Why Earth Won't Cope With Humans Much Longer

[Studeo]

Frosty Wooldridge
9-2-10

In this continuing series on overpopulation in America by Marilyn
Hempel, editor of Population Press, you, a concerned citizen, will
find more information than anything in the main stream media. In the
current edition of Population Press, Hempel features John Gibbons with
"Six reasons why Earth won't cope for long." www.populationpress.org

This article was written on the eve of the last day of the Copenhagen
Climate Conference. The pressing reality, the dangerous convergence of
environmental and resource crises, has not diminished.

Richard Heinberg, author of Peak Everything: Facing a Century of Declines, said,
"...the discussions in Denmark took place in a conceptual fantasy
world in which climate change is the only global crisis that matters
much; in which rapid economic growth is still an option; in which
fossil fuels are practically limitless; in which a western middle
class staring at the prospect of penury can be persuaded voluntarily
to transfer a significant portion of its rapidly evaporating wealth to
other nations; in which subsistence farmers in poor nations should all
aspire to become middle-class urbanites; and in which the subject of
human overpopulation can barely be mentioned.

... It's no wonder more wasn't achieved in Copenhagen."

http://us1.campaign-archive.com/?u=311db31977054c5ef
58219392&id=1853646c28&e=411677039a

"As world leaders arrive in Copenhagen for the crunch phase of the
climate conference, the focus turns to what kind of deal is likely to
emerge," said Gibbons. "Pre-eminent climate scientist Prof James
Hansen of the Nasa Goddard Institute has already given the entire
process the kiss of death. Any political deal cobbled together is, he
believes, likely to be so profoundly flawed as to lock humanity on to
"a disaster track."

"Hansen voiced publicly what environmental scientists and campaigners
have murmured all year. A political fudge that ducks science is the
likeliest outcome at Copenhagen. Earlier this week, for instance, EU
fisheries ministers agreed a deal that pleased government and
fishermen. However, it does little to arrest the progressive
annihilation of a common resource that, like our atmosphere, is owned
by no one-and so exploited by all.

"The world faces a dangerous convergence of environmental and resource
crises, not all directly climate related. All, however, are
increasingly difficult to resolve in a rapidly warming world. Taken
together, they are not amenable to a business-as-usual political
response. Here, in no particular order, are six:

1. Population Pressure: Sir David Attenborough has witnessed how the
natural world is being crushed by humanity. "I've never seen a problem
that wouldn't be easier to solve with fewer people, or harder-and
ultimately impossible-with more," he says. The Earth must provide for
around 80 million more people than this time last year. It took us
almost 10,000 years to reach a billion people. We now add that many
every 12-15 years.

2. Biodiversity: "The world is currently undergoing a very rapid loss
of biodiversity comparable with the great mass extinction events that
have previously occurred only five or six times in the Earth's
history," says the World Wildlife Fund. It has tracked an astonishing
30% decline in the Earth's biodiversity between 1970-2003.
Overpopulation, hunting, habitat destruction, deforestation, pollution
and the spread of agriculture are leading to as many as 1,000 entire
species going extinct every week-that's a species every 10 minutes.
The economic cost of destroying biodiversity is also immense. A 2008
EU study estimated the cost of forest loss alone is running at $2-$5
trillion (¤1.3-¤3.4 trillion) annually.

3. Ocean Acidification: The evidence of the effects of increased CO2
levels on the world's oceans is unequivocal. Surface ocean acidity has
increased by 30% since 1800, with half this increase occurring in just
the last three decades. The rate of change in oceanic pH levels is
around 100 times faster than any observed natural rate. Increasing
acidity is impeding the ability of plankton called foraminifera to
produce shells. These creatures form the base of the entire marine
food system. The world's vital reef systems are also in peril from
acidification.

4. Peak Oil: This month, the International Energy Agency formally
predicted global peak oil by 2020. [Some industry analysts think it
has already occurred.] Today, the world burns the equivalent of 82
million barrels of oil every day. Projected growth in energy demand
will see this rise to almost 100 million barrels within a decade, but
by then, output from the oilfields currently in production will have
plummeted to barely a third of that. A massive energy gap is looming,
and with discoveries having peaked in the mid-1960s, we are
approaching the bottom of the cheap oil barrel. Non-conventional oil,
renewables and nuclear will be nowhere near capable of bridging this
energy gap in time. The oil shocks of the coming decade will be
intense.

5. Peak Food: The global food system is predicated on plenty of cheap
oil, fresh water, soil and natural gas. All four are in decline. The
food riots of 2008 were an early warning of a global system in crisis.
In the US, it is estimated every calorie of food energy requires 10
calories of fossil fuel energy. More food production is now being
channeled into fattening animals. Meat is a tasty but entirely
inefficient way to use finite food resources. Meanwhile, the UN
predicts the collapse of all global commercial marine fisheries by
2048, depriving up to two billion people of food.

6. Peak Water: During the 20th century, human water usage increased
nine-fold, with irrigation (for agriculture) alone using two-thirds of
this total. With almost all major glaciers retreating, many river
systems are at risk. Groundwater in aquifers is another key fresh
water source. Over-extraction, mostly for agriculture, has caused
their levels worldwide to plummet. Pollution, especially from
fertilizer overuse, adds to the loss of fresh water. The [Irish]
Environmental Protection Agency yesterday reported only 17% of
Ireland's rivers are of "high ecological status".

"The 19th century naturalist John Muir famously wrote that "when one
tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of
the world". As the Copenhagen conference draws to a close, the words
of a contemporary of Muir, politician and orator Robert Ingersoll,
have never seemed more apt: "In nature there are neither rewards nor
punishments; there are only consequences.""

John Gibbons blogs at www.thinkorswim.ie

http://www.rense.com/general92/rth.htm

[Humble Janitor]

I must not be alone in thinking that the overpopulation myth is still alive and well. I'm thinking that the deposed, pitiful masters want population control because they do not want to unveil technology that could save this planet and help to manage/conserve the earth's resources.

[Snowbird]

I must not be alone in thinking that the overpopulation myth is still alive and well. I'm thinking that the deposed, pitiful masters want population control because they do not want to unveil technology that could save this planet and help to manage/conserve the earth's resources.

Perhaps Humble Janitor, we should be discussing overpopulation-consideration. Control, is an issue that stems solely from the masters who are control-freaks.

Although, I have not read the info as yet from the 1st post, I cannot help but support a form of overpopulation-consideration. Seven+ billion people on this tiny planet is beyond reasonable. That is unduly taxing Mother Earth to the max.

Yes, the masters are hiding technology that would help to bring balance into the imbalance that they helped greatly to produce, and many of the world's religions are very much doing their part to keep imbalance in place.

I have been reading and hearing that peak oil does not exist because oil is not a fossil fuel. That does not mean that we should be extracting massive amounts of oil from the earth that we really don't need. This is but one example of imbalance that stems from not only the masters, but from the people who seem to need to be instructed as to how and when to do everything, who do not spend the time and effort to learn about what is really going on around them. Does that sound harsh? It isn't meant to be.

The understanding of over population and birth control and balance must come from the people themselves. The new generations will understand this concept because they are more in tune with nature and the needs of the earth than are those who receive their life instructions from the pulpit.

[Dale]

The understanding of over population and birth control and balance must come from the people themselves. The new generations will understand this concept because they are more in tune with nature and the needs of the earth than are those who receive their life instructions from the pulpit.

Exactly right.

[Fredkc]

Intellectual curiosity perhaps, but

I would be curious to hear from people posting to this thread, how many children and grand children they have.

Fred

[wynderer]

just wanted to post again that the late Philip Jones, the rense columnist whose death was sudden & suspicious, at the time of his death was investigating & beginning to write about the fact that the human population is actually declining in parts of the world

& once again will state my p.o.v., that the 'population explosion' is in part due to the introduction of many clones , & hybrids, tho fewer of them , into many areas of the world

[Luke]

[...]Yes, the masters are hiding technology that would help to bring balance into the imbalance that they helped greatly to produce, and many of the world's religions are very much doing their part to keep imbalance in place.[...]
Ok. Lemme put grenade to this bathtub.

Consider the way technology develops.

Is technology something that is found out by armies of men on government pay labouring in labs day after day? I think not.

I do not claim to track every little breakthrough, but if you track lives of ones like Tesla, Einstein or even Crick/Watson, that are not lab rats. On contrary, they seen highly eccentric and driven, usually against prevalent scientific paradigm.

No matter how many labhours you throw at problem. 100 millions years of earthquakes would not turn pile of rocks into Gothic cathedral.

There must be something else, and is often referred as "moment inspiration". Only after this first moment where "something new" is created, it can be optimized, streamlined and make ready for popular use.

It is well known phenomenon, that similar breakthroughs happen at least in twos, which often leads to many years of quarrels of who was "the original inventor"

What I think is, we might be missing a point looking for a man. I encountered idea of "thoughtspace" some time ago, in SF novel by polish author Jacek Dukaj (novel was called "Czarne Oceany" -"Black Oceans"). Idea is, there is a space where ideas are tangible beings. We tap into that space, feed them with our thoughts, and sometimes, in right circumstances, we tap into something organized. We set circumstances by content of our thoughts, we tap into same vast timeless reservoir of ideas. There are no new ideas then, no "intellectual property", only circumstances that allow such ideas to materialize.

Of course somebody can be just given technology, but that puts him into position of a man, who cannot swim, on floating sack in the middle of bottomless lake. Scared and paranoid about his sack, trying to paddle to the shore. Man who "feeds" the idea in first place, is experienced swimmer who does not need the damn sack.

This brings us to crucial question: can government hide technology? If I am right, then answer is no. All they can do is try to prevent right alignment of circumstances for "development" to occur, when knowledge will be available for everyone determined to find it.
For me, that's chief reason for all that global circus. Distraction.

If we look how much world changed in last 200 years, both technologically AND morally, it's incredible. And it can be taken further, but that would mean dissolution of any semblance to the "order" we know. Too many people are scared of this, and they are made scared even more.

And if we look into plans of PTB's .. they want to move world BACK, into the 1500's, to the realm of "rulers from divine right" Check when World population was estimated at 500 million.

And another shocker for some: those who plotted overthrowing the old regime were illuminated ones.

All Hail Discordia.

[frank samuel]

My wife has a total of 19 brothers and sisters, you read right 19 . Three of them have died in the last few years. I guess you can say that 50 or so years ago television was not the main form of entertainment. I don't know exactly how many grand kids there is in the family but an average family in PR has two to three children multiply that by 20 that's an estimate of about 50 . Then those grand kids many are already adults that have kids of their own, continue multiplying, ouch that's a lot of people in just one family.

Now the rate of birth vs the rate of death is higher thus the problem with the social security retirement fund, us old buggers refuse to die, I'm planning to live to be 100 years old. If we looked at places like India perhaps in 20 years the population will increase 3x fold, China is becoming more lenient on its one child policy so the same can be said with China.

Folks the projected realistic growth per countries averages is 12 billion by the year 2050, and there's nothing anybody could do about it specially tptw. Enjoy your family and watch it grow in my case I just can't keep up, so I wish you luck in trying.

[Beth]

Intellectual curiosity perhaps, but

I would be curious to hear from people posting to this thread, how many children and grand children they have.

Fred

Zero children, therefore zero grandchild to be had. But you already know this :p

[Zook]

Hi Studeo,


Frosty Wooldridge
9-2-10
[...]

"The world faces a dangerous convergence of environmental and resource
crises, not all directly climate related. All, however, are
increasingly difficult to resolve in a rapidly warming world. Taken
together, they are not amenable to a business-as-usual political
response. Here, in no particular order, are six:

1. Population Pressure: Sir David Attenborough has witnessed how the
natural world is being crushed by humanity. "I've never seen a problem
that wouldn't be easier to solve with fewer people, or harder-and
ultimately impossible-with more," he says. The Earth must provide for
around 80 million more people than this time last year. It took us
almost 10,000 years to reach a billion people. We now add that many
every 12-15 years.

"http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/030406massculling.htm"

To wit, the current world's population can fit into the state of Texas with an acre of land for each person. So population management begins with future reproductive rates; not fearmongering over the results of past rates. Yet these so called scientists - little more than paid protosimian chimps producing designed output (my apologies to all chimps worldwide) - would have you believe that the global population needs to be sharply reduced to fit into a homeostatic relation with the environment ... somewhere at levels decreed by the Georgia Guidestones (e.g 500,000,000) or a number in that vicinity. Human culling, to be less diplomatic.

I find it dubious that, on the one hand, we have been (allegedly??) visited by extraterrestials whose technology the shadow government has procured, e.g. to establish bases on Mars and to travel to other star systems via jumprooms, torsion fields, fingersnaps from the Great Gazoo, etc., in effect, giving us virtually unlimited spaces to colonize and removing the population pressure here on Earth ... yet on the other hand, these same PTBs seek to cull massive numbers of humans, the so-called "useless eaters" (their terminology, not mine) based on some outdated meme (e.g. Malthusian model of geometric population growth vs arithmetic resource growth). Well ... which is it, PTB? Do we have unlimited spaces at our disposal, or don't we? And if we don't, what proof do you have that culling is the only way to bring the human population into balance with the available resources? People die naturally usually after 80 years; that's Mother Nature's built-in culling system. People tend to reproduce less when given better guarantees of offspring survival (e.g. when given material opportunity); that's Mother's Nature built-in birthing system. If Mother Nature has its own solutions for human population management; by what authority do you arrive that your solutions are better, PTB?

There are six points in total. I've only addressed point number one. I will tackle the other five later when I find time and/or interest.


Cheers
Uncle Zook

[Zook]

Zero children, therefore zero grandchild to be had. But you already know this :p

Zero children. Nine personalities. I know, I know ... most people only have the four. But hey, it`s not like I`m consuming extra resources ... my guys (well me, really) rarely consume at the same time.

Cheers
Uncle Zook

[Moemers]

The entire population of the world could live comfortably in Texas.

At least that's what I heard Jim Marrs say.

[Luke]

The entire population of the world could live comfortably in Texas.

At least that's what I heard Jim Marrs say.

It's really a matter of technology and morality. You can live in 2mx2m container, but is there a point to that?

Still I see great possibility of expanding natural system to create sustaining one that could "encapsulate" humankind. All in all, it's all matter of creating balance, and complex system left alone are marvelous at that. If we understand how natural systems work and adapt, we can build on that. Say, floating cities made of organic material symbiotic to humans, ie. thriving on waste we produce, nice tidy, and with practically zero impact if done right.

Real problem is, to use such technology, we must change our morality, especially thinking "someone else" should deal with OUR problems, and that looting is an acceptable solution to anything. By accepting looting as a concept you become a looter. By accepting someone else "help" you become a slave.

[Chakra]

Some people should google 'declining birthrates' both Canada and the USA are going down - of course the ptb's know this very well. :confused:

http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/censusstatistic/a/aabirthrate.htm

"Continuing a 12-year decline, the U.S. birth rate has dropped to the lowest level since national data have been available, according to statistics just released by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The rate of births among teenagers also fell to a new record low, continuing a decline that began in 1991. The birth rate fell to 13.9 per 1,000 persons in 2002, down from 14.1 per 1,000 in 2001 and down a full 17 percent from the recent peak in 1990 (16.7 per 1,000), according to a new CDC report, "Births: Preliminary Data for 2002." CDC analysts say the birth rate is dropping as the increasing life span of Americans results in a smaller proportion of women of child childbearing age.

The birth rate among women of peak childbearing age has also been declining. Birth rates for women in their 20s and early 30s were generally down while births to older mothers (35-44) were still on the rise. Rates were stable for women over 45.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/kits-trousses/issues-enjeux/edu01c_0002-eng.htm
"Today a falling birth rate is changing the nature of Canada. We know that the post World War II baby boom affected many areas of Canadian life. How will a baby bust affect us?"

[wynderer]

Some people should google 'declining birthrates' both Canada and the USA are going down - of course the ptb's know this very well. :confused:

http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/censusstatistic/a/aabirthrate.htm

"Continuing a 12-year decline, the U.S. birth rate has dropped to the lowest level since national data have been available, according to statistics just released by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The rate of births among teenagers also fell to a new record low, continuing a decline that began in 1991. The birth rate fell to 13.9 per 1,000 persons in 2002, down from 14.1 per 1,000 in 2001 and down a full 17 percent from the recent peak in 1990 (16.7 per 1,000), according to a new CDC report, "Births: Preliminary Data for 2002." CDC analysts say the birth rate is dropping as the increasing life span of Americans results in a smaller proportion of women of child childbearing age.

The birth rate among women of peak childbearing age has also been declining. Birth rates for women in their 20s and early 30s were generally down while births to older mothers (35-44) were still on the rise. Rates were stable for women over 45.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/kits-trousses/issues-enjeux/edu01c_0002-eng.htm
"Today a falling birth rate is changing the nature of Canada. We know that the post World War II baby boom affected many areas of Canadian life. How will a baby bust affect us?"

also in Russia, as i understand it -- the birthrate is way down

i've never, on any forum, had anyone comment on my hybrids/clones population explosion theory -- making me wonder, since i gather there are just as many TV watchers here as in the general sheeple population, if 'hybrids' & 'clones' are in the same category as 'chemtrails' when it comes to subliminals saying 'IGNORE THIS TOPIC'

[Zook]

Hi Studeo,




2. Biodiversity: "The world is currently undergoing a very rapid loss
of biodiversity comparable with the great mass extinction events that
have previously occurred only five or six times in the Earth's
history," says the World Wildlife Fund. It has tracked an astonishing
30% decline in the Earth's biodiversity between 1970-2003.
Overpopulation, hunting, habitat destruction, deforestation, pollution
and the spread of agriculture are leading to as many as 1,000 entire
species going extinct every week-that's a species every 10 minutes.
The economic cost of destroying biodiversity is also immense. A 2008
EU study estimated the cost of forest loss alone is running at $2-$5
trillion (¤1.3-¤3.4 trillion) annually.


World Wildlife Fund? You mean, that Rockefeller front organization?
http://windfarms.wordpress.com/2008/03/30/earth-hour-scam-world-wild-life-fund-scam/

The brotherhood of dark souls that gives us Monsanto Corp. and GMFs (which contribute to the reduction of biodiversity) also gives us fearmongering (about the reduction in biodiversity) and a proposed solution (population reduction). Problem. Reaction. Solution.



3. Ocean Acidification: The evidence of the effects of increased CO2
levels on the world's oceans is unequivocal. Surface ocean acidity has
increased by 30% since 1800, with half this increase occurring in just
the last three decades. The rate of change in oceanic pH levels is
around 100 times faster than any observed natural rate. Increasing
acidity is impeding the ability of plankton called foraminifera to
produce shells. These creatures form the base of the entire marine
food system. The world's vital reef systems are also in peril from
acidification.


More fearmongering. Global Warming is an element in the set of Solar System warming. Anthropogenic contributions are negligible to this elemental reality. Simply put: if the Sun heats up, we heat up; if the Sun cools down, we cool down. A further critique of the alleged role of CO2 (much less anthropogenic CO2) in global warming can be found at:

http://mc-computing.com/qs/Global_Warming/index.html

----------beginExcerpt---------------------------------
Most Global Warming reports make it sound like most of the atmosphere is made of carbon dioxide. In fact, it is only 0.03% (and seasonally variable). Actually, water vapor (another Green House gas) forms a larger percentage (0 to 4%) and completely swamps the effect of CO2 (except when it is very cold and/or very dry).

[...]

Basically, the temperature of the Earth does change, but if you think that humans are the cause, take another look at the data.
----end------------------------------------------------


Here's another URL that talks about the global warming scam (which is related to the ocean acidification issue):


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6763913684263458299#

I will follow up on the remaining three points (peak oil, peak water, peak food) later.

Cheers
Uncle Zook

[bluestflame]

what if it was the centre of the earth that was heating up and contributing to the natural global warming ?

[Luke]

what if it was the centre of the earth that was heating up and contributing to the natural global warming ?

Actually, that is most likely the case
But also that means the "iron core" theory is highly unlikely (but then, "Science" has no idea where our magnetic field come from, but that never stopped them in case of planets to light for iron core but having magnetic field)
Hoagland + Wilcock report of 2004 deals with that , and connection to hyperdymensional physics. (http://www.enterprisemission.com/_articles/05-14-2004_Interplanetary_Part_1/Interplanetary_1.htm)
For me, assumption that sun is thermonuclear reactor might be wrong .. it might be just portal for energy, and such portals would exist in core of any living planet .. planetary grid being their effect .. but those are just my amateurish musings without any proofs etc

[Snowbird]

Intellectual curiosity perhaps, but

I would be curious to hear from people posting to this thread, how many children and grand children they have.

Fred

Zero and zero.

[Snowbird]

The entire population of the world could live comfortably in Texas.

At least that's what I heard Jim Marrs say.

When I get some time, I'm going to do some research on this. This does not sound plausible.

[wynderer]

Actually, that is most likely the case
But also that means the "iron core" theory is highly unlikely (but then, "Science" has no idea where our magnetic field come from, but that never stopped them in case of planets to light for iron core but having magnetic field)
Hoagland + Wilcock report of 2004 deals with that , and connection to hyperdymensional physics. (http://www.enterprisemission.com/_articles/05-14-2004_Interplanetary_Part_1/Interplanetary_1.htm)
For me, assumption that sun is thermonuclear reactor might be wrong .. it might be just portal for energy, and such portals would exist in core of any living planet .. planetary grid being their effect .. but those are just my amateurish musings without any proofs etc

re the Hoagland & Wilcock info -- this man, Lawrence Joseph [bio & link below] wrote a book 'Apocalypse 2012' -- in it he writes about meeting Dimitriev, the Russian scientist D Wilcock quotes , who lives in an exclusive enclave for top scientists in Siberia -- Dmitriev is the scientist who first observed all the strange things happening to the outer planets in our solar system --

it's been a while since i read the book, & i gave it to a friend -- as i recall, Dmitriev said that there ARE new energies [or cyclic returning energies] which our solar system [galaxy also?] is beginning to go thru -- but what D Wilcock did not say, at least the last time i checked his site, is that Dmitriev said that these energies are going to create tremendous upheavals -- earthquakes, volcanoes erupting, etc -- when Earth is in the strongest most intense phase of the energies , the photon energies -- of course these energies are affecting our sun also

also of interest [to me anyway] from the book -- Jose Arguelles, the Mayan calendar guy, also visited Dmitriev & his fellow scientists

the effects of these energies may be why the DUMBS are being built -- i'd rather have that be the cause than an expected invasion by hostile ETs

http://www.lawrenceejoseph.com/
[I]
'Over the past twenty five years, Lawrence E. Joseph has written on science, nature, politics and business on five continents for publications including The New York Times (Magazine, Op-Ed), Discover, Salon.com, and has also authored a number of books, detailed below.

Apocalypse 2012: An Investigation into Civilization’s End, published by Broadway/Random House in January, 2007, hardcover, and January, 2008, paperback, is a personal exploration of a strange coincidence, that both ancient Mayan prophecy and contemporary solar physics indicate that the year 2012 will be pivotal, perhaps catastrophic. What if there is some significance to this coincidence? The book examines a range of scenarios concerning civilization-threatening cataclysms that may well occur in 2012 or thereabouts. Apocalypse 2012 has sold more than 100,000 copies in 21 languages and editions.'

[bluestflame]

the DUMBs were built cos they knew some event was on the cards , they're just not sharing exactly what that is with us

wether it's a solar flare, comet, or the event of climatic events the reason for the secrecy presumably is not just to avoid mass panic , but to ensure a relatively trouble free occupation while those not on the VIP list are left to deal with the conditions topside

[Zook]

Hi Snowbird,


When I get some time, I'm going to do some research on this. This does not sound plausible.

You're correct. I made a mistake when I said an acre per person ... it's actually 40 persons per acre or 1089 sq ft per person.


http://opr.princeton.edu/popclock/
World population ~ 6,869,000,000 human units

http://www.onlineconversion.com/area.htm
Texas land area = 268,820 sq. miles

268 820 square mile [survey, U.S. statute] = 172 044 801.26 acre [survey]

Ergo, number of acres per human unit
= 172 044 801.26 acres/6,869,000,000 human units
=0.0250
= 1/40 (acres/human unit)
= 40 (human units/acre)

1 acre = 43 560 sq. ft
1/40 acres = 1089 sq. ft = (33 feet)^2

Ergo, a section of land 33x33 per each human unit.


In short, each person would have a space 33 feet wide and 33 feet long if the entire population of the globe was squeezed into Texas. Mea culpa. I hate it when I have egg on my face ... don't mind blueberry pie, tho'.

Cheers
Uncle Zook

ps: The rest of my argument remains unaffected. The point being that the output of past human reproductive rates can fit into Texas, with sufficient room for a house and garden for each person; more so if one considers the vertical living space that is available. In short, human culling is not the answer, morally or from an ecological point of view (indeed, if Texas holds all humans, the rest of the world can become a wilderness sanctuary). Instead, we should focus on future reproductive rates and how best to bring them into sustainable management. To wit, future reproductive rates and not human culling ... is the moral and rational response to any perceived population pressure.

[wynderer]

whenever i go cross-country here in the USA, i am always amazed anew about how much unpopulated land there is

[Moemers]

Hi Snowbird,



You're correct. I made a mistake when I said an acre per person ... it's actually 40 persons per acre or 1089 sq ft per person.


http://opr.princeton.edu/popclock/
World population ~ 6,869,000,000 human units

http://www.onlineconversion.com/area.htm
Texas land area = 268,820 sq. miles

268 820 square mile [survey, U.S. statute] = 172 044 801.26 acre [survey]

Ergo, number of acres per human unit
= 172 044 801.26 acres/6,869,000,000 human units
=0.0250
= 1/40 (acres/human unit)
= 40 (human units/acre)

1 acre = 43 560 sq. ft
1/40 acres = 1089 sq. ft = (33 feet)^2

Ergo, a section of land 33x33 per each human unit.


In short, each person would have a space 33 feet wide and 33 feet long if the entire population of the globe was squeezed into Texas. Mea culpa. I hate it when I have egg on my face ... don't mind blueberry pie, tho'.

Cheers
Uncle Zook

ps: The rest of my argument remains unaffected. The point being that the output of past human reproductive rates can fit into Texas, with sufficient room for a house and garden for each person; more so if one considers the vertical living space that is available. In short, human culling is not the answer, morally or from an ecological point of view (indeed, if Texas holds all humans, the rest of the world can become a wilderness sanctuary). Instead, we should focus on future reproductive rates and how best to bring them into sustainable management. To wit, future reproductive rates and not human culling ... is the moral and rational response to any perceived population pressure.


Whoa. This post rules.

[Chakra]

5. Peak Food: The global food system is predicated on plenty of cheap
oil, fresh water, soil and natural gas. All four are in decline. The
food riots of 2008 were an early warning of a global system in crisis.
In the US, it is estimated every calorie of food energy requires 10
calories of fossil fuel energy. More food production is now being
channeled into fattening animals. Meat is a tasty but entirely
inefficient way to use finite food resources. Meanwhile, the UN
predicts the collapse of all global commercial marine fisheries by
2048, depriving up to two billion people of food.


If we made all the corporations change and do what this fellow talks about and what is being done in Spain, the world would also change.

There really is enough food for everyone - due to waste, greed and corruption we have starvation.
The general population living humbly is not the problem, it is easy to blame those that can't defend themselves, the elite that just push for more and more materialism are.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/dan_barber_how_i_fell_in_love_with_a_fish.html

[wynderer]

If we made all the corporations change and do what this fellow talks about and what is being done in Spain, the world would also change.

There really is enough food for everyone - due to waste, greed and corruption we have starvation.
The general population living humbly is not the problem, it is easy to blame those that can't defend themselves, the elite that just push for more and more materialism are.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/dan_barber_how_i_fell_in_love_with_a_fish.html

supporting Renee's post:

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=52804

Cereals Rot in the Rain While the Poor Stay Hungry
By Ranjit Devraj

NEW DELHI, Sep 13, 2010 (IPS) - When India's Supreme Court reacted to the news that thousands of tonnes of grain were rotting in the rain due to lack of granary space and ordered the government to distribute the surplus free of cost to the hungry, it seemed like the logical thing to do.

But in response to this simple directive, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh surprised many by accusing the apex court of interfering with policy matters and remarked that distributing free grain would hurt the interests of farmers.

According to a United Nations report released last week, India accounts for 50 percent of the world's hungry. The Global Hunger Index for 2008, calculated by the International Food Policy Research Institute, estimated that some 350 million Indians were 'food insecure', that is uncertain of where their next meal was coming from.

Food security expert Vandana Shiva told IPS that the court was merely upholding the fundamental right to life as enshrined in the Indian Constitution.

"The right to food is at the heart of the right to life, because without food people cannot survive. Article 21 of the Constitution obliges the Government to protect the right to life of all Indian citizens and it is the Supreme Court's duty to ensure that the Government is performing its constitutional duty," Shiva said. "No government policy can undermine the fundamental rights of the people."

On Sep. 6 the central government admitted in court, through an affidavit, that more than 67,000 tonnes of grain had rotted outside overflowing granaries.

But the government refused accept the court's suggestion that the programme of procuring grain from farmers, under a policy to support farm prices, be limited to the extent of granary capacities.

According to the affidavit if the government made procurements only according to storage capacities then at times "when markets are not very favourable, many farmers may not be able to sell their produce and would be left at the mercy of traders who may not pay adequate prices."

The affidavit added, "Absence of adequate returns or an assured guarantee from the government procurement agencies for purchase of foodgrains will be a disincentive to farmers to sow these crops in the future."

According to Shiva, the central issue is that the government finds itself caught in a "contradiction created by its own neo-liberal fundamentalist market ideology, where every aspect of life is being commoditised, privatised and transformed into economic policy."

Shiva challenged the idea that moving out rotting grain for free distribution to starving people was anti-farmer. "If the granaries have no space, how will make government make further procurements (in) the next harvest season, which begins in late September?" she asked.

One answer to the problem would be to increase the government's storage capacities. The courts have ruled out private organisations, after identifying private facilities as the key to the massive diversion of subsidised grain into the open market.

Currently the government has a storage capacity of 15 million tonnes and has rented space to handle another 10 million tonnes. Against this capacity, 55 million tonnes were procured in 2008-2009 and ended up being stacked in the open, unprotected from the weather and vermin.

"The government is ensuring food security for rats," said Prakash Karat, leader of the opposition Communist Party of India (Marxist).

Devinder Sharma, a New Delhi-based food and trade policy analyst argues against any centralised system – private or state-owned. "What we need is a system of local production and local storage starting at the village level and moving up to the state level. Only such a system can guarantee food security and fair prices for farmers."

Sharma told IPS that centralised food systems in a country the size of India can only provide opportunities for massive leakages, market manipulation and sheer wastage that have become endemic, with no easy solution in sight.

Sharma also argued against free distribution of rotting grain to the poor except as a one-time solution to resolve the present crisis and said it should be confined to the 150 districts identified as desperately poor. "Free distribution will lead to political problems with every politician trying to corner stocks for distribution in his state, if not constituency," he said.

There is also no guarantee that free distribution will not result in large-scale diversion of the grain back into the open market, said Sharma, who chairs the independent Forum for Biotechnology and Food Security. India's food procurement, storage and public distribution policy is ridden with inconsistencies that leave it open to such large-scale manipulation.

In 2006 the government came under fire for importing 5.5 million tonnes of wheat from Australia at prices higher than the locally prevailing rates. Just a few weeks later, the Australian Wheat Board was allowed to buy the cereal directly from Indian farmers at prices far lower than it was charging India.

Sharma said such inconsistencies, driven by the central government's neo- liberal approach continue. "For example, nothing prevented the government from offloading stocks earlier this year when food prices were rising steeply and clearing the bulging granaries for the next harvest. No one seems accountable for such colossal mismanagement," he said. (END)

& this: "Life and Debt" Documentary About Jamaica , where you can see the Jamaican farmers pouring milk out on the ground to go along w/IMF/WTO policies
http://rhetoricofreggaer.blogspot.com/2009/09/life-and-debt-documentary-about-jamaica.htm

[Chakra]

whenever i go cross-country here in the USA, i am always amazed anew about how much unpopulated land there is

Ya eh - pretty amazing isn't it?
There is even more way more here in Canada. :) Our best farming community with the best black earth in Canada and hits a lovely -40 in the winter!
There is one crop per year, no irrigation and in a good crop year they can't even give away the corn there is so much of it.

As the fellow on the TED video states - each community should work towards becoming self sustaining. The current corporate model of farming is what is unsustainable. That is why they push for population control - they don't want to have to change.

[Celine]

Herein Quebec they get 3 crops of corn in usualy per summer.

We travel a lot , my husband and i throughout Canada..

Incredible how resourceful some can be. In the North of Newfoundland, along the high ways..people builld gardens on "goverment land"...built up square areas with added earth (most of newfoundland is rock)..Many here in the city are starting to use hydroponic growing for more then just recreational herbs.

i have ultimate faith in the resourcefulness of Man

[Chakra]

supporting Renee's post:

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=52804

Cereals Rot in the Rain While the Poor Stay Hungry
By Ranjit Devraj

NEW DELHI, Sep 13, 2010 (IPS) - When India's Supreme Court reacted to the news that thousands of tonnes of grain were rotting in the rain due to lack of granary space and ordered the government to distribute the surplus free of cost to the hungry, it seemed like the logical thing to do.

& this: "Life and Debt" Documentary About Jamaica , where you can see the Jamaican farmers pouring milk out on the ground to go along w/IMF/WTO policies
http://rhetoricofreggaer.blogspot.com/2009/09/life-and-debt-documentary-about-jamaica.htm

Two things - wow that was fast and thank you! I spammed everyone on my facebook with the article you sent.

Isn't Dan Barber awesome? Smart and funny! :)

[Chakra]

Herein Quebec they get 3 crops of corn in usualy per summer.

We travel a lot , my husband and i throughout Canada..

Incredible how resourceful some can be. In the North of Newfoundland, along the high ways..people builld gardens on "goverment land"...built up square areas with added earth (most of newfoundland is rock)..Many here in the city are starting to use hydroponic growing for more then just recreational herbs. i have ultimate faith in the resourcefulness of Man

Give us a shout when you head out west! I was in Montreal twice this summer. Brought home Maple syrup :) Just seems better to buy it there.
Love Montreal, we drove out to Quebec City at the 400th year anniversary. The countryside seemed so 'traditionally' old farm life. Wonderful people too.

But back to the topic :P there is so much land and as Dan Barber states there is enough tonnage of food produced, and as also shown in the Indian article by Wynderer. The problem of hunger is not due to overpopulation it due to distribution. I will add and the control of the corporations over the governments and the people. People left on their own, with land, will do just fine.

[Celine]

The problem with hunger...is they dont want to feed the hungry.

They have the know how and the distribution capabilities..

Just look at Codex...

When i was in africa i was at first speachless and the infuriated when i saw billboards advertizing BOTTLE feeding....

sigh...

[Chakra]

what if it was the centre of the earth that was heating up and contributing to the natural global warming ?

Sounds very plausible as the earth is also growing. It was something that my instructor in Archaeology had covered in class - still looking on line for it but it coincided with the tsunami that hit.

[Chakra]

I must not be alone in thinking that the overpopulation myth is still alive and well. I'm thinking that the deposed, pitiful masters want population control because they do not want to unveil technology that could save this planet and help to manage/conserve the earth's resources.

Yup I second that!
The proof is in the pudding - or you can judge them by their actions, AND non-actions. :)

[norman]

I must not be alone in thinking that the overpopulation myth is still alive and well. I'm thinking that the deposed, pitiful masters want population control because they do not want to unveil technology that could save this planet and help to manage/conserve the earth's resources.

yep.... Seems to me their grip on 'power' is getting so much more like a dangling man's grip on a very high bridge. If they lose that grip they fall a very long way before they stop screaming.

In the OP above I spotted this section.....

" In nature there are no rewards or punishments, only consequences ".

THEY KNOW THE CONSEQUENCES !..... and that's what makes them so very dangerous to us AND THIS WORLD we share with them.

To them..... there are 3 options.

1) They keep control and continue to manifest their darkest aspirations and projections.

2) They lose control and fall from a very great hight, to be put up on trial etc and continue to live and experience their penitence.

3) They lose control and destroy everything including themselves to avoid option 2.


It's not hard to see which option is the most likely one we all face.

I'd even go as far as to say that unless we can come up with a garunteed way to stop them destroying the world, we can't realistically hope for very much in the resistance and fight for getting the world 'put to rights' and them banged to rights. As long as they still have enough power and technology to act at all, they will deliberately choose destruction before, anything other than, their own 'victory'. ( think S.A.S. ).....or ( no win no fee, etc...)

They've got everything to gain and everything to lose. We've got everything to gain and not so much to lose. "He who dares, wins".

They are VERY big on dare, audacity, cheek, nerve, ruthlessness etc etc...... hey.... what are we big on?...... hhmmmm.

[Luke]

Problem, for me, is obvious.
We have the technology to manage such population. And cost for them is not that big. So, IMO both technology and money are not the problem.

Problem is with the people.

First and foremost, we give our faith and energy to people that neither deserve it, or can do productive things with energy given. Even in above "rotting grain" example, it would not happen if people start working with each other, instead of waiting for system to solve things. System is interested in it's well being, not it's subjects.
People believing in it accept dinner invitation from well-known cannibal, and then complain that they are served for dinner. Open your eyes, dammit!

With so much energy lost, there is not enough energy for people to expand, create new ways of living.

Another sink for energy are belief systems, "traditions" borders that we erect in our minds. Cannibal morality. Thief morality. Holier-than-thou morality. Morality that accepts human sacrifice.

These things restrict natural flow of energy, that in normal circumstances would be used to extend and improve our ways of life.

Land and else is not important. You can build ship-cities. You can build zeppelin cities. If there is need, you can build dyson-sphere style spaceships, even with our current technology.

Possibilities are endless, and within our reach. All we need to do is stop giving away our energy foolishly.

System cannot thrive without people's consent.

[Chakra]

http://online.sfsu.edu/%7Erone/GEessays/gedanger.htm

I found a site on
Genetic Engineering and Its Dangers
Compiled by Professor Ron Epstein
" I originally constructed this web site primarily for the benefit of the students in my classes at San Francisco State University, from which I am now retired. (I am currently a research professor at the Institute for World Religions in Berkeley, California.) I am leaving the site online in the hope that people will still find it to be useful. All of the material is copyrighted. Permission is granted for individual, single copy, personal use only. Please send suggestions, corrections, broken links, and inquiries about other use of the materials to me at epstein@sfsu.edu."

Tons of articles on the dangers of GM - food and people.

[Chakra]

Problem, for me, is obvious.
We have the technology to manage such population. And cost for them is not that big. So, IMO both technology and money are not the problem.
Problem is with the people.
System cannot thrive without people's consent.

Yes and These are the people that are the causes of the biggest problems - they have the power, they have the resources to prevent those of the 80% of the population from standing up and saying no more. They use the police - the government - the big pharma - the media.

Most people do not have the ability to comprehend in the existence of psychopaths' in there midst - why - because most people are not psychopaths.
Like only liars believe all people lie.

I c&p only a small portion and the charts did not come with it. There is a lot more at the website. Worth reading to gain an understanding of the bigger picture and how complicated it is.

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

The Wealth Distribution
"In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers).

In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%. Table 1 and Figure 1 present further details drawn from the careful work of economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2010)."


"In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 38.3% of all privately held stock, 60.6% of financial securities, and 62.4% of business equity. The top 10% have 80% to 90% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and over 75% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America."

[Luke]

Most people do not have the ability to comprehend in the existence of psychopaths' in there midst - why - because most people are not psychopaths.
Like only liars believe all people lie.
Psychopaths are overrated. They just use system other people provided. They are symptom not the cause.
People believing that someone else should be taking care about their problems are the cause.

"In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 38.3% of all privately held stock, 60.6% of financial securities, and 62.4% of business equity. The top 10% have 80% to 90% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and over 75% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America."
Again, symptom, not the cause
Wealth is measure of energy in the system. Above means most of energy is leeched off and trapped, and it is done with support of majority of population. Those top 10% are those who know how to gamble the system. They are also "Aristocracy of pull (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?3095-Society-Patterns&p=49128&viewfull=1#post49128)".
Still all they use is system that relies on people's support to exist.

Big pharma or police are people too. Some of them are fools, but most think they do their job, and they are proud of it. They want their life simple: they take orders and they follow them. They believe guys on top know better what to do. They believe that there are rules people should follow, or else....
They are not "bad". But they are problem.

Now, imagine amount of people that have great minds, but refuse to use them in service of this system, that voluntarily removed themselves from actively adding to "global pool". Year after year, there are more and more such people. Tesla and Einstein were only the first. As long as system stays, those people, that would change the way we live, choose not to participate. Some even decided to actively destroy the way we live, because living as we live, we support the system that chokes us to death.

Only way to destroy the system is make people stop believing they need it.

Remove the system, and there would be no "earth is too small for us" problem. It's artificially created scarcity we're dealing here.

[Chakra]

Psychopaths are overrated. They just use system other people provided. They are symptom not the cause.
People believing that someone else should be taking care about their problems are the cause.
Again, symptom, not the cause, Wealth is measure of energy in the system. Above means most of energy is leeched off and trapped, and it is done with support of majority of population. Those top 10% are those who know how to gamble the system. They are also "Aristocracy of pull (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?3095-Society-Patterns&p=49128&viewfull=1#post49128)".
Still all they use is system that relies on people's support to exist.

Big pharma or police are people too. Some of them are fools, but most think they do their job, and they are proud of it. They want their life simple: they take orders and they follow them. They believe guys on top know better what to do. They believe that there are rules people should follow, or else.... They are not "bad". But they are problem.
Now, imagine amount of people that have great minds, but refuse to use them in service of this system, that voluntarily removed themselves from actively adding to "global pool". Year after year, there are more and more such people. Tesla and Einstein were only the first. As long as system stays, those people, that would change the way we live, choose not to participate. Some even decided to actively destroy the way we live, because living as we live, we support the system that chokes us to death.
Only way to destroy the system is make people stop believing they need it.
Remove the system, and there would be no "earth is too small for us" problem. It's artificially created scarcity we're dealing here.

At the risk of sounding really patronizing - ahh the surety and arrogance of youth! You also sound like a product of the establishment - dismissive. If you are 29 you might want to start reading up on Saturn Returns - your going to be in a bit of a shock. :) It is not really very polite to talk down to someone. Whether you know them or not.

But first - Please explain as to how you come about with such absolute declarations of fact. IE in that your answer to some of our world's real world issues is to declare and dismiss it as simply being 'over rated'. What is the research to back this up. I am afraid you will need to do much better than this to be actually taken seriously.

Thorough studies have been done on the number of corporations that are run by psychopaths, as well as in the study of evil. Do you not think that just possibly it deserves a little bit more than such a flippant answer as 'overrated'. In actually they are the cause of the creation of the symptoms we see now - not the other way around. It is a total disconnect with empathy - Study history more.

When one discusses the issues of society in the context that I was showing through the stat's provided. I was never referring to the cop or the druggist - yes they are often doing their jobs and they are also accountable for discerning the difference between what is right and what is wrong. The people I am referring to here are the heads of corporations that attend G20 and Bildi conferences, and are more than just knowing how to gamble the system - which is pretty obvious in itself or they would not have made it that far. Those that run countries and kill anyone that tries to expose them and any back door dealings with said corporations.
Petitions and protestors - labeled terrorists or fanatics and just disappear - or planes just fall out of the sky.... hence possibly why those that could make a difference chose instead to stay alive, since they have seen what happens to professional colleagues that have become a threat in some ones delusional mind.

http://rense.com/general62/list.htm
http://911review.org/Wiki/DeadMicrobiologists.shtml
There is an ongoing worldwide series of killing experts in virus and infections diseases: see the Anthrax attacks and microbiologistdeaths timeline by Paul Thompson. The total number of leading microbiologists killed in a six-month period starting soon after 9/11 was at least 15: Globe and Mail, May 4, 2002, page A1 (Cached).

But that they also did so creating a mass of human wreckage in the wake of their climb up the corporate ladder. The domino effect can be huge. Some of these families and companies have been around for 100's of years and have influenced the rise and fall of empires.

Hence the reference to psychopaths - please refer to the articles and websites below. This level of psychosis and unethical behavior reflects a systematic decline in all levels of society. Labeling either a cause or symptom is also rather pointless actually. The fact of the matter is - it is present and it has to be recognized for what it is and addressed and stopped, before society as whole can move on.

So - How do you suggest is the best route to stop people from believing in what they do if it is not about educating them about the actions of those that have intensionally lied to them for very long time.

http://www.ponerology.com/
"PSYCHOPATHY: THE CAUSE OF EVIL
Inherited and acquired psychological disorders and ignorance of their existence and nature are the primal causes of evil. The magic number of 6% seems to represent the number of humans who either carry the genes responsible for biological evil or who acquire such disorders in the course of their lifetime. This small percent is responsible for the vast majority of human misery and crime, and for infecting others with their flawed view of the world."

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/96/open_boss.html
"Is Your Boss a Psychopath?
BY: ALAN DEUTSCHMANJuly 1, 2005
Odds are you've run across one of these characters in your career. They're glib, charming, manipulative, deceitful, ruthless -- and very, very destructive. And there may be lots of them in America's corner offices."
"According to the Canadian Press and Toronto Sun reporters who rescued the moment from obscurity, Hare began by talking about Mafia hit men and sex offenders, whose photos were projected on a large screen behind him. But then those images were replaced by pictures of top executives from WorldCom, which had just declared bankruptcy, and Enron, which imploded only months earlier. The securities frauds would eventually lead to long prison sentences for WorldCom CEO Bernard Ebbers and Enron CFO Andrew Fastow.
"These are callous, cold-blooded individuals," Hare said.
"They don't care that you have thoughts and feelings. They have no sense of guilt or remorse." He talked about the pain and suffering the corporate rogues had inflicted on thousands of people who had lost their jobs, or their life's savings. Some of those victims would succumb to heart attacks or commit suicide, he said."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2005/apr/18/medicineandhealth
Is your boss a psychopath?
Probably, if we are to believe the results of a new scientific study, says Oliver James
Oliver James The Guardian, Monday 18 April 2005
"Board and Fritzon found that three of 11 personality disorders (PDs) were actually commoner in managers than in disturbed criminals. The first was histrionic PD, entailing superficial charm, insincerity, egocentricity and manipulativeness. There was also a higher incidence of narcissism: grandiosity, self-focused lack of empathy for others, exploitativeness and independence. Finally, there was more compulsive PD in the managers, including perfectionism, excessive devotion to work, rigidity, stubbornness and dictatorial tendencies."

[Luke]

At the risk of sounding really patronizing - ahh the surety and arrogance of youth! You also sound like a product of the establishment - dismissive. If you are 29 you might want to start reading up on Saturn Returns - your going to be in a bit of a shock. :) It is not really very polite to talk down to someone. Whether you know them or not.
Because Ignoring the inconvenient reality where we are large part of problem and placing blame on group of individuals that just use the system to their advantage, is childish in my opinion. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. Do not blame mercenaries for war they take advantage of. Seek the cause used to start the war and create mercs in the first place. Removing symptom without addressing the cause ensure problem would be back soon.
I know concept of "psychopath" quite good, there is con-lady revered by some here that was fixated on the issue few years back, when I was interested in her. I consider that "issue" a clever sleight of hand, aimed at rose-glasses-do-gooders.

[Chakra]

Because Ignoring the inconvenient reality where we are large part of problem and placing blame on group of individuals that just use the system to their advantage, is childish in my opinion.

Any "group of individuals that just use the system to their advantage" - is one of the issues of BEING a psychopath.

But - Everyone is entitled to have an opinion even if it is constructed to demean. There is a saying point a finger at someone - 4 fingers are pointing back. I am pointing fingers at the 'establishment' those corporations that participate in G20's, or what ever name you wish to call them. That they have through systematic and deliberate destruction for centuries, of the family and a holistic way of life, caused the majority of the global issues. Most people just spend there days living - not focusing on world domination.

On the other hand what is someone that insists on blaming and pointing fingers (at me) and at all those that have been forced to be subject to the laws they created, that denies one freedom, both before I was born and after, without our voted consent and behind closed doors?

Which it would seem is exactly what you ARE doing - only mine is back by data, not by a lack of maturity. By what data or facts do you have to blame starving children for the fact they are starving? That it is their fault. That some corporation (hiring low life's and drug lords) has ran the families off the farms they have had for generations.


See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.

Again would not refusing to acknowledge the data, the current and historical evidence, that the world is being run by those that are 'service to self', and that their is no shortage of psychopaths in the position of power an attempt to deny the rather obvious?

Please see point 1] below


Do not blame mercenaries for war they take advantage of. Seek the cause used to start the war and create mercs in the first place. Removing symptom without addressing the cause ensure problem would be back soon.

At the risk of repeating myself - That is exactly what 'I' have been saying - the symptom is the psychopathic behavior of those that are in power that hire the mercenaries are the cause. Since you use the example of a mercenary, it is quite interesting actually - who is PAYING the mercenary? They don't work for free - last I heard, maybe times have changed and they are all now philanthropists and they just kick families off their farms as a form of humanitarian work for drug lords? I would have to research that farther though just to be sure.


I know concept of "psychopath" quite good, there is con-lady revered by some here that was fixated on the issue few years back, when I was interested in her. I consider that "issue" a clever sleight of hand, aimed at rose-glasses-do-gooders.

As based on your first comment - obviously not well enough. So are you here repeating the 'clever slight of hand' in an attempt at removing the focus on your lack of supportive evidence?

Let see here so far - an issue is denied existing, dismissive, many unrelated issues used in comparison in an attempt to discredit the not only the all science, all the research relevant to the issue, but also disparage the person relaying the information. Not providing any supporting evidence, not acknowledging the data, and using diversion and discrediting as a means of demeaning the seriousness of the issue and the messenger.

Have you also read?

the

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

7. Question motives.
Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

It is from another article on ----

How can you tell when tptb are lying?

Everything is a Lie: The Deliberate Intent To Deceive People Is At An All Time High

http://preventdisease.com/news/10/081010_everything_is_a_lie.shtml

I am adding some interesting content that I found regarding disinformation a the bottom of the page

The Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation - is a really good read too! but I thought to long to post. Please see the above link - it is located towards the middle of the web page.

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

"1) Avoidance
They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

Boy do I see this a lot! Not getting to the point - going on and on about nothing...

2) Selectivity
They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

3) Coincidental
They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork
They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial
They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions
An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal.

But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation.

You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent
There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.

I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.

8) Time Constant
There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:
ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.

When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command.

In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.

Remarkably, even media and law enforcement have NOT BEEN TRAINED to deal with these issues. For the most part, only the players themselves understand the rules of the game.

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy. "

[Studeo]

14 September 2010 Last updated at 11:33 GMT Global hunger 'unacceptably high', UN report says

Asia suffers the highest incidence of malnourishment, the FAO says Global hunger has fallen this year but remains "unacceptably high", a report from the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has said.

The FAO estimates there are 925 million undernourished people in 2010, compared with 1.02 billion in 2009.

But it warned that the fight to reduce hunger would face additional obstacles if food prices continue to rise.

A separate report from Action Aid estimates that hunger costs developing countries $450bn (£292bn) a year.

On track to meet the Millennium Development Goals?
The report says that 90% of these costs stem from lost productivity as a result of malnutrition, while the other 10% is due to higher health system costs.

Action Aid says this is more than 10 times the amount of funding needed to halve hunger by 2015. This is one of the eight United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

The MDGs represent a global commitment by members of the UN to reduce poverty and improve lives by 2015.

Targets under threat

Food prices have risen sharply recently, with the price of wheat hitting a two-year high last month after a severe drought and fires in Russia devastated crops there.

Undernourishment in 2010, by region (millions)

Asia and the Pacific: 578
Sub-Saharan Africa: 239
Latin America and the Caribbean: 53
Near East and North Africa: 37
Developed countries: 19
Source: FAO
Higher wheat prices are also believed to have increased demand for other relatively cheaper foodstuffs, particularly other grains.

And higher grain prices are pushing up the price of meat and dairy products as the cost of feeding livestock increases.

The FAO also warns that the ability to achieve the international hunger targets in the Millennium Development Goals is at risk.

It says the total number of undernourished people is still higher than before the economic crisis of 2008-09.

The FAO says that analysing hunger during crisis and recovery "brings to the fore the insufficient resilience to economic shocks" of many poor countries.

"Lack of appropriate mechanisms to deal with the shocks or to protect the most vulnerable populations from their effects result in large swings in hunger following crises," the report says.

"Moreover, it should not be assumed that all the effects of crises on hunger disappear when the crisis is over."

Action Aid's head of policy Meredith Alexander said: "This is hardly time for celebration. Hunger is still no better than it was before the global food crisis and the goal to halve hunger is decades off track."

The FAO measure of undernourishment refers to an inadequate intake of calories. On average, this is considered to be less than 1,800 calories a day.

Action Aid uses the term malnutrition in a broad, not technical, sense, to cover both undernourishment (not enough calories) and also a nutritionally poor diet.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11288744

[THIRDEYE]

saico my hats off to ya the grnade worked....thirdeye...lol

[Chakra]

IMO I think the name of this thread is misnomer ("misnomer is a term which suggests an interpretation that is known to be untrue") It should more accurately read 'Why the Earth Won't Cope With the ELITE Much Longer' http://www.websmileys.com/sm/aliens/very_first_smiley.gif


14 September 2010 Last updated at 11:33 GMT Global hunger 'unacceptably high', UN report says

"Lack of appropriate mechanisms to deal with the shocks or to protect the most vulnerable populations from their effects result in large swings in hunger following crises," the report says.

"Moreover, it should not be assumed that all the effects of crises on hunger disappear when the crisis is over."
"Action Aid's head of policy Meredith Alexander said: "This is hardly time for celebration. Hunger is still no better than it was before the global food crisis and the goal to halve hunger is decades off track."

"Action Aid uses the term malnutrition in a broad, not technical, sense, to cover both undernourishment (not enough calories) and also a nutritionally poor diet."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11288744

Thanks for this article - it really goes to show how that the corporate system that has been in place is broken and needs to be replaced.

The chef in this TED video has found that there are some out there that see this and are working on changing it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EUAMe2ixCI

The new movie Wall Street - money never sleeps is a good portrayal of your typical back room dealings with the FED.
Which most American's at that time had opposed - apparently no one bothered to listen though...so much for the majority rules.

Gallup "April 3, 2008 Six in 10 Oppose Wall Street Bailouts "PRINCETON, NJ -- A new Gallup Poll, conducted March 24-27, shows that 6 in 10 Americans oppose the federal government taking steps to help prevent major Wall Street investment companies from failing."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS0PJSKJoxw

[Chakra]

A little more about the Elite - how they operate and how they have (same families) been doing this, behind closed doors for 100's of years.
All the US President's and a Russian Tzar, that stood up to them - were assassinated.

Originally posted on another thread by Swami


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USGSOViaulc&p=2D9A4CC70379E216&playnext=1&index=21

"FluorideinWater | October 11, 2008
'The answer to the Kennedy assassination is with the Federal Reserve Bank. Don't underestimate that. It's wrong to blame it on (CIA official James) Angleton and the CIA per se only. This is only one finger of the same hand. The people who supply the money are above the CIA.'
- wife of accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald, told to author A.J. Weberman

I am one of those who do not believe the national debt is a national blessing... it is calculated to raise around the administration a moneyed aristocracy dangerous to the liberties of the country
.
Andrew Jackson, Letter to L. H. Coleman of Warrenton, N.C., 29 April 1824

Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.

Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom (1913), Doubleday

"The Rothschilds introduced the rule of money into European politics. The Rothschilds were the servants of money who undertook the reconstruction of the world as an image of money and its functions. Money and the employment of wealth have become the law of European life; we no longer have nations, but economic provinces." (New York Times, Professor Wilheim, a German historian, July 8, 1937).

"If you will look back at every war in Europe during the nineteenth century, you will see that they always ended with the establishment of a 'balance of power.' With every reshuffling there was a balance of power in a new grouping around the House of Rothschild in England, France, or Austria. They grouped nations so that if any king got out of line, a war would break out and the war would be decided by which way the financing went. Researching the debt positions of the warring nations will usually indicate who was to be punished." (Economist Stuart Crane).

From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.

Winston Churchill, "Zionism versus Bolshevism", Illustrated Sunday Herald (London), February 8, 1920, pg. 5

The people must be helped to think naturally about money. They must be told what it is, and what makes it money, and what are the possible tricks of the present system which put nations and peoples under control of the few.

Henry Ford, My Life and Work, Doubleday, Page & Company, 1922

I am afraid that the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can, and do, create and destroy money. The amount of money in existence varies only with the action of the banks in increasing or decreasing deposits and bank purchases. Every loan, overdraft or bank purchase creates a deposit, and every repayment or bank sale destroys a deposit. .... And they who control the credit of a nation, direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people.

Reginald McKenna, a former Chancellor of the Exchequer, addressing the shareholders as Chairman of the Midland Bank, at the Annual General Meeting in January 1924.

The present Federal Reserve System is a flagrant case of the Governments conferring a special privilege upon bankers. The Government hands to the banks its credit, at virtually no cost to the banks, to be loaned out by the bankers for their own private profit. Still worse, however, is the fact that it gives the bankers practically complete control of the amount of money that shall be in circulation. Not one dollar of these Federal Reserve notes gets into circulation without being borrowed into circulation and without someone paying interest to some bank to keep it circulating. Our present money system is a debt money system. Before a dollar can circulate, a debt must be created. Such a system assumes that you can borrow yourself out of debt.

Willis A. Overholser, A short review and analysis of the history of money in the United States, with an introduction to the current money problem (1936), p. 56"

[Snowy Owl]

I would lie to share an opinion,

No lins nor corroborated yet,

There might have been a time that humans where considered as domestic animals, able to understand quite a few things and able to help.

The actuals Humans that has the faculty of Thinking is certqinly not the ultimate product of this Earth, just dare to look at the history.

Humans IMHO did their best, the new Specy will do better as usual.

Mother Earth is so Wise you know. She adapted herself trough History, she is so impertubable.

No Worry, the sole task, as I understand it, is to Trust Mother Earth.

She is now in work, like all Mothers who are subject of pain, tremors, stress and pain to bring forth the new Baby.

[sunnyrap]

25 years ago I participated in a good-hearted 'end world hunger' event. 25 years ago tptb were squawking about hunger being due to overpopulation. Hunger, we knew then, was due to unequal distribution of resources. I.e., the wealthy few were creating hunger and overpopulation by their hoarding and manipulation of resources. As you pointed out, when a population is well fed and has adequate resources, the birth rate drops to near 0. TPTB are the guilty ones and are the ones who COULD positively rectify the situation instead of making their karmic debt ever so much heavier. If they are indeed illumined...wonder why they do not? So many questions with so very inadequate answers...

It was posted on this forum some weeks ago about a bunch of billionaires donating half their wealth towards rebuilding the economy. Then the story evaporated. Wonder what happened to that?