UFO Technology Could Provide Climate Change Solutions: Former Canadian Def. Minister

[CCC]

UFO Technology Could Provide Climate Change Solutions: Former Canadian Defense Minister

After a retired U.S. Air Force General confirmed to Hon. Paul Hellyer that the 1947 Roswell UFO crash took place, Hellyer went public about what he knows of the cover-up. He says that he spoke out because the policy implications affect every nation on Earth. He suggests that the world community should find ways to establish contact with advanced civilizations to find out what we can learn from them that will help us save our planet, save our civilization from coming global environmental challenges caused by climate change.

Toronto, Canada (PRWEB) February 25, 2007 -- A former Minister of National Defense of Canada believes that advanced technology from extraterrestrial civilizations could help all nations put an end to our addiction to oil, and reduce greenhouse gases.

Hon. Paul Hellyer will be further discussing his views at an upcoming screening of a new documentary exposing an alleged UFO cover-up in Toronto on March 7, 2007.

Hellyer first went public about UFOs when he spoke at the Toronto Exopolitics Symposium in September 2005. He stated that a retired U.S. Air Force General confirmed to him that the 1947 Roswell UFO crash took place and originated from an advanced humanoid intelligent extraterrestrial civilization.

A video of his presentation can be seen online: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...02304852399080

Hellyer is not new to controversy. While serving as Defense Minister under Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, the famous Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, he oversaw the controversial integration and unification of the Royal Canadian Navy, Canadian Army, and the Royal Canadian Air Force into a single organization, the Canadian Forces.

more...
http://prweb.com/releases/2007/2/prweb507479.htm

Dontchu be holdin' out on our alien tech.

[92Notch]

Global warming + aliens ... it was only a matter of time before the two crackpot groups joined forces.... actually it was probably the gullible alien folks who ate up the global warming crap hook ,line and sinker to begin with. But they do have a point. G W should hand over the alien built model 20067894 anti-global warming device immediately.

We should somehow get the alien folks and the global warming folks to fight …. It’ll be like the epic south park cripple fight episode, it’ll be great


don't get me wrong, I think there is life outside this planet, I just do not think they burn up their frequent flyer miles comming here ... that's just silly.

[grimrebuke]

Originally Posted by 92Notch

Global warming + aliens ... it was only a matter of time before the two crackpot groups joined forces.... actually it was probably the gullible alien folks who ate up the global warming crap hook ,line and sinker to begin with. But they do have a point. G W should hand over the alien built model 20067894 anti-global warming device immediately.

We should somehow get the alien folks and the global warming folks to fight …. It’ll be like the epic south park cripple fight episode, it’ll be great


don't get me wrong, I think there is life outside this planet, I just do not think they burn up their frequent flyer miles comming here ... that's just silly.

If we could put cameras on a bunch of neanderthals without them knowing... wait, we have reality TV, we do that already.

Seriously, if we could observe an undeveloped society slowly evolve, we would. Look at the way we strap cameras to penguins. Now, is there any reason to think that an evolved species that mastered space travel wouldn't have the interest in science necessary to pique the curiosity and coerce them into observing us neanderthals making our reality television?

That being said, I don't think shooting our problems out into the universe on a digital carrier-wave in the hopes of having some alien come fix them is any more likely to succeed than burying your head in the sand and pretending we aren't poluting the earth or sitting around preying for some deity to remove the smog.

[92Notch]

Originally Posted by grimrebuke

If we could put cameras on a bunch of neanderthals without them knowing... wait, we have reality TV, we do that already.

Seriously, if we could observe an undeveloped society slowly evolve, we would. Look at the way we strap cameras to penguins. Now, is there any reason to think that an evolved species that mastered space travel wouldn't have the interest in science necessary to pique the curiosity and coerce them into observing us neanderthals making our reality television?

That being said, I don't think shooting our problems out into the universe on a digital carrier-wave in the hopes of having some alien come fix them is any more likely to succeed than burying your head in the sand and pretending we aren't poluting the earth or sitting around preying for some deity to remove the smog.

You are talking about two different things.... polution and smog have nothing to do with global warming. ... Global warming is a natural cycle that the earth has been through many times ... there's nothing we can do to stop it.

[enkahootz]

how can you correct someone else, when you don't know what you are talking about..?

[92Notch]

Originally Posted by enkahootz

how can you correct someone else, when you don't know what you are talking about..?

What did I say that has been proven incorrect? ... Al Gore doesn't know what he's talking about, nothing is shutting him up.

[Java_man]

Oh my

UFO's + Global warming .. does that mean GW is crackpot ?

Link

[92Notch]

Originally Posted by Java_man

Oh my

UFO's + Global warming .. does that mean GW is crackpot ?

Link

I do not see how any of that could point to GW being a crackpot .... I'm not saying he's not ....

[enkahootz]

Originally Posted by 92Notch

What did I say that has been proven incorrect? ... Al Gore doesn't know what he's talking about, nothing is shutting him up.

well, evidently "proof" is a subjective term in the case of global warming, so anything I say or empirical evidence I cite, seems to be remissibly discounted by someone either totally ignorant or with ulterior interests...
but I will say, global warming is not man-made; humans didn't cause it per se, but they certainly sped up the process tremendously...
if it weren't for human activity (including the resulting pollution and smog) the cycle would take much longer to complete.

[92Notch]

Originally Posted by enkahootz

but they certainly sped up the process tremendously...
if it weren't for human activity (including the resulting pollution and smog) the cycle would take much longer to complete.

lol ... no, the cycle would be the same... with or with our activity, our impact is too minute.... it does not even matter. Nothing we do will change the fact the earth goes through rapid warming / cooling at times ... the current theory that humans have caused the warming is ridiculous, the idea that man has caused global warming is this millenniums “the world is flat” theory.., a few folks had convinced the sheeple that its fact .... when its not.... that's whats going on here.... even alien technology is not going to help lol ...

[enkahootz]

Originally Posted by 92Notch

lol ... no, the cycle would be the same... with or with our activity, our impact is too minute.... it does not even matter. Nothing we do will change the fact the earth goes through rapid warming / cooling at times ... the current theory that humans have caused the warming is ridiculous, the idea that man has caused global warming is this millenniums “the world is flat” theory.., a few folks had convinced the sheeple that its fact .... when its not.... that's whats going on here.... even alien technology is not going to help lol ...

"to cause X" is not the same as "to contribute to (the result of) X"...
do you not "believe" in the greenhouse effect either?

[92Notch]

Originally Posted by enkahootz

"to cause X" is not the same as "to contribute to (the result of) X"...
do you not "believe" in the greenhouse effect either?

Yes I do believe in the green house theory, certain gasses can work to insulate the earth so to speak, the levels of co2 / etc in the atmosphere fluctuate naturally IMO and that fluctuation is grand enough on its own to negate our contribution; I do not feel we cause a signifigant impact on the earth natural swing. IMO.

I would like to see a reduction in the gasses labeled green house gasses, but not because I feel they contribute significantly to global warming. I believe it would help the US politically, as it would mean lees of a dependency on foreign oil.... and result in more nuclear power solutions ... which I feel is the way to go.

[enkahootz]

Originally Posted by 92Notch

Yes I do believe in the green house theory, certain gasses can work to insulate the earth so to speak, the levels of co2 / etc in the atmosphere fluctuate naturally IMO and that fluctuation is grand enough on its own to negate our contribution; I do not feel we cause a signifigant impact on the earth natural swing. IMO.

I would like to see a reduction in the gasses labeled green house gasses, but not because I feel they contribute significantly to global warming. I believe it would help the US politically, as it would mean lees of a dependency on foreign oil.... and result in more nuclear power solutions ... which I feel is the way to go.

the natural fluctuations would fall within a certain variance, and it seems pretty clear to me that with the industrial revolution beginning sometime in the mid-to late 1700's, a couple hundred years of exponential human growth and activity, including pollution, etc. would significantly contribute more greenhouse gases than could possibly be accounted for within natural fluctuations.
not only are we creating more particles of say, CO2, we are significantly decreasing the amount of plants that facilitate the breakdown of that CO2.
and I'm not sure that I understand how reducing what's categorized as a greenhouse gas would help lessen our dependency foreign oil...

[92Notch]

Originally Posted by enkahootz

the natural fluctuations would fall within a certain variance, and it seems pretty clear to me that with the industrial revolution beginning sometime in the mid-to late 1700's, a couple hundred years of exponential human growth and activity, including pollution, etc. would significantly contribute more greenhouse gases than could possibly be accounted for within natural fluctuations.
not only are we creating more particles of say, CO2, we are significantly decreasing the amount of plants that facilitate the breakdown of that CO2.
and I'm not sure that I understand how reducing what's categorized as a greenhouse gas would help lessen our dependency foreign oil...

I disagree; I believe our impact is not significant in the grand scheme. And… Plants produce co2 at night, I believe the net o2 production / co2 consumption is quite minimal ... oil: It would lessen as a by product, to reduce "green house gas" emissions you would have to lessen fuel consumption.

[grimrebuke]

Originally Posted by enkahootz

and I'm not sure that I understand how reducing what's categorized as a greenhouse gas would help lessen our dependency foreign oil...

That's the GOP-speak version of pleading no-contest. It allows a person to be on the right side of the debate over cleaner technologies without admitting they were wrong. Because not much sounds stupider than, "There's not enough evidence, we should pollute as much as we can."

[grimrebuke]

Originally Posted by 92Notch

I disagree; I believe our impact is not significant in the grand scheme. And… Plants produce co2 at night, I believe the net o2 production / co2 consumption is quite minimal ... oil: It would lessen as a by product, to reduce "green house gas" emissions you would have to lessen fuel consumption.

That's not true. We could just reduce the amount of byproduct by filtering emissions, etc.

[92Notch]

Originally Posted by grimrebuke

That's the GOP-speak version of pleading no-contest. It allows a person to be on the right side of the debate over cleaner technologies without admitting they were wrong. Because not much sounds stupider than, "There's not enough evidence, we should pollute as much as we can."

Not true. I just don't like breating poluted air ... still not going to change the earths natural warming / cooling cycles.

"Global warming" is like santa clause, its made up so that little kids and sheeple have something to believe in and unite them .... its a little kids club-house with a great big "retards only" sign on the door.

[enkahootz]

Originally Posted by 92Notch

I disagree; I believe our impact is not significant in the grand scheme. And… Plants produce co2 at night, I believe the net o2 production / co2 consumption is quite minimal ... oil: It would lessen as a by product, to reduce "green house gas" emissions you would have to lessen fuel consumption.

just b/c you "believe" something, that doesn't make it true, or make you right in your belief...

and as far as plants releasing CO2 at night, you're half correct. under certain circumstances (basically, which ever is more abundant), certain plants can react with O2 as well as CO2. if CO2 is more abundant in the leaf, it will use that and release 1 out of every 4 carbon atoms as CO2, while the other 3 atoms are recovered as fixed carbon. but it's affinity is for CO2 fixation. and the result of the overall resipration cycle is still O2...
but this isn't a biology lesson.

Originally Posted by 92Notch

Not true. I just don't like breating poluted air ... still not going to change the earths natural warming / cooling cycles.

"Global warming" is like santa clause, its made up so that little kids and sheeple have something to believe in and unite them .... its a little kids club-house with a great big "retards only" sign on the door.

would people that compare 'santa' to 'global warming' be welcomed into your special little clubhouse..?

[92Notch]

Originally Posted by enkahootz

would people that compare 'santa' to 'global warming' be welcomed into your special little clubhouse..?

I'm not a member of said clubhouse, you'll have to ask the global warming crowd, but if I were a betting man I imaging a person that believes in global warming would be welcomed so long as they do not question global warming.