ASL Veteran Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 Who is John Holdren? John Holdren is the science advisor to the president of the US. Why should I care about John Holdren? Because John Holdren is the science advisor for the president of the US. Here he is in a 5 minute interview with the BBC – pretty standard stuff http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8142935.stm He seems like a reasonable enough fellow. Here he is in 2007 discussing what we can do to reduce the effects of climate change. You can watch the entire 10 minute video if you want, but really I’m only concerned about the first bullet point on the very first ‘slide’ – the slide entitled “Options for reducing fossil CO2 emissions” and the first bullet point on the second ‘slide’ entitled “There is no Panacea” which comes up at the 1:05 mark in the video. Namely “reducing population growth” and “limiting population”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw6k-9nwP9w&feature=related Keep in mind the video was from 2007. It just so happens that he also co authored a book that was published in 1977 called “Ecoscience” where he explains what he means by “limiting population”. I can't put a link to it, but you can probably just look it up on Amazon if you are curious. It may even be available online somewhere for free in an electronic format, but I'm not sure I would want to read the entire thing. Here is one person’s analysis of what John Holdren coauthored in 1977. I personally find it quite disturbing, but as this material comes from a book that was published thirty years ago it should be easy to confirm it's accuracy. You can judge for yourselves if these excerpts are disturbing or not. http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/ Here is a bonus video with Nancy Pelosi in it discussing a part of the Stimulus bill that was passed in the spring – a part related to her views on population. Oh well, it’s all probably nothing anyway. Of course, if all that is too creepy for you then you can always check out this video for a little comic relief Just in case anyone is confused about the green house gas that gives someone a 'carbon' footprint, CO2 is the same stuff that you exhale when you breathe. So the very act of breathing creates greenhouse gasses. It’s obvious then that by limiting planetary population you would also limit greenhouse gasses. I would also like to add that there is no link that I’m aware of between exhaling and any form of sickness or disease. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 CO2 is the same stuff that you exhale when you breathe. At least there was one thing other than right wing conspiracy theories in your post. Say, were you home schooled? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 I would also like to add that there is no link that I’m aware of between exhaling and any form of sickness or disease. If you cannot exhale it is unlikely you will get any sicker than you already are. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 ASL Veteran, I would also like to add that there is no link that I’m aware of between exhaling and any form of sickness or disease. Nope, but I would challenge you to put a plastic bag over your head and see how that works out for you. And while you're at it, since you seem to be in a scientific mood, replace your copper or PVC water pipes with good old fashioned lead pipes. Then go out and get some mercury to sprinkle on your fish dinner. After all, since the econazi scientists all say that these things are really bad for you, there really can't be any harm that can come from it since they are part of some international conspiracy. If I am given the choice between taking the advice of a politician or a scientist, I'll take the advice of a scientist pretty much any day. On no day, not even the worst day of my life, will I take the advice of a big industry capitalist (not to mention a bought and paid for right-wing nutjob radio talkshow host). But I can't help it... I'm a capitalist with a degree in history. History shows that Capitalism is not a benign force. ASL Veteran, I'd recommend you put the anit-global warming message bearers to 1/100th the amount of scrutiny you're putting environmental scientists under. After all, I don't know of any Super Fund sites that were caused by environmental scientists. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hertston Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 The population of the planet is increasing exponentially, and sooner rather than later that means it will be larger than the planet can support. If population growth is not reduced and, ultimately, stopped, people will be starving to death by the billion. Those that don't die in the inevitable wars for resources, anyway. OK, that makes it a self-solving problem, but personally I'd rather see it done by simple persuasion and improvement in economic conditions that make 'breeding as a pension policy' a historical relic. Agreed his 1977 suggestions seem somewhat extreme, though! Whether they will stay that way if the problem is ignored for another 50 years is a different question, sadly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 ASL; where did you crib that post from, since I doubt it is your own work. Who are you carrying water for, and why? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 ASL; where did you crib that post from, since I doubt it is your own work. Who are you carrying water for, and why? Mostly John Kettler. BUT... - the international copyright legislation has the ability to shut down the last remaining avenue of free speech available to the general populace. - GWB's escalation of the use of armed forces of the US has ensured that the US populace actually has an army to go into this next phase with (and, because it is made up of US people, it will back them before it will back a legal system). - the funding arrangements for the enviro-fascists is dependent on taxation. They aren't smart enough to think this through to the logical conclusion. Lesson: control isn't the same as leadership. Welcome to the new world order. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 It's not a good sign if three threads get locked and this isn't one of them. This isn't science, this is politics, and as such breach of forum rules. Lock please! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 It's not a good sign if three threads get locked and this isn't one of them. This isn't science, this is politics, and as such breach of forum rules. Lock please! Eugenics is a science (of sorts). Hiding your head in the sand does not make it go away. In fact, same kind of views as brought forth here were voiced in Finland not long ago by a prominent controversial Green Party affiliated scientist. He got shouted down but not before he had had his say in main stream media. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 By ASL Veteran Just in case anyone is confused about the green house gas that gives someone a 'carbon' footprint, CO2 is the same stuff that you exhale when you breathe. So the very act of breathing creates greenhouse gasses. It’s obvious then that by limiting planetary population you would also limit greenhouse gasses. I would also like to add that there is no link that I’m aware of between exhaling and any form of sickness or disease. I should focus more on excrememt and gastric gasses. Bovine excrement and gastric gasses have been blamed for the green house effect. How long do you think the media will start to focus on human production of said byproducts ? After all, that will inevitably be the next logical step in that path. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 Eugenics is a science (of sorts). Hiding your head in the sand does not make it go away. In fact, same kind of views as brought forth here were voiced in Finland not long ago by a prominent controversial Green Party affiliated scientist. He got shouted down but not before he had had his say in main stream media. See? Back to politics even in the rebuttal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 See? Back to politics even in the rebuttal. Not in the least. The scientist made scientific remarks. The fact he is affiliated with the Green Party has nothing to do with it. Even his own party denied they endorse his views. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSgt Viljuri Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 About whom are you talking about, Tero? Promisingly, there's a growing popular movement inside SDP to get some mundane things back on the Agenda again. All likewise minded (and I am not one of them), act before it's too late. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 Not in the least. The scientist made scientific remarks. The fact he is affiliated with the Green Party has nothing to do with it. Even his own party denied they endorse his views. Hogwash! You weren't discussing his scientific view, but you did get round to mention his party affiliation and media exposure. Politics. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 By SSgt Viljuri About whom are you talking about, Tero? Susi-Pullinen. He blurted out his remarks early IIRC last year. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted November 11, 2009 Author Share Posted November 11, 2009 If I am given the choice between taking the advice of a politician or a scientist, I'll take the advice of a scientist pretty much any day. Steve Then why not just address what Holdren's views are rather than discussing me and .... some other random thoughts. His views are in the public record for all to see and all I did was present them - I never said that his views are a reflection of your views. His views are his own unless you choose to associate yourself with those views. The difference, of course, is that he is in a position of political power and you make great games. You can be concerned for the environment and do good things to fight pollution and not subscribe to the views that John Holdren does. In fact, I hope you don't subscribe to his views and that you would be willing to state that you don't. I really don't want to get into a big argument with you Steve and this clearly is a topic that seems to strike deep at your core values. I think I'll refrain from continuing as I am at a disadvantage now that you are personally involved. Your involvement shapes how I have to respond and may prevent others from contributing. I hope we can have more productive discussions on other boards on other topics. Who knows, maybe I'll agree with you on something someday 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Probably because you "presented" them right up as political - he's adviser to Obama was the first thing you wrote, nd it is because he is science advisor to teh Pres that yuo are interested in him - right off the bat your only actual interest is in his politics...sheesh...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 ...and the behaviour you display in your relationship with power (i.e. Steve) is telling. Treat him like a human or he'll start believing his own press. Then we're all stuffed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Having read the links I can from ASL's original post.......population is the elephant in the room. Holden's 1977 book seems nothing more than navel gazing, and his "Planetary Regime", etc is presented as potential responses to the need to limit population. so.... Is there any serious argument that we can continue to increase in population indefinitely? If not, and you disagree with Holden's 30-year-old co-authored analysis and ideas.......what is it that you think we should do to shift this elephant out of the room? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Having read the links I can from ASL's original post.......population is the elephant in the room. ..snips... what is it that you think we should do to shift this elephant out of the room? Well, obviously it has to go on a diet before it'll fit out the door; there's no sense in damaging the room. Or we could turn the room into an abattoir and eat the elephant. Personally, I'm for organising a register of volunteers willing to cork one or more of their orifices for the remainder of their lives. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 It's a pygmy elephant and access is by room-width folding doors 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 By SSgt Viljuri Susi-Pullinen. He blurted out his remarks early IIRC last year. And of course it was the ecofascist Linkola who I was referring to. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave H Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 I thought this comic strip had a pretty good take on the underlying problem http://www.gocomics.com/tomthedancingbug/2009/08/08/ Or maybe just read John Brunner's "Stand on Zanzibar". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
easy-v Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Wow, judging by the tone of this thread, I guess that I shouldn't be surprised about the absence of discussion of the CRU documents here. Keep that head firmly implanted in your fourth point of contact. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.