Return to Website

Number Watch Web Forum

This forum is about wrong numbers in science, politics and the media. It respects good science and good English.

Number Watch Web Forum
Start a New Topic 
View Entire Thread
Re: Re: Re: Hey, suckers!

We must be careful what we say here. You joke now, but it will be policy tomorrow.

Re: Hey, suckers!

Now that you mention maleness, let's go to the extreme. The real cause of death is life. Ban all life!

Re: Re: Hey, suckers!


They are working on just that!!!

May 15 [02:45 GMT] – Is having children the next frontier of repression? – “Having large families should be frowned upon as an environmental misdemeanour in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a big car and failing to reuse plastic bags, says a report to be published today by a green think tank.”

One does not have to be dismissive of concerns about the size of the human population to be troubled about this report. In step with many Non Governmental Organization pressure groups and even governments, the Optimum Population Trust think-tank seeks to create an environment of social sanction – the prelude for repressive legislation – by making emotionally-laden and odious comparisons between the behaviour it disapproves of (child-bearing in this case) with dubious panic-inducing ideas that are widely shared in the public consciousness. Here, the notion of child-bearing as an “environmental misdemeanor” equivalent to the production of a certain quantum of air pollution, is a barely concealed invitation to think of human life as a kind of rubbish. An alienating and alienated attempt to jump on the climate change bandwagon with an anti-human message.

Re: Re: Re: Hey, suckers!

More on this.
FEELING CROWDED? Paul Watson is. The founder and president of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society writes that human overpopulation is "a virus . . . killing our host the planet Earth," and so the number of people living in the world should be slashed by 85 percent.

"No human community should be larger than 20,000 people," Watson insists in a new essay. "We need to radically and intelligently reduce human populations to fewer than one billion." He describes mankind as "the AIDS of the Earth," and calls for an end to cars, planes, and all ships save those powered by sail.

The views of a fanatic? Yes, but Watson is also a co founder of Greenpeace and a former member of the Sierra Club board of directors, not to mention one of Time magazine's 20th-century environmental "heroes." It is unlikely that his support for eliminating 5.5 billion human beings and most modern conveniences will hurt his standing among the green elite. On the contrary: Within the environmental movement, antipathy to population growth and technology is utterly conventional."

Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey, suckers!

Of course this is aimed only at western sorts of people. It's hard to see how third-world or aspiring countries will be interested in putting the brakes on, which is just like the way global warming counter-measures work.
All these green/liberal/white guilt people only ever seem to want to hurt western ways of life. Of course we COULD cut the population quickly in the same way as we could reduce CO2 emissions. Go nuclear. Funny how that one never appeals to the greens.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey, suckers!

Guilt works really well.

Too bad not one of these Greenies recognizes that if they didn't have those 7 billion people to support them, they wouldn't be able to stand up on their soap boxes and feel morose over anything they do. Since they feel miserable, it is their duty to make us as miserable as possible.

Randi ( suggested that we (humans) made a big mistake when we entered the Petroleum age. He fell into the abundance trap and failed to recognize that the Petroleum age was responsible for making life a hell of a lot nice and make it possible for him (an entertainer) to create an organization that spends it time fighting the irrational. Before that wouldn't have been possible. There wasn't enough free capital to allow donation based societies to survive as readily.

The only reason people in greenpeace (and I MEAN ONLY) and its like can continue to exist is because there is excessive excess of capital available to fund them. That capital came without exception from the very organizations they claim to despise. EXXON is being targeted for it's windfall profits (of 9%, whoopee). Not one media outlet is recognizing that that 9% means that $39B/.09 went into many different peoples pockets. (This would be the money that was expenses) Keynes then stepped in and turned it into trillions. Smith on the other hand is taking hold of that $39B and doing a variety of things with it, like ensuring that there is another quarter of revenue to pay the bills.

Such thinking will only get me shot by the elite, highly educated people, who failed to understand that it was okay to be alive and to continue to be alive. They also fail to recognize that since it is okay for them to be alive, it is also okay for EVERY OTHER HUMAN on the planet to be alive. Many of you may have BOD lists, but we like to keep those hidden, so we won't discuss them.


talked too long

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey, suckers!

Well I think the first requirement for any person who wants less people in the world to be taken as sincere, they should remove themselves from the population first.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey, suckers!

Back in the early 1970's at the height of the global cooling scare the US "National Lampoon" humour group created a spoof musical show called the "Woodshuck Festival of Peace, Love and Death". Based on the story of Woodstock of course.

Part of this revolved around the suggestion that people should 'offer themselves' in order to save the planet. Difficult to do ethically at the time because the capitalists corporations controlled the production nylon rope, razor blades and most other ethical, non-polluting means of self-extermination. However despite that the recommendation was for TNT suppositories (instant manure) or, as the parodied Woodstock weather turned wet and thunderstorms appeared, to keep warm by wrapping oneself in tin foil and lying in the middle of a field.

An LP was produced - I have it on tape somewhere.

Despite the 30 or so years which have passed since it was produced it occurs to me that it may be even more pertinant as a social commentary today than it was then.


Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey, suckers!


"Who should have children? Those who are responsible and completely dedicated to the responsibility which is actually a very small percentage of humans. Being a parent should be a career. Whereas some people are engineers, musicians, or lawyers, others with the desire and the skills can be fathers and mothers. Schools can be eliminated if the professional parent is also the educator of the child. "


"Paul is married to Allison Lance Watson. He has one child from his first wife "

Presumably he's one of the elite. I bow in homage.