Eco Whackos Propose Genocide To Save The Planet

THE world’s association of camel scientists has fought back angrily over Australian plans to kill wild dromedaries on the grounds that their flatulence adds to global warming.

The idea is “false and stupid… a scientific aberration”, the International Society of Camelid Research and Development (ISOCARD) charged, saying camels were being made culprits for a man-made problem.

“We believe that the good-hearted people and innovating nation of Australia can come up with better and smarter solutions than eradicating camels in inhumane ways,” it said.

The kill-a-camel suggestion is floated in a paper distributed by Australia’s Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, as part of consultations for reducing the country’s carbon footprint.

The scheme is the brainchild of an Adelaide-based commercial company, Northwest Carbon, a land and animal management consultancy, which proposes whacking feral camels in exchange for carbon credits.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au

Hopefully Dr. Hansen will be held accountable in this life and the next one for the insanity he has spent his life pushing.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Eco Whackos Propose Genocide To Save The Planet

  1. P.J. says:

    Why are all the really nutty ideas coming out of Australia lately?

  2. Andy WeissDC says:

    That is completely absurd!

  3. GregO says:

    “The world’s association of camel scientists has fought back angrily over Australian plans to kill wild dromedaries on the grounds that their flatulence adds to global warming.”

    This belongs in the Onion.

  4. PhilJourdan says:

    Yet PETA supports them. Kind of like NOW supporting the “Rapist-in-Chief”.

  5. rw says:

    Well, they’re killing condors, bats, and golden eagles already. Why not camels?

    (Are koala bears next?)

    • eco-geek says:

      Wow! You have the solution. Just make the wind generators lower in Oz and the camels can be eliminated at the same time as these green energy sources kick out the micro-Watts needed to save the planet. Brilliant sir and well said!

  6. DERise says:

    “We believe that the good-hearted people and innovating nation of Australia can come up with better and smarter solutions than eradicating camels in inhumane ways,” it said.

    Good hearted? We are talking about the kind of people that brought us the light hearted “No Pressure” comedy, that want to tatoo “deniers”, that want to drive the industrialized world back to 1800s level carbon emissions and before? These good hearted people. I’m supprized they haven’t suggested erradicating humans in inhumane ways. That is comming.
    That reminds me. Why the H*** isn’t PETA screaming it’s head off about plans on killing these poor defensless camels?

  7. Bruce says:

    The irony is this was raised early last year and was squashed then by the Minister for Climate Change, whose spokesperson said:

    “Camel herds emit a very small amount of greenhouse gas,”

    She (the Minister) said to the newspaper there was little point doing anything about Australia’s feral camels as only the CO2 of the domesticated variety is counted under the Kyoto Protocol. That equates to only a small number of the beasts, the sort found lugging tourists around Cable Beach in Broome and at Monarto Zoo, southeast of Adelaide.

    So the irony is now that Kyoto has expired they can claim carbon credits for culling the poor beasts (who are pests) which they couldn’t do when Kyoto was in force.

    This is the same Minister who is helping push the carbon tax on us. Loopy.

  8. nigelf says:

    First they came for the camels, and I did nothing…

  9. Michael says:

    Feral camels are pests in Australia and definitely need removing. There are massive herds. I can’t see how the Camelid Research Organisation can be so angry about removing them.

    • Blade says:

      What? I heard 1.2 million in Australia (a country the size of the USA). Humans there are what 25-30 million (we have that many illegal aliens). Lots of wide open empty space without doing the math. I don’t see population as relevant.

      Pests? I call that a slippery slope. Lots of pests we don’t kill. But using some liberal logic this would make sense I guess …

      (A) Camels might fart increasing GHG and *may* affect something in some far-off future fantasy. Let’s kill them?

      (B) Deadly snakes abound, they will kill someone today or tomorrow. Usually a child or an elderly person. Leave them alone.

      What is the most ridiculous option? Yup, liberals would select (A) alright.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s