Population reduction (Channel 4 News/UK)

[cottonzway]

Cottonzway, explain to me how you know the professor is lying?

Because you can find the transcript of his speech in 2006 that he clearly says it. Both by people who think he is nuts and by people who support him (they are nuts). Here is a blog form one of his supporters.

http://www.geocities.com/tetrahedronomega/brenmccnnll.blogspot.com-2006-03-dr.html

 

[jimbo83478]

Because you can find the transcript of his speech in 2006 that he clearly says it. Both by people who think he is nuts and by people who support him (they are nuts). Here is a blog form one of his supporters.

http://www.geocities.com/tetrahedronomega/brenmccnnll.blogspot.com-2006-03-dr.html

Show us the transcript.

I don't doubt that even the Dalai Lama has supporters who are nuts. This may say something about the supporter, but it says very little about the supported.

 

[ddd999]

Yeah but if you phrase it that way it makes it sound all conspiratorial and spooky rather than the responsible, forward-thinking, looooooong-term plan it actually represents.

What would that loooong-term plan be?
Sterilization?
Biochemical engineering?
How would you drop from 60mil to 20mil in ... let's say 100 years?

Some people like to be scared, like on a roller coaster.

Give me a break. There's plenty of land and sea to go around... we have to change our evil ways, but then that wouldn't suit multibillion dollars/euros industries that are not only bleeding dry and poisoning the environment but also hold control of 90% resources.
But, hey the REAL solution is population reduction.

The whole world is becoming one big Banana Republic.

Think what ever the fu*k you want, but "Population reduction" happened before, most recent ones are " The First World War " ( 37 million: 16 million deaths and 21 million wounded) and "The Second World War" (total dead range from 50 million to over 70 million).
Aren't we supposed to learn from the past?
Wander what they have in store for us this time.
Maybe cotton and candies? Better think twice.

 

[cottonzway]

http://www.cathyyoung.net/speech/Piankaspeech.htm

I tried to copy and paste the whole thing but it is WAY too long.

 

[cottonzway]

Kill the humans!

this is an aids infected piece of a human. Each of those little round things is an hiv virulent that can infect a new human. Basically, they use their t-cells to they make copies of themselves.

Hiv is a pandemic spread worldwide. It's increasing in frequency in a lot of places and it's a big concern to everybody. But, it's not gonna be the one that gets us cause hiv is too slow, it lets us live several years so it can pass itself on to new hosts.

Uh, it's no good, it's too slow.

Now when you get to these viruses — ebola zaire has potential. It kills nine out of ten humans. It's never gotten out of africa cause its so virulent it kills everybody before they can move. I mean it kills you within a day or two.

Uh, you can only catch ebola zaire by contact with a human that's infected. It causes you to bleed. It breaks capillaries and you bleed out your orifices and if you go out and touch somebody who's sick with it you get it and you die, too — or nine times out of ten.

so this is really, really an exciting time in the history of mankind. Remember the ancient chinese curse: “may you live in interesting times”? I think that right now has got to be just about the most interesting time ever and you get to see it, and, hopefully, a few are gonna live through it.

Here's another graph from their book. The only one i could find on the web was a little outdated, but they predicted way long ago the oil peak. And, of course, there are still idiots out there claiming that there's oil galore that we will keep finding it and keep going, and i just can't believe these people that don't understand a finite world.

But you notice the estimated population red line with a collapse and without a collapse and things are gonna get better after the collapse because we won't be able to decimate the earth so much. And, i actually think the world will be much better when there's only 10 or 20 percent of us left.

It would give wildlife a chance to recover — we won't need conservation biologists anymore. Things are gonna get better.

 

[CapnG]

What would that loooong-term plan be?
Sterilization?
Biochemical engineering?
How would you drop from 60mil to 20mil in ... let's say 100 years?

EEEK! PANICKY PANIC!

Yes indeed, suggesting humanity try and manage itself responsibly instead of breeding like cockroaches and simply ASSUMING there will always be enough to go around forever is clearly the work of the devil.

Now here's the reality. In the "first-world" population growth is flat, practically zero (negative in some places). When the rest of the world is on that level, human population growth will no longer be an issue, LITERALLY.

Raise standards of living globally, provide access to education, family planning, contraception and yes abortion (upon request and with good reason only) and the problem will solve itself. No jack-boots, no death camps and no viral outbreaks required.

Of course, I know being responsible and sensible isn't nearly as sexy as "Teh gubment want to kill you!" but there you go...

 

[ddd999]

So it's cotton and candies for you CapnG then. Well just for your information all the messures you just mentioned are being implemented in the UK for the past 50 or so years so kind of didn't work- did it?... Obviously that's not what this dude is talking about.

 

[cottonzway]

The actual site says by 2050, to put it in prospective. 1 million a year less with zero growth. Yeah, that is reasonable and sane.

http://www.optimumpopulation.org/opt.more.ukpoptable.html

Why should ANYONE in the government or in "science" get to decide our future as a species? Nobody has the right. If I want to have kids, I will have kids. If I don't, I don't. That is not for ANYONE to tell me nor is it for me to tell anyone else.

 

[jimbo83478]

Kill the humans!

Thanks for finding that, cottonzway, but I think you're slightly misinterpreting Eric Pianka's words.

Nowhere in this speech does he encourage culling our population. From what I could gather, he believes it is inevitable that our population will be scaled back by viruses and, as far as he is concerned, that will be good for the earth. Maybe he's right; maybe he's wrong - I don't know. He raises good points about the reality of our situation, but, as far as I can tell, offers no solution except to try and survive the ensuing viral epidemic. I think we can do better than that, but I see a big difference between his laissez-fiare attitude towards microbial-induced mass deaths and, say, Henry Kissinger's thoughts on population metering,

"A U.S. National Security Study memorandum produced in 1974 by the National Security Council at the request of then U.S. Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, concluded that there were four types of reasons that population growth in poor countries could be a threat to U.S. national security:

1. Larger nations would gain greater political power
2. Populous nations would be more able to deny the West access to resources and materials
3. Growing number of younger people might be more able to challenge global power structures
4. Growing populations may be a threat to U.S. investors in those countries."

- Populations: A Numbers Game — Global Issues (thank you ddd999)


Clearly Kissinger's reasons are not aimed to benefit the earth and all it's inhabitants, but Pianka's are. I'm not saying Pianka has the solution - I personally think we have much better options, and what Pianka predicts would be worst case scenario - but I think you have to separate intentions, here, instead of indulging in this constant knee-jerk reaction towards anyone discussing the issue.

 

[CapnG]

So it's cotton and candies for you CapnG then. Well just for your information all the messures you just mentioned are being implemented in the UK for the past 50 or so years so kind of didn't work- did it?... Obviously that's not what this dude is talking about.

MMmmmm... cotton candy... wait, what were we talking about? Oh right, the boogeyman.

Stricter immigration policies will be required for countries with limited space. Duh. You can fit 10 UKs into the province of Ontario alone. If everyone who went to the UK came to Canada instead the UK would be stable and we probably wouldn't have even noticed.

However, if you raise standards of living globally, the NEED for immigration lessens in the first place. So again, you can there's my common sense approach or stick with your "let's continue to breed like rabbits and hope it all works out" polly-anna bullshit.

 

[cottonzway]

Good reply.

The INTENTION of the comments between, say Kissinger and Pianka are different, to an extent. One makes those comments because he is a control freak sociopath and the other a misguided man of science who cares more about "mother gaia" then anything else. IMO, of course.

I don't really know how I can look at comments like "AIDS is too slow" and misinterpret it. The guy said he thinks we will be "better" at only 10-20% of us. That is creepy.

 

[jimbo83478]

The guy said he thinks we will be "better" at only 10-20% of us. That is creepy.

I won't argue there.

 

[ddd999]

CapnG, I don't and didn't question your approach to the problem. Only it wasn't you that was interviewed on Chanell 4 talking about "Population reduction" (UK in this case/ from 60mil down to 20mil).
And if you watch the clip again, he was questioned about all the things that you presented as a solution (and I don't disagree with you) being in place already... But he was very "sketchy" about how he would go about his 60 to 20 "final solution". How to fu*k do you make 40 million people magically disappear?

This kind of Population reduction talk is not new and is very disturbing, you have to admit ... Especially, when it's coming from a public platform and is well funded.

 

[ddd999]

MMmmmm... cotton candy... wait, what were we talking about? Oh right, the boogeyman.

From this gentelman's own website:

"...recommends radical fertility policies to help achieve environmentally sustainable population size."

What is radical fertility policies?

Oh yes, education and stuff... Oh no wait, that's not it... been there, done that -didn't work. Wonder what "radical" stands for...? I'm sure you're right CapnG, there's nothing to worry about.

 

[ddd999]

Bertrand Russell (3rd Earl Russell),
/British philosopher, logician, mathematician, historian, religious skeptic, social reformer, socialist and pacifist/

The Impact Of Science On Society 1953

“I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing… War… has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full… The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people’s… There are three ways of securing a society that shall be stable as regards population. The first is that of birth control, the second that of infanticide or really destructive wars, and the third that of general misery except for a powerful minority…”



I'm sure 3rd Earl Russell wasn't talking about himself there, or his family...

Orwell was right"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".





This just in:

"WASHINGTON (Reuters)

Doctors are reporting a severe form of swine flu that goes straight to the lungs, causing severe illness in otherwise healthy young people and requiring expensive hospital treatment, the World Health Organisation said on Friday.

Earlier, WHO reported that H1N1 had reached epidemic levels in Japan, signalling an early start to what may be a long influenza season this year, and that it was also worsening in tropical regions.

"Perhaps most significantly, clinicians from around the world are reporting a very severe form of disease, also in young and otherwise healthy people, which is rarely seen during seasonal influenza infections," WHO said.

Minority groups and indigenous populations may also have a higher risk of being severely ill with H1N1.

Every year, seasonal flu infects between 5 percent and 20 percent of a given population and kills between 250,000 and 500,000 people globally. Because hardly anyone has immunity to the new H1N1 virus, experts believe it will infect far more people than usual, as much as a third of the population. "

Link


There you go, problem solved! I wonder- Is it by God or Is it by design?



.

 

[Poi]

Or is it just hype?

Water rights are being bought up quickly in Texas. So far, it seems companies are focusing on land owners with resources. But I've read that Bechtel, along with two other behemoth corporations are buying water systems in place in the U.S.

Resources may be hyped to be scarce so that we'll have to pay a lot more for them.

 

[ddd999]

Or is it just hype?

Water rights are being bought up quickly in Texas. So far, it seems companies are focusing on land owners with resources. But I've read that Bechtel, along with two other behemoth corporations are buying water systems in place in the U.S.

Resources may be hyped to be scarce so that we'll have to pay a lot more for them.

That was my point in post on page 1 of this thread:
"Also, I don't buy this "no resources" BS, the only reason that there's "no resources" is because very small percentage of people are having a grip on and control of said resources. Someone has to have 250 mill $ a year salary after all."

 

[Poi]

Sorry, ddd. Can't remember that far back, page one. LOL

I think you've got it though. Dialectics are created to hype and divide the population on issues while something else goes on in the background. Call it conspiracy, I don't care. Bechtel has a brand new facility near me and it's presence is no longer mystifying. Bye-bye cheap water.

 

[pixelsmith]

Even though there is really no fast form of depopulization, a slow and gradual method, such as a one child policy, might be a good idea. Short of huge natural disasters and zombies, I see no real way to accomplish a rapid, or even semi rapid population decreases.

there is indeed a faster way. hitler developed a way after being inspired by the american eugenics movement.

 

[cottonzway]

Sorry, ddd. Can't remember that far back, page one. LOL

I think you've got it though. Dialectics are created to hype and divide the population on issues while something else goes on in the background. Call it conspiracy, I don't care. Bechtel has a brand new facility near me and it's presence is no longer mystifying. Bye-bye cheap water.

Bye-bye cheap water indeed. Bechtel is one of the most evil and ruthless compaines in the world. What they did in Bolivia was flatout evil and far beyond typical big-business corruption.

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=6670