduce carbon emissions per unit of GDP, meaning emissions will grow (assuming China’s GDP continues to grow). The U.S. claims it will reduce emissions over 10% (I am unsure of the exact figure) by 2020…

Clean coal technology, increasing use of natural gas and nuclear power, and a shift towards mass-transit systems may or may not be the primary goal of this organization – but it should have solid technical know-how in these areas. Considering a few companies well versed in these technologies – Bombadier, General Electric, Siemens, Vattenfall to list a few, could possibly contribute technology, manpower, and know-how towards this new organization’s effectiveness in exchange for tax-breaks with equivalent costs put towards their respective countrys’ payment towards the organization.

A few ideas for the organization’s name: GCCI (Global Climate Change Initiative), APL (Anti-Pollution League) just to name two…

Comment and tell me what you think, or any suggestions/comments/hate-speech/etc.

Urinating into Ocean will reduce CO2 Levels?



It is a proved fact that phytoplankon (plankton) thrive of a substance known as urea. Urea, which is nitrogen-rich, is also the main non-water component of urine. The phytoplankon, which live near the surface of well-lit water, can also thrive on phosphate and silicic acid.  Some parts of the ocean do not have enough iron for the phytoplankton to thrive, which also leads some to suggest pumping the water in those areas full of iron in the form of iron sulphate. Such actions, however, have cause the opposition by those claiming the practice ruins the ocean’s ecosystem [1].

The most important fact to remember is that phytoplankton already account for half of all photosynthetic oxygen production on the planet. However, according to Ken Buesseler, senior scientist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, plankton also emit carbon dioxide when they decompose or are eaten. What he says is a better gauge of their effectiveness is how much mass of planton sinks to the sea bed [2].

[1] Monastersky, R.: “Iron versus the greenhouse.” Science News, 30 September 1995, p. 220.


Photo credits:
plankton: Australian Institute of Marine Science

Shrink Humans to Save Energy and our World

All the talk seems to be about energy these days. If we, as humans, can humble ourselves as much as to genetically reduce our size to 1/5 of our original size, we will be able to conserve the environment. Just imagine humans as tall as subway sandwiches, we have the technology to do it, and we have the technology and intellectual prowess to remain at the top of the food chain. Just imagine just how big the world would become? Humankind would consume less power, and the earth would have a chance to replenish it’s resources and endangered species. Humans no longer need brawn, we have the brains and we have courage and determination. Let’s do it folks! But you first…

A Star Wars Ewok

Al Gore, Hero or lunatic?

Al Gore, vice president from 1992 to 2000, has in the last eight years become an environmental prophet. Just today, he proclaimed that the US should stop burning fossil fuels within the next ten years and rely instead on the sun, wind, and other environmentally friendly sources of power. This radical shift from skilled politician to an eco-zealot can only be explained from two points of view: either you think he is a hero or a lunatic.

Why would he be considered a hero? Al Gore has a clean political record and is known to be very intelligent. He has also served in the Vietnam War after being drafted, instead of fleeing to Canada like many of his peers at Harvard University. He graduated cum laude from Harvard with a government major, after switching from English.  During his term as Vice President, Al Gore strongly supported the development of information technology and is strongly credited for the economic success during that period.

Now, Al Gore seems to have been researching, and has become a devout follower of the environment. He has done lectures on the topic, and it seems that even at the risk of seeming absurd he continues to preach green.

This goal is achievable, affordable and transformative. It represents a challenge to all Americans, in every walk of life — to our political leaders, entrepreneurs, innovators, engineers, and to every citizen. -Al Gore

Cutting all fossil fuel use in ten years is a very ambitious plan, and although it is obvious McCain will disregard this speech, Obama has taken in Gore’s words

For decades, Al Gore has challenged the skeptics in Washington on climate change and awakened the conscience of a nation to the urgency of this threat, -Barack

Continue reading