|
|
Post by trbixler on May 14, 2012 12:52:18 GMT
"The New Holocaust Deniers" "Recently, in conjunction with publication of my new book, Merchants of Despair, which exposes the crimes of the global Malthusian movement, I was interviewed on the radio by a liberal talk show host. When I brought up the issue of race- or caste-targeted forced sterilization programs instituted in Peru, India, and many other Third World countries with USAID and World Bank funds, the host chose to deal with the matter by pooh-poohing the existence of these atrocities. I was shocked. These programs are not secret, and their horrors have received some, if less-than-deserved, coverage in the mainstream media. Indeed, the members of the Fujimori government were brought to trial and convicted of genocide for their enforcement of such policies. Yet here was this liberal gentleman, supposedly an anti-racist and feminist, a self-proclaimed defender of the poor and the helpless, shrugging off massive violations of human rights and extraordinary crimes directed against women, infants, and people of color. In amazement I blurted out, “This is a holocaust, and you should not be denying it!” Then it hit me. I was dealing with a holocaust denier. Indeed, the entire environmentalist movement consists of holocaust deniers, who continue to refuse to look at or admit the existence of the carnage they have created and continue to perpetuate worldwide." icecap.us/index.php/go/new-and-coolbetter link pjmedia.com/blog/the-new-holocaust-deniers/?singlepage=true |
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 14, 2012 19:30:09 GMT
This sort of article rather undermines the fake criticism of the Heartland billboards from some sceptic parts of the blogosphere.
So the first reference I checked in this guy's book (end-note 13 in Chapter 1) in this book was an allegation that Paul Ehrlich described the Irish potato famine as a "safety valve" that protected Ireland from over-population. In fact the term "safety valve" referred to the growing levels of emigration to the new world. So minus several zillion marks for careful research. I suspect he misunderstood this "liberal" interviewer's objection to his characterisation of certain issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by magellan on May 15, 2012 4:21:44 GMT
This sort of article rather undermines the fake criticism of the Heartland billboards from some sceptic parts of the blogosphere. So the first reference I checked in this guy's book (end-note 13 in Chapter 1) in this book was an allegation that Paul Ehrlich described the Irish potato famine as a "safety valve" that protected Ireland from over-population. In fact the term "safety valve" referred to the growing levels of emigration to the new world. So minus several zillion marks for careful research. I suspect he misunderstood this "liberal" interviewer's objection to his characterisation of certain issues. I leave for a month, come back, and what's the first thing I read? steve's bilge. We're supposed to believe by shear luck steve "found" an error in the very first reference he just happened to come across. Hopefully he'll share with us how he knew it was wrong at first glance, just by picking it out at random. Damn that's good. Well steve, I read Ehrlich's book Population Bomb over 30 years ago now, and am quite familiar with this Malthusian lunatic you are defending[?]. Hmm. I also have the book 'Merchants of Despair' which I assume is the book you're referring to. This book is on my Kindle (PC version) and having read the first few chapters, somehow I missed the error you "found". Great detective work steve. So this is the reference steve is referring to, sorry if it is too small:  Next we refer Ehrlich's book, co-authored by John Holdren, current "science" adviser to Obama. On page 232 of the book, which anyone can obtain here, , and steve obviously must have read, we find [my bold]: Large as this emigration was, it had little effect in retarding population growth in most of Europe, although it fueled population explosions in the receiving countries. In most European countries, emigration appears to have allowed a delay in the beginning of the birth-control movement. The Irish potato famine provided a special stimulus to emigration in the 1840s and 1850s, as 2 million Irish left the country in four years. Emigration continued at a high level, and Ireland is the only European country whose population growth was reversed by it. Had the same fertility prevailed without that safety valve, the Irish population would be more than 12 million today, rather than 3 million.
Ehrlich is giving praise to the potato famine for providing a special stimulus. None of the other countries were successful in reducing the population, oh but Ireland, they got it right. It is about depopulation, nothing more. Whether it be by birth rates or immigration, population growth is bad according to Ehrlich. Lest steve blow more smoke trying to convince you Ehrlich was unfairly accused of....being himself, here is another quote from an interview with Ehrlich in 1974. www.mnforsustain.org/ehrlich_paul_interview_1974.htmIt's the classic situation we've repeated down through history, you know. A country has a million people living on the edge of starvation so it puts in an irrigation project and grows twice as much food . . . and ends up with two and a half million people living on the edge of starvation. The Irish potato famine showed the way. Ah yes, the blessings of the plague, the "special stimulus". Now if steve actually read the book, he'd know Ehrlich is a complete fool if not a damned liar concerning the Irish potato famine and what role the British government had in Ireland's food shortage. It was Malthusian theory put into policy in both Ireland and GB. Read the book folks. Malthus' theories are not unlike the AGW religious cult of today. |
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on May 15, 2012 12:46:13 GMT
magellan, good to see you again.
|
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 15, 2012 12:54:52 GMT
Magellan, you went on a hunt to prove me wrong and found that I was right. Thanks, as I didn't have the time to copy in the links to the text.
A "safety valve" refers to a positive thing (in this case emigration to get away from the effects of the famine).
The term "special stimulus" does not have any such value judgement attached. I'm sure there are chemicals that act as a special stimulus for certain cancers, and others that act as a special stimulus for healing disease.
The point that Zubrin was making with his shoddy scholarship was that there is approval of environmentatlists towards population limiting factors even if they are malign. There is not. And there is lots of good evidence that access to education and contraception are extremely important in managing population growth. In most countries this does not lead to forced sterilization of ethnic minorities or poor people, and in many countries where it does such as Peru the desire to limit a particular population exists in *absence* of Malthusian or environmental concerns.
OK I admit it. Dr Ehrlich phoned me personally to ask me to deal with this smear.
|
|
|
|
Post by magellan on May 16, 2012 23:54:57 GMT
Magellan, you went on a hunt to prove me wrong and found that I was right. Thanks, as I didn't have the time to copy in the links to the text. A "safety valve" refers to a positive thing (in this case emigration to get away from the effects of the famine). The term "special stimulus" does not have any such value judgement attached. I'm sure there are chemicals that act as a special stimulus for certain cancers, and others that act as a special stimulus for healing disease. The point that Zubrin was making with his shoddy scholarship was that there is approval of environmentatlists towards population limiting factors even if they are malign. There is not. And there is lots of good evidence that access to education and contraception are extremely important in managing population growth. In most countries this does not lead to forced sterilization of ethnic minorities or poor people, and in many countries where it does such as Peru the desire to limit a particular population exists in *absence* of Malthusian or environmental concerns. OK I admit it. Dr Ehrlich phoned me personally to ask me to deal with this smear. OK I admit it. Dr Ehrlich phoned me personally to ask me to deal with this smear. No, you just didn't find it. Instead of linking to your source, you made it look like it was your own. I seriously doubt you bought the book, and couldn't have found it by reading a sample from Kindle because the notes page is missing. Nice try though. As stated, I read 'The Population Bomb' long ago. Ehrlich was and still is a demented man. You say there were "allegations" against him. I say " that safety valve" does not refer to either specifically, so one must dig deeper, something you didn't do, but Zubrin did because he understands these Malthusian monsters. An ordinary person may be refer to emigration as a safety valve, but Ehrlich is not your ordinary man, and as he stated, emigration did not work in other countries, but the "special stimulus" famine saved the day by being the key to depopulating Ireland. There is no mention of the New World that you came up with. From Merchants of Despair, again Chapter 1, note 36 we find referencing The Population Bomb, 36:  For those who can't read it, quoting Ehrlich [my bold]: Why did I pick on the next nine years instead of the next 900 for finding a solution to the population crisis? One answer is the world, especially the underdeveloped world, is rapidly running out of food. And famine, of course, could be one way to reach a death rate solution to the population problem. In fact, the battle to feed humanity is already lost, in the sense we will not be able to prevent large-scale famines in the next decade or so. P. Ehrlich, The Population Bomb, 36. So spin it again for us steve. Convince us there is no way Ehrlich was referring to the famine as the safety valve. Let's see, where have we heard mention of the solution to the problem...oh yes, the Final Solution. The term "special stimulus" does not have any such value judgement attached. I'm sure there are chemicals that act as a special stimulus for certain cancers, and others that act as a special stimulus for healing disease. What a moronic statement. Nick Stokes couldn't do a better job of obfuscating. Now you say this: In most countries this does not lead to forced sterilization of ethnic minorities or poor people, and in many countries where it does such as Peru the desire to limit a particular population exists in *absence* of Malthusian or environmental concerns. Hitler didn't invent sterilization, he modeled it after the Eugenics movement in the U.S. and Europe. 37 states in the U.S. had compulsory sterilization laws during that period. Eugenics and Malthusian theory are joined at the hip and come from the same time period. Environmentalism is their offspring. So what do you call what Peru did, "special stimulus", like a treatment for cancer, to control the population? Malthusian=Eugenics=Environmentalism; they're all from the same vein. |
|
|
|
Post by magellan on May 17, 2012 0:55:01 GMT
www.scribd.com/doc/26753034/The-First-Global-Revolution-Textpg 75 In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself
|
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on May 17, 2012 17:29:34 GMT
So banning DDT was a good thing and the 50 million who died were just collateral damage. The earth is much happier now, just ask her or it or him. Malthus had it all correct.
|
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 28, 2012 18:15:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 28, 2012 18:31:08 GMT
No they aren't. Don't be daft. One is about selective breeding in an attempt to improve the gene pool. The other is about concerns that over-population will lead to shortage of resource. Just because some twisted people or some intellectual snobs have sought to validate their intolerant Eugenics policies by reference to Malthus does not make it so.
So I take it that (bitter) irony is not something you get? It takes some twisted thinking to come up with a reason why someone concerned about the Malthusian prophecy is actually advocating for the prophecy coming true.
|
|
|
|
Post by magellan on May 29, 2012 1:56:28 GMT
No they aren't. Don't be daft. One is about selective breeding in an attempt to improve the gene pool. The other is about concerns that over-population will lead to shortage of resource. Just because some twisted people or some intellectual snobs have sought to validate their intolerant Eugenics policies by reference to Malthus does not make it so. So I take it that (bitter) irony is not something you get? It takes some twisted thinking to come up with a reason why someone concerned about the Malthusian prophecy is actually advocating for the prophecy coming true. Try looking up Malthusian Eugenics. Time to peel off the bark from the tree steve. It is quite obvious you are defensive of Ehrlich for a reason. Gee, what could the reason be? |
|
|
|
Post by magellan on May 29, 2012 2:16:46 GMT
Wow! You really are paranoid. I didn't buy the book, I looked on Amazon. You said: So the first reference I checked in this guy's book (end-note 13 in Chapter 1)..... I looked on Amazon too before buying the book, and also preview on Kindle. Where is it that you "found" the reference on Amazon? I say you didn't find anything and are telling a tale. Sorry, nobody just by serendipity just happens to check the first reference and finds that. BS. So, what is untrue about this statement which is found on Amazon? "The book is replete with scientific studies and facts, though it’s Zubrin’s view on the people and history behind antihumanist movements that’s the most disturbing. Whether pointing out that the first Green Party was founded under the leadership of August Haussleiter, a former Nazi SS officer; that Fujimori’s genocide in Peru was funded by international aid; or that Qian Xinzhong was given the first United Nations Population Award (together with Indira Gandhi) after forcing thousands of Chinese women to abort their children, Zubrin paints a dark and disturbing picture of antihumanism that’s worth everyone’s time to read." — Publishers Weekly Today's "Green" movement is all about population control, centralized control of energy and food etc. Next you'll telling us Occupy Wall Street is a peaceful movement, not bent on destroying Capitalism and has no connection with the Environmental movement at large. |
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on May 29, 2012 3:17:12 GMT
No mention of DDT kind of politically incorrect to actually say the word. Only a million or so green deaths a year. But lets talk about the trees. Green is good as in kill the coal power. No consequence only green rhetoric.  ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2007/07/malaria/finkel-text |
|
|
|
Post by Pooh on May 29, 2012 3:20:36 GMT
Ehrlich, P.R., and A.H. Ehrlich. “The Population Bomb Revisited.†The Electronic Journal of Sustainable Development 1, no. 3 (2009): 63–71. It is still available at dea.org.au/news/article/the_population_bomb_revisited_by_paul_r._ehrlich_and_anne_h._ehrlich ( See Note 1) Page 68: "On the population side, it is clear that avoiding collapse would be a lot easier if humanity could entrain a gradual population decline toward an optimal number. Our group’s analysis of what that optimum population size might be like comes up with 1.5 to 2 billion, less than one third of what it is today. We attempted to find a number that would maximize human options – enough people to have large, exciting cities and still maintain substantial tracts of wilderness for the enjoyment of outdoors enthusiasts and hermits (Daily et al. 1994). Even more important would be the ability to maintain sustainable agricultural systems and the crucial life support services from natural ecosystems that humanity is so dependent upon. But too many people, especially those in positions of power, remain blissfully unaware of that dependence." Note 1: The original website ( www.ejsd.org/docs/The_Population_Bomb_Revisited.pdf ) has expired. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 31, 2012 6:36:59 GMT
magellan,
If I click on the Amazon link I gave above, I see a picture of the book with a "Click to Look Inside" arrow on it. When I click the arrow I get to see the Preface, most of Chapter 1 and all of the notes pages.
By what you are saying it is possible that you do not see what I see from my UK location.
I read parts of Chapter 1 and followed up the note 13 related to the claim that Malthusians said that the Irish famine was evidence for their theory, because I've never heard that claim before. The note 13 you kindly provided above does *not* back up the claim in the Chapter and further it misinterprets what wa/s said in the Ecoscience book.
I've not read Ecoscience and I don't know much about Paul Ehrlich. My intention really is to tackle trbixler for his habit of drive-by postings linked to garbage that I suspect he himself has not really analysed very well.
Pooh,
Seems obvious to me that estimating an "ideal" population level is hardly controversial. Can the Earth cope with 6 billion? What about 10 billion? 20 billion?
trbixler, DDT does not work in areas where the mozzies are resistant to it, and mass-spraying which leads to resistance can be counterproductive. Why would you advocate mass spraying of a useless chemical. I really don't understand your position.
|
|
