(NaturalNews) In the last week, nearly 100,000 fish washed up on the shores of the Arkansas River, dead. Also in Arkansas, thousands of red-winged blackbirds fell from the sky and plummeted to the ground where they were also found dead. The scene repeated itself in Southern Louisiana where 500 red-winged blackbirds recently plunged out of the sky, dead on arrival, and in Chesapeake Bay, thousands of dead fish have begun washing up onto bay shores.
It is common sense to be concerned when the animals around us start dying suddenly and in large numbers.
So far, scientists are dismissing these scenes as common phenomena. They say the fish in Arkansas were killed by "disease" and dismiss any possibility of chemicals being involved. The red-winged blackbirds, after autopsies were performed yesterday, appear to have been killed by "blunttrauma," but it's not clear whether that trauma was the act of slamming into the ground or if it was caused by something else beforehand.
Coincidence? Or is there another cause?
While there are many documented cases ofbirds(and even frogs) falling out of the sky throughout world history, the seeming coincidence of having thousands of birds fall out of the skywhile, at the same time, 100,000 fish wash up as dead in the same geographic regiondemands greater scrutiny. What's happening in Arkansas that's killing these animals?
The question becomes even more important when you consider that other animal die-offs are occurring with alarming frequency across North America. Not only are honeybees dying off in record numbers, but nowbatsare being wiped out, too (http://www.naturalnews.com/022989_b...).
What's the root cause behind the mass die-offs?
Conventional scientists say it's all due to "disease," but they neglect to ask the obvious question: What makes these animals suddenly so susceptible to disease?
Because that answer may be a uncomfortable to the established industries that sell pesticides, or build cell phone towers, or grow genetically modified crops.
For all we know, these 100,000 dead fish are downstream from a field of GMO corn that mutated into something even more deadly than the GMOs we already know. This may not be so far-fetched, actually:Monsanto has a corporate office in Arkansas(in Stuttgart, Arkansas) that's not too many miles from the Arkansas River (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A...).
This isn't proof of anything, of course, but the idea that a whole lot of birds and fish are suddenly dying near Monsanto's corporate offices should at least get intelligent people asking some serious questions.
Are secret experiments the cause?
The PrisonPlanet.com websites suggests that these deathsmay be due to secret government experiments (http://www.prisonplanet.com/is-mass...). This is not as far-fetched as it sounds. NaturalNews has documented the long history of U.S. government experiments on human beings, too (http://www.naturalnews.com/019189.html). Just last year, Obama was forced to apologize to Guatemala for the U.S. medical experiments conducted on prisoners there (http://www.naturalnews.com/029924_m...).
So the idea that the government might be conducting experiments on the weather or on wild animal populations is in no way bizarre. It's routine, in fact.
Still, more mundane explanations may be valid, too. For the birds, the most likely explanation is that they were somehow struck by afreak hail storm. But if hail struck the birds, that same hail should have also appeared on the ground (birds don't fly at super-high altitude), and no hail was reported. So the hail theory doesn't pan out.
The fish deaths are also a mystery: While the scientists say that disease is the most likely cause -- because only one fish species washed up dead -- that explanation doesn't hold water. Here's why:
Animals deaths don't resemble infectious disease pattern
A virus, bacteria or fungus doesn't magically and suddenly spread across 100,000 members of one species all on the same day. It takes time for such infectious agents to spread. If disease were the cause, you should have seen a few fish showing up dead on one day, followed by a few more some days later, then a lot more after that, and then finally a much larger mass over the subsequent days or weeks as the infectious agent spread through the population.
Yet that's not what we saw. Instead, we saw100,000 fish dying all at once(or very nearly all at once). This is not indicative of infectious disease. Even the CDC will tell you that. Infections don't time themselves to kill large populations simultaneously. The pattern ofdeathall butrules out infectious diseaseas the cause.
This pattern is, however, indicative ofa poisonor some other radical change such as a sharp temperature change in the river. Something changed in the environment -- perhaps a rapid depletion of oxygen, or the interference with fish physiology through electromagnetic means. And this points to something other than disease: Perhaps the behavior of a corporation or the actions of a government experiment.
In either of those cases, the truth will almost certainly be hidden from public view. Scientists will be paid off to say it was caused by disease, and the corporate-controlled press will buy it, too. And that's what people will be told.
But I'm suspicious. When I see animals dying 100,000 at a time and birds falling out of the sky, I begin to suspect much more than just normal in-the-wild infectious disease.
I suspect something far more nefarious is afoot, and whatever it is, you have to ask the inescapable question: Is this a trial run of a much larger experiment involving other species? Perhaps even humans?
Sources for this story include:
Url de cet article: