The Most IMPORTANT Video You'll Ever See [Archive] - Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE)

KathyT

01-04-2009, 12:06 AM

The first thought i had when I saw this is imagine if they gave this elcture in high school in public school.

Amazing lecture!!

You are absolutely correct Deb!

We all agree we have to fix our planet. We’re all spending time saying the awareness has to spread to everyone, or that everyone needs to ‘wake up’. The reality is, there ARE day to day actions that are hurting ourselves. One of our biggest problems is that we’re not talking about a population problem. We have major resources in many areas that are going to run out. Water for drinking. Sites for garbage disposal. Coal for energy. Energy for transportation. Areas on which we can grow food to feed the world. Raw materials to build roads, bridges and buildings.

What are we doing from the government level to address our population problem?

Yet in my own community I know families that have procreated 8 children or more. That has got to stop.

We have to balance the equation and get to zero growth. We are as close as 2 minutes before noon (12pm) (watch video to understand.)

Swanny

01-04-2009, 01:25 AM

Definitely a one to watch :thumb_yello:
Personally I think it's 11.59
Time to make the leap.

AussieG

01-04-2009, 12:13 PM

One should ask why do we have over population? I for one after the delivery of our third child had a vasectomy.
Why do we need constant economic and population growth? In my humble opinion is has been the direct result of greed cultured by the illuminati. to sustain there positions, it is all our fault ( the filthy breeders) and we on a regular basis need culling.
It is my belief that all reasonably conscious adults are aware of the need for sustainability and if asked would willingly participate in
Population management
Resource management
And what ever management that would assist all in achieving sustainability.

It is NOT the result of reckless prorogation but the direct result of GREED. If we could change from "Whats in it for me" to "How can I help" we and our future generation can live in peace and harmony.

Steve_A

01-04-2009, 01:12 PM

Hi KathyT,

I too have seen the video some time ago.

It's funny how when Henry Kissinger made a report about this, even now it's considered to be a genocidal PTB master plan, ( http://wlym.com/text/NSSM200.htm ) yet when a sweet old man like Dr. Albert Bartlett brings up the problem, it becomes something to think about and consider.

The problem about exponential growth was brought up as early as 1800's!

There is one question that Bartlett made which until now, nobodyhas been able to answer, which is what is the solution. We know it's to at least slow down the population growth rate, but how do we do this in a humane way?

Over here in Brazil, mothers receive a lump sum for each child they have. Consequently, in the remoter areas of Brazil (normally the much poorer reasons) women are having children to try and make ends meet, albeit temporarily.

The huge problem with this is the pressure for the future where they don't seem to understand that children eat, grow up and need to be clothed, educated and cared for when they are ill.

My idea for reducing growth rate is to offe a lump sum for men and women to be steralized, that way the population will eventually become to enter in decline, and when it becomes to the number that can be managed properly, the return of money for children can be brought back.

The offset for these payments will be the reduction of spending for health and education.

This would eliminate the controversial need for abortion and everybody (at least here in Brazil) will be consenting adults - if they can become pregnant for money, I'm sure they will be conscient enough to become steralized.

If anybody else has an idea that is not too controversial, that could be accepted by many, I would be interested to hear about them.

Best regards,

Steve

Just a little mathematical review which is very compelling.

by Dr. Albert Bartlett, Professor Emertus, Department of Physics, University of Colorado

“Arithmetic, Population, and Energy”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY&feature=related

Even just the first part will amaze you... but there are 8 parts if you have time.

From Dr. Bartlett's presentation... of the problems facing our planet... and how much time do we have left?

Steve_A

01-04-2009, 01:22 PM

Hi AussieG,

Although in general I can undestand what you're saying, we need to take into consideration other factors.

Not everyone as a conscience.
Not everyone has access to health care.
Ignorance is rife in the world.
Some populations are just too big to control now, except to cull (look at China and India).
The expense for many governments to steralize is just too much.
Some religions do not allow steralization.
Governments want to reduce populations rather than increase them (except France and I beleive Australia).

These are just a few items as to why the problem is not as simple as having a good conscience. In your case, for example, you more than doubled the size of your family in one generation. Now there are another three people to have another three kids and that makes the family population to be 17 (You, your wife, your three children, their three partners and nine children)! More than eight times the original size in two generations! Phew!!

Best regards,

Steve

One should ask why do we have over population? I for one after the delivery of our third child had a vasectomy.
Why do we need constant economic and population growth? In my humble opinion is has been the direct result of greed cultured by the illuminati. to sustain there positions, it is all our fault ( the filthy breeders) and we on a regular basis need culling.

pyrangello

01-04-2009, 04:28 PM

Here in Michigan you have a kid, can't afford the health care for delivery, BAM , here comes the state , they paid for 26,000 kids last year compliments of the taxpayers, and the worst part is now the parent gets a check for 1-18 yrs. from the state for assistance.

Then there's the part of breaking the chain repeating what their parents did and getting on state aid , I tried to interject in one family and get both kids on the right track as to not continue the chain, the one girl ended up pregnant and the boy unkwown now.

You have kids having kids because they know they'll be taken care of financially. Alot of older guys I know are trying to mentor many of these kids which are our next generation of hope including me.

Yes it does seem like a problem with no end in the cycle until level heads prevail.

Swanny

01-04-2009, 07:44 PM

In the UK they have career babies, young girls have a kid on purpose as they know they will be given a house and money and they don't have to work :thumbdown:
I wouldn't choose to bring a child into this world the ways things are heading.

Josefine

01-04-2009, 08:35 PM

[/QUOTE
I wouldn't choose to bring a child into this world the ways things are heading.[/QUOTE]

Just found this thread. Well, I beg to disagree!

If you have seen the interview Kerry did with Jessica, the Canadian 'crystal child', she is making the most politically incorrect statement about our current population size:

It is a huge honor to be in a physical body on this planet at this time!

There is a great line-up of people who want to be on the Earth at this time, and this is the reason the world population is what it is right now.

It is major transformation time, and the transformation is in a most positive direction.

It feels negative because change, even for the better, infringes on our 'comfort zone', what we have become accustomed to, that includes all the strife and sorrow, we try to hold on to it all.

More and more children who are coming in now, are coming without the fear, guilt and shame that is our greatest genetic weakness. They will have their mind aligned with their heart, and this will make them free to speak their inner truth in a bolder way. We are all going through this same transformation, but they will greatly accellerate the changes with their fresh energies.

There will be geophysical earth changes that will take a great toll of human lives. Those that leave that way, have given their input to the transformation process before their time is up. EACH ONE IS UNIQUE, EACH ONE IS NEEDED EQUALLY. THERE IS NO ACCIDENT ABOUT WHO INCARNATES, AND EVERYONE IS HERE FOR A PURPOSE.

New technologies, a new and more simple lifestyle more in tune with nature will make less of a strain on our resources. Today something like 70% of the world's consumption goes to wars and preparations for war!!!! Just think what will happen when that need is made redundant. Yes, it will happen!

Czymra

01-04-2009, 10:39 PM

I agree strongly with the notion that the current density of population is right. I am just greatly concerned that those children that we need are so removed from the real world that I'm not sure how to access them without manipulating them.

KathyT

01-04-2009, 10:41 PM

Jessica:
There is a great line-up of people who want to be on the Earth at this time, and this is the reason the world population is what it is right now.

Even Jessica did not say it would be good to continue to have doubling or tripling of our population. She only talks of the current population today.

I do think it may be incorrect to say “this is the reason the world population is what it is right now.” Line-ups of people does not force people to conceive. Line-ups of animals do not force animals to conceive. It is their natural habit that sustains animals. Food supply is probably the major factor in animal population growth. When food supply has become scarce for certain animal species (eg. natural disasters, weather patterns, push-back by humans) animal populations have changed dramatically, sometimes nearing extinction. When food is plentiful, animal populations increase.

The ability of humans to sustain food production, including the distribution of food production to regional areas facing drought and starvation, or to sustain regional areas whose annual local food production ‘failed’ for one year, is what has sustained populations. How long do you think your local community would survive if the food stores were empty, really empty, for 3 months? Can and does your town grow it's own food?

Our advancements in agriculture… increased agriculture by using equipment instead of ox labor, increased production due to crop management and improved crop varieties have improved the availability and tonnage of food supplies. When populations are sustained/fed in a healthy manner, according to history, family growth has been on increasing rates. Facts for centuries show that.
My idea for reducing growth rate is to offe a lump sum for men and women to be steralized, that way the population will eventually become to enter in decline, and when it becomes to the number that can be managed properly, the return of money for children can be brought back.

Steve, something like this has to happen. But we have major religions opposing it.
China's policy is this:http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/worldbalance/campaigns.html
"China's Communist Party first implemented the "one child" rule—perhaps the best-known population policy in the world—in the 1970s amidst growing concerns over whether the famine-prone country could continue to feed its skyrocketing population. The rule, which reportedly is more lax today, stipulates that urban couples should have only one child. Couples in rural areas, where 80 percent of the population lives, may have two or possibly more children but should delay getting married initially and then space their children. Families that violate the rule where it is most strictly enforced face mandatory abortions and severe financial penalties, while single-child couples throughout the country are entitled to better child care, preferential housing assignments, and cash bonuses. The policy has generally worked, and fertility rates have fallen to an average of about two children per woman, down from more than five children per woman in the 1950s. However, the number of Chinese women having children today is still much greater than were having children in the previous generation, so China's population growth continues."

Ready2BPeaceful

01-05-2009, 01:38 AM

Thank you KathyT. That really puts things into perspective. Astounding!

Steve_A

01-05-2009, 09:08 AM

Hi KathyT,

The major factor in animal population growth is water, without such food could never be made and the animal species would die. We can go without food for over a month, but can go without water for only about a week.

Non human species do not 'produce' food. They take it 'in natura', if it's there.

Humans produce food artificially creating environments where specific plants and crops will grow to sustain the increase in demand.

The natural non human population has been manipulated by the un-natural hand of humans.

I'm sure that if the human race was to return to the times when we had to hunt and collect berries our poulation would be reduced and return to an number where the planet would return to its' natural balance.

I understand the policy of China and think that using a heavy hand is not the right way to go.

I also understand that many religions of course would oppose my idea.

But the question needs to be asked. Which is more ethical, having unwanted children just to create artificial sources of income or an incentive for not having unwanted children?

As we can see by some of the answers in this thread, the problem is not just a third world problem. Youngsters in the developed world are using children as an easy financial solution.

But don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to get young sixteen year olds being pressured by their parents to be steralized just to grab the money.

It needs to be with people who are over 21 and preferably who already have one child.

The incentive is not to take away the privelage of parenthood, but to reduce the tendancy of having large families with almost no means of support and to invert the tendency of the baby making industry so that the population may be managed in a more efficient manner lessening the strain on natural resources and raising the quality of life.

Best regards,

Steve

Even Jessica did not say it would be good to continue to have doubling or tripling of our population. She only talks of the current population today.

I do think it may be incorrect to say “this is the reason the world population is what it is right now.” Line-ups of people does not force people to conceive. Line-ups of animals do not force animals to conceive. It is their natural habit that sustains animals. Food supply is probably the major factor in animal population growth.

Josefine

01-05-2009, 09:37 AM

[QUOTE=KathyT;100387]Even Jessica did not say it would be good to continue to have doubling or tripling of our population.

1) She only talks of the current population today.

2) I do think it may be incorrect to say “this is the reason the world population is what it is right now.”

3) Line-ups of people does not force people to conceive. Line-ups of animals do not force animals to conceive. It is their natural habit that sustains animals.

1) Yes, Jessica ONLY talks about the current population size. About the future she says we have not much to worry about, quite the contrary. We may look forward to becoming fully empowered as spiritual beings incarnated in human bodies. We will be able to more consciously control every aspect of our individual and communal lives.

2) We are much more in control already than we give ourselves credit for. I suggest, as does Jessica, that the current population size is no accident. On a non-physical level of decision-making we have deemed what is an adequate population size for the challenge at hand.

3) It is not a matter of 'line-ups of people'. It is a matter of beings, who are sovereign and integrated in the I AM, that are eager to incarnate in human bodies in order to take part in the ongoing transformation. There are no forced conceptions, they are all premeditated and deliberate, whatever it may look like.

The term 'line-up of animals that force animals to conceive' is a rather meaningless expression, don't you think?
Animals eat and procreate in a different manner than human beings. It is known, sociologically, that as the status of woman is elevated to that of equality with men and her sosio-economic status is higher, which, by the way, means more food is available, she chooses to have fewer children. There is no equivalent in the animal kingdom. Animal populations ebb and flow with the available food supply and other physical factors, such as the ebb and flow of predators.

People on this forum generally see human beings as something more than mere biological entities. I suggest we explore our current situation in that light.

I understand you are in favour of more draconian measures, - right now. There are measures in effect that might be beyond your wildest dreams, read 'Matrix' vol. I, II and III by Val Valerian or 'Rapport from Iron Mountain, 1977' describing measures that could, would and have been put into effect against 'useless eaters'.

There are those who favour nuking us into an uninhabitable desert, right now. Of course, that would be rather like 'cutting off your nose to spite your face', as we, humanity, are One.

We will, without doubt, go through testing times very soon. It does not happen because there are too many of us, but rather because we have by and large forgotten who we truly are and why we came here.

AussieG

01-05-2009, 12:23 PM

Although in general I can undestand what you're saying, we need to take into consideration other factors.

Not everyone as a conscience.
Not everyone has access to health care.
Ignorance is rife in the world.
Some populations are just too big to control now, except to cull (look at China and India).
The expense for many governments to steralize is just too much.
Some religions do not allow steralization.
Governments want to reduce populations rather than increase them (except France and I beleive Australia).

These are just a few items as to why the problem is not as simple as having a good conscience. In your case, for example, you more than doubled the size of your family in one generation. Now there are another three people to have another three kids and that makes the family population to be 17 (You, your wife, your three children, their three partners and nine children)! More than eight times the original size in two generations! Phew!!

Steve T
Not everyone as a conscience.
BS we all have one, it is our connection to the universal energy, some just don't choose to us it, or there Ego has been so grossly enhanced by the greed machine that it has been so weakened as to be ineffective. I have personally witnessed the miracles that can happen when someone becomes conscious aware.

These are just a few items as to why the problem is not as simple as having a good conscience. In your case, for example, you more than doubled the size of your family in one generation. Now there are another three people to have another three kids and that makes the family population to be 17 (You, your wife, your three children, their three partners and nine children)! More than eight times the original size in two generations! Phew!!

And I did that without knowledge imagine how much better it could be if growth and greed did'nt dominate, and enlightenment pervaded.

I do agree that it has been left to late, (deliberately so by the PTB )it is now one minute to 12 and unfortunately only catastrophic events will have any effect on galvanizing people to seek true sustainability based on what is best for all and not the individual

Steve_A

01-05-2009, 12:56 PM

Hi AussieG,

Point taken. I meant to say that not everybody knows how to use their conscience. :)

Steve A
Not everyone as a conscience.
BS we all have one, it is our connection to the universal energy, some just don't choose to us it, or there Ego has been so grossly enhanced by the greed machine that it has been so weakened as to be ineffective. I have personally witnessed the miracles that can happen when someone becomes conscious aware.

These are just a few items as to why the problem is not as simple as having a good conscience. In your case, for example, you more than doubled the size of your family in one generation. Now there are another three people to have another three kids and that makes the family population to be 17 (You, your wife, your three children, their three partners and nine children)! More than eight times the original size in two generations! Phew!!

And I did that without knowledge imagine how much better it could be if growth and greed did'nt dominate, and enlightenment pervaded.

I do agree that it has been left to late, (deliberately so by the PTB )it is now one minute to 12 and unfortunately only catastrophic events will have any effect on galvanizing people to seek true sustainability based on what is best for all and not the individual

dayzero

01-05-2009, 01:18 PM

What a strange thread you have here.

"it is all our fault ( the filthy breeders) and we on a regular basis need culling."

You what? Ha hahhhhahha

Many posts here would be unthinkable if they'd read even 'some' of the correct material. Sometimes it really makes me wonder!

Josefine - you're bang on.

KathyT

01-05-2009, 07:34 PM

All references to "line-ups" that I spoke of, I meant spirits or souls "lining-up" to be born. Including animal spirits.

Hi KathyT,

It needs to be with people who are over 21 and preferably who already have one child.

The incentive is not to take away the privelage of parenthood, but to reduce the tendancy of having large families with almost no means of support and to invert the tendency of the baby making industry so that the population may be managed in a more efficient manner lessening the strain on natural resources and raising the quality of life.

Steve

Steve, just to be clear, I was agreeing with you.
("Steve, something like this has to happen.")

I would back your idea 100%.

I do not know what it will take for societies and nations to talk open enough that family planning takes place on an overall basis. Many single individuals are aware and have chosen smaller families... but there are way too many who follow a religion which tells them birth control is wrong, and way too many who are caught in a spiral of famine and poverty.

On a side issue, I have a friend who returned from a vacation in South Africa. She and I talked for 2 hours about what she saw. Death from AIDS was occurring all around, country, town, and city. She said in communities/funeral halls it was common to have 20 funerals a weekend. Grandparents are raising children because the parents have died from AIDS. What shocked me, was that she said the government there is telling people AIDS is not transmitted by sex. I don't know if this was every aspect of government, but it seemed to be common knowledge of what the indigenous people thought.

I guess this relates to the topic as to what challenges nations face to educate the people.

Steve_A

01-05-2009, 09:36 PM

Hi KathyT,

The part quoted of your message was not a shock to me.

Many, many African countries receive huge amounts of aid to combat AIDS. The corruption flying around in these countries is flabberghasting and much of these funds are re-directed into the pockets of the governers. In other words, they need to keep the AIDS numbers high to keep the amount of aid high, to increase their 'profits'.

Here in Brazil, there are many, many NGOs that exist receiving international aid, but don't do the work they promise to do. Of course they won't. They need to problem to persist to ask for more aid to keep the coffers full.

The directors in many of these organizations give themselves a very good salary indeed, much higher than in the public sector... so why should they resolve the problem they tackle just to put themselves out of a job?

I know this as a fact here in the State of Pernambuco as I used to be a volunteer in two NGOs and left utterly disgusted.

Best regards,

Steve

What shocked me, was that she said the government there is telling people AIDS is not transmitted by sex. I don't know if this was every aspect of government, but it seemed to be common knowledge of what the indigenous people thought.

I guess this relates to the topic as to what challenges nations face to educate the people.

Czymra

01-05-2009, 10:05 PM

On a side issue, I have a friend who returned from a vacation in South Africa. She and I talked for 2 hours about what she saw. Death from AIDS was occurring all around, country, town, and city. She said in communities/funeral halls it was common to have 20 funerals a weekend. Grandparents are raising children because the parents have died from AIDS. What shocked me, was that she said the government there is telling people AIDS is not transmitted by sex. I don't know if this was every aspect of government, but it seemed to be common knowledge of what the indigenous people thought.

I guess this relates to the topic as to what challenges nations face to educate the people.

Well, today I read this article claiming that AIDS was not actually caused by HIV and if that is so the 'transferrable by sex' argument isn't so strong anymore.
It stated that the Immune Deficiencies are rather a cause of contaminated water and parasites that are all around in Africa. Not sure if that is anything transmissible by sex.
Slowly, I'm losing my faith in being 'enlightened'. It seems to create more fear than anything else. The amount of experience from my perspective is the only thing I trust (at least to some degree) and in that respect I don't think I can say that there are too many people on the earth either.
I mean, how are we supposed to even know?

Swanny

01-05-2009, 10:25 PM

I heard that when they treat HIV it turns in to AIDs.
If you don't get HIV treated you wont get AIDs ....

Czymra

01-05-2009, 10:33 PM

I heard that when they treat HIV it turns in to AIDs.
If you don't get HIV treated you wont get AIDs ....

Eh... wait a second, you can't 'treat' HIV, it's a Virus, AIDs is the illness that one supposedly gets from it.
Maybe you mean 'kill' HIV and thus prevent AIDs.
The magazine (Zeiten Schrift from Switzerland) claimed that there was a prize on showing the connection between the two and no scientist managed to win it because the connection isn't understood or not there.

I'm no specialist, just throwing in what I heard.
As I said, what can you believe anymore? I always had the feeling that AIDS is a big scam, but whether it it a bioweapon or a fearweapon, I can't be sure.
Comment very appreciated.

Swanny

01-05-2009, 10:53 PM

Czymra

01-05-2009, 11:11 PM

Cant remember where I read or saw it (I think it mite have been something to do with MMS) but I'm sure they said no one dies from HIV but if you take the medicine they give you it will develop into AIDs.

Yes, that AZT (or AZN?). That's what I've read, too. Spooky, how can so many doctors be ignorant when dealing out poison?

Dominic

01-06-2009, 01:22 PM

I do not buy the overpopulation scam for one moment.

This planet is capable of supporting 10 times the current population.

The greed and waste that was taught by our creators must stop.

The Free energy is available.

Do some math on the livable land on earth and you will find out.

It is a government scam!

Steve_A

01-06-2009, 01:29 PM

Hi Dominic,

On what did you base your statement "This planet is capable of supporting 10times the current population"?

What is the calculus to base our maths on liveable land?

Best regards,

Steve

I do not buy the overpopulation scam for one moment.

This planet is capable of supporting 10 times the current population.

The greed and waste that was taught by our creators must stop.

The Free energy is available.

Do some math on the livable land on earth and you will find out.

It is a government scam!

Dominic

01-06-2009, 01:43 PM

Steve_A

01-06-2009, 02:32 PM

Hi Dominic,

I understand that it's possible for the whole world to huddle in Texas, putting everyone on the space of an average house. Mathematically it works.

However, we are talking about human beings and not just numbers. People need to eat and drink. Think of the logistical nightmare of the State governor having to supply water to nearly 8 billion thirsty people! Also the biological waste products.... what a smell.

So let's look at this reasonably. We need to be spread around as we need to be able to explore natural resources. Your article mentions about two thirds of the planet being composed with water, but doesn't say, for example, how much fresh water is readily available. Towns and cities have grown in ribbon development along the coastline, along river margins, near to irrigational land, they spread out from centers of energy sources like hydro electric dams, and commercial centers etc. So we can't always class liveable land as just the State of Texas, as nice as the State is I'm sure.

You mentioned Australia as a reference, but really Australia is built around the coast and almost 8 tenths are dessert. Are you in your calculations assuming that the whole of Australia is liveable?

Imagine if the world had nearly 80 billion inhabitants all huddled together in Brazil. It could well be done mathematically, just as I could squeeze three mice into a matchbox if I put them through a blender (don't ask me how I know), but the practicality of the result of the mathematical equation would be nul.

I certainly do agree with you about energy and the possibility of alternative energy and its' use, but that's another topic.

Best regards,

Steve

Here is one where everyone in the world could live in Texas.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy/msg/02a750bd39257d96

I also did another calculation that everyone in the world could live in Australia and have a quarter acre.

Here is more
http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/enviroscam.html

Up is down and down is up.

Once you learn their code you will never be fooled again.

Josefine

01-06-2009, 06:17 PM

Eh... wait a second, you can't 'treat' HIV, it's a Virus, AIDs is the illness that one supposedly gets from it.
Maybe you mean 'kill' HIV and thus prevent AIDs.
The magazine (Zeiten Schrift from Switzerland) claimed that there was a prize on showing the connection between the two and no scientist managed to win it because the connection isn't understood or not there.

I'm no specialist, just throwing in what I heard.
As I said, what can you believe anymore? I always had the feeling that AIDS is a big scam, but whether it it a bioweapon or a fearweapon, I can't be sure.
Comment very appreciated.

Just have another go at listening to Jessica. She states that the future is bright. This is not trite, it is the truth.

HIV/AIDS is both a bioweapon and a fearweapon. The ONE thing we should avoid is fear. The fear generated around our PRESENT population size is a case in point. THEY fear this size of the human population, as they know that it is necessary for sustaining the change at hand.

If one piles all the woes of the world on top of each other, is seems scary. Yet, who says it is scary that 0.5 % of the world's population controls 80% of its wealth? (The discrepany might be larger, given all the turmoil in the market lately). With that power they control war and 'peace', who eats and who goes hungry. THAT is what I term Highly Undesirable.

They would have loved to control more, but bounds and limits have been put on their their might. THEIR power is on the wane, thank goodness!

And please check out thread 'Bayer knowingly sold HIV-Contaminated vaccine'. What else is new?

KathyT

01-07-2009, 05:18 AM

Here is one where everyone in the world could live in Texas.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy/msg/02a750bd39257d96

I also did another calculation that everyone in the world could live in Australia and have a quarter acre.

Here is more
http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/enviroscam.html

Up is down and down is up.

Once you learn their code you will never be fooled again.

Dominic, it is not true that everyone could live in Texas. I've been to Texas twice on extended visits. A good part of it is nearly desert. The rainfall is very minimal. Sure it is "large", but it is not ideal for top agriculture. Most of the plant kingdom that grows in tropical zones could not grow in Texas, as the summer heat is too hot and humid. Most of the plant kingdom in northern territories like Oregon or Pennsylvania could not grow there. Even most of California's native trees and plants will not grow in Texas.

I would be interested in knowing how you thought you could put 5-6 billion people in houses and for them to grow their own food there if their climate only supports a narrow range of plant life. And where do you plan to get enough water for both drinking and for agriculture?

And where would you put all the sewage and waste? Out in the ocean and pollute the ocean?

Josefine

01-07-2009, 10:28 AM

Dominic, it is not true that everyone could live in Texas. I've been to Texas twice on extended visits. A good part of it is nearly desert. The rainfall is very minimal. And where do you plan to get enough water for both drinking and for agriculture?

And where would you put all the sewage and waste? Out in the ocean and pollute the ocean?

I like to play along on this one:
Water and food are the No. 1 key to survival:

Some years ago I, as a member of an environmental group, had a discussion with a water expert on the rapid conversion of agricultural land into industrial and residential zones in many countries. He claimed there was not grounds for concern as 'everybody' knows that all the food for the world population today could be grown in hydrophonic condition in an area the size of Denmark and Holland put together!
He did not say anything about the quality of the food thus grown, but maybe they had figured out a solution to that one too.
He is now retired and living in Hawaii. Hawaii has a fast sinking groundwater level. It is not helped by the fact that there are many wealthy retirees there, and many of them live in first-class hotel/apartments that are big consumers of fresh water. So are the golf greens they love to spend their days on. So are the bottling plants for soft-drinks and bottled water. Do you know that for every glass of bottled water produced, 10 glasses have been used for the production?

So, we have solutions, but we are outpacing our best solutions with yet new wasteful spending patterns, also for water.

The trouble with water is that only a small percentage of all the water on the globe is fit for human consumption or agricultural irrigation. Given better and cheaper sources of energy, all our water may be turned into usable water for these pusposes.

As for the garbage problem, all garbage is seen as raw material in one way or other these days. All organic waste may be turned into a fertile growth medium through a process of compostation. Much of the rest may be used for energy production.

In agriculture it is a documented fact that small private plots give much higher yields, tenfold, than industrial production. Russia, e.g., could not provide enough food for its population had it not been for their 'Datscha'-culture, where citizens grow as much of their own food in small plots where they have their little holiday cottages. This is fresher and more ecological food than much of the store-bought.

Now, Malthusians are not the only ones who have an opinion on population patterns. In fact, they are often seen as a little old-fashioned as they equate human populations with animal populations. Humans are different, sometimes better, sometimes worse, than the animal kingdom.

Dominic

01-09-2009, 05:02 AM

Here is one more fact on overpopulation agenda. It supports the New World Order plan of population Reduction!

If you haven't had the chance take a read NWO overview

http://educate-yourself.org/nwo/

And here is Henry Kissinger two days ago on the NWO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD3BqK-9ZiU&eurl=http://www.blacklistednews.com/news-2896-0-9-9--.html&feature=player_embedded

Steve_A

01-09-2009, 09:11 AM

iainl140285

01-09-2009, 10:08 AM

Hi Dominic,

We know this already. It has been in the pipeworks since the 1970s. If you read the first few posts from this thread the groundwork has been explained.

The planet is becoming a little crowded, not because of space, as there is plenty of physical space, but because of the resources available in it. Which brings me back to the question I posed, "How do we reduce the population by peaceful means?".

Best regards,

Steve

Hi Steve,

I'll take a crack at this.
Reduce by peacfull means, would mean not killing people already on the earth - which is what seems to be the plan for these crazies in charge.

Peacfully can go a number of ways. Lets start with the out there ...

Colonisation. IF, people agree that advanced military tech. is surpressed this may already be possible. Downside, this would cost an uncomprehendable amount, BUT if we're looking at the collapse of an entire planet maybe the cost is worth it. IF this is not yet possible, then its something that will take a huge amount of time and therefore maybe not feasable.

And the not so out there ...

I liked your earlier suggestion of incentives. If countries can (and have) paid people to have children they can pay people to not have children also.

Education. What if everone was taught how to look after the planet properly. The earth would be much more sustainable. Its our current lives that we live causing the problem here. (WARNING: THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IS NOT A DIG AT EVER HUMAN ON EARTH!!!) As a species we are filthy - we pollute recklessly, lazy - our lives are run in the most conveniant way possible. People still drive cars to the shop when the shop is a 5 minute walk!
If as a species could change our thinking, release the free energy tech. that out there, raise our game in preserving the earth population reduction may not actually be required.

But we are humans. We will always take the easiest road.
And we all know the easiest road for the crazies in charge ...

Peace
Respect
Iain