Edit :source (http://www.infowars.com/articles/life/population_reduction_top_scientist_cull_90_percent .htm)

A top scientist gave a speech to the Texas Academy of Science last month in which he advocated the need to exterminate 90% of the population through the airborne ebola virus. Dr. Eric R. Pianka's chilling comments, and their enthusiastic reception again underscore the elite's agenda to enact horrifying measures of population control.
http://www.infowars.com/images2/life/020406professor.jpg

Pianka's speech was ordered to be kept off the record before it began as cameras were turned away and hundreds of students, scientists and professors sat in attendance.

Saying the public was not ready to hear the information presented, Pianka began by exclaiming, “We're no better than bacteria!”, as he jumped into a doomsday malthusian rant about overpopulation destroying the earth.

Standing in front of a slide of human skulls, Pianka gleefully advocated airborne ebola as his preferred method of exterminating the necessary 90% of humans, choosing it over AIDS because of its faster kill period. Ebola victims suffer the most tortuous deaths imaginable as the virus kills by liquefying the internal organs. The body literally dissolves as the victim writhes in pain bleeding from every orifice.
http://www.infowars.com/images2/life/020406ebola.jpg

Pianka then cited the Peak Oil fraud (http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives/peak_oil/index.htm)as another reason to initiate global genocide. “And the fossil fuels are running out,” he said, “so I think we may have to cut back to two billion, which would be about one-third as many people.”

Later, the scientist welcomed the potential devastation of bird flu and spoke glowingly of China's enforced one child policy, before zestfully commenting, “We need to sterilize everybody on the Earth.”

At the end of Pianka's speech the audience erupted not to a chorus of boos and hisses but to a raucous reception of applause and cheers as audience members clammered to get close to the scientist to ask him follow up questions. Pianka was later presented with a distinguished scientist award by the Academy. Pianka is no crackpot. He has given lectures to prestigious universities worldwide.

One horrified observer was able to make notes on the speech and our gratitude goes to Forrest M. Mims (http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2006/2006-04-07/feature1p/index.html)for bringing this sickening display to the attention of the world.

Throughout history elites have invented justification for barbaric practices as a cover for their true agenda of absolute power and control over populations. Up until the 19th century, the transatlantic slave trade was justified by saying that the practice was biblical and therefore morally redeemable in nature, despite the fact that no such bible passage exists.

From 1932 until 1972, the Tuskegee Study (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_study)Group (pictured below) deliberately infected poor black communities in Alabama with syphilis without their consent and withheld treatment as the diseased rampaged through the town killing families.
http://www.infowars.com/images2/life/020406tuskegee.jpg

Pianka's doomsday warning of the population bomb, for which Mims claims he presented no evidence whatsoever, is complete pseudo-science. Populations in developed countries are declining and only in third world countries is it expanding dramatically. Industrialization itself levels out population trends and even despite this world population models routinely show that the earth's population will level out at 9 billion in 2050 and slowly decline after that. "The population of the most developed countries will remain virtually unchanged at 1.2 billion until 2050," states a United Nations report. Conservation International's own study (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=%5CCulture%5Carchive%5C200212 %5CCUL20021206b.html)revealed that 46% of the earth's surface was an untouched wilderness, that is land areas not including sea. It is commonly accepted that the entire world population could all fit into the state of Texas and each have an acre of their own land.

Think about the magnitude of Pianka's statements. He wants to kill nine out of every ten members of your family and he wants to kill them in one of the most painful and agonizing ways imaginable.

If Pianka, or 'The Lizard Man' as he likes to be called, is so vehement in the necessity of culling the human population will he step forward to be the first one in line? Will he sacrifice his children for the so-called greater good of the planet? We somehow doubt it.

Will the students who so enthusiastically greeted his ideas go home and kill themselves for the cause if it is so righteous?

It was noted how Pianka presented his argument with the kind of glee that you would see in a demented serial killer before dispatching his victim. This is an attitude we have encountered again and again. To discuss killing 90% of the world's population via a horrific plague is sick enough within itself but you would at least expect its advocates to be serious and sober in their approach to the subject. The opposite seems to be the case, where the subject is aired in a context of lighthearted lip-smacking and hand-rubbing as if the individual was about to sink his teeth into a T-bone steak.

This window gives us a clear view of exactly why these deranged bastards encompass this ideology. They love death and their lives are motivated by dark influences very different to you or I.

In the 21st century the elite are concerned that from over 6 billion people might spring a new elite to challenge their stranglehold on the reigns of power. This is one reason for desire to cull the population down to a manageable level. Another is control over the behavior of the existing serfs and herding them like cattle into the slaughter house.

As we have documented, members of the elite are quite open in their feverish lust to commit mass murder and ethnic cleansing. In the foreword to his biography If I Were An Animal, Prince Philip wrote, "In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation."
http://www.infowars.com/images2/life/020406phili.jpg

National Security Memo 200, dated April 24, 1974, and titled "Implications of world wide population growth for U.S. security & overseas interests," says:

"Dr. Henry Kissinger proposed in his memorandum to the NSC that "depopulation should be the highest priority of U.S. foreign policy towards the Third World." He quoted reasons of national security, and because `(t)he U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less-developed countries ... Wherever a lessening of population can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resources, supplies and to the economic interests of U.S."

Kissinger prepared a depopulation manifesto for President Jimmy Carter called 'Global 2000' (http://www.rense.com/general59/kissingereugenics.htm)which detailed using food as a weapon to depopulate the third world.

One of the most chilling admissions of deadly intent came from the lips of the late Jacques Cousteau, the sainted environmental icon. In an interview with the UNESCO Courier for November 1991 the famed oceanographer said:

"The damage people cause to the planet is a function of demographics — it is equal to the degree of development. One American burdens the earth much more than twenty Bangaladeshes. The damage is directly linked to consumption. Our society is turning toward more and needless consumption. It is a vicious circle that I compare to cancer...."

"This is a terrible thing to say. In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it’s just as bad not to say it."
http://www.infowars.com/images2/life/020406coust.jpg

The Melbourne Age (http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/100604_burnets_solution.html) reported on recently uncovered documents detailing Nobel Peace Prize winning microbiologist Sir Macfarlane Burnet's plan to help the Australian government develop biological weapons for use against Indonesia and other "overpopulated" countries of South-East Asia.

Pianka's ideology is in the same league as Hitler, Pol Pot, and the rest of history's despots who advocated mass extermination and had the temerity to dress it up in a 'noble' Straussian facade. We demand that he be investigated for openly calling for mass murder and in the meantime we encourage everyone to click here (mailto:pianka@mail.utexas.edu) and e mail Pianka, enabling him to receive your feedback about his wish that you and your entire family die.

Hey! He has an easier job than Jim Jones. See... this guy doesn't have to convince his followers to drink. All they have to do is be in the area....

Top?

Yes, because I always listen to herpetologists speaking about socio-economic policy.

I can tell no one read the entire article. Prince Phillip, Sir Macfarlane Burnet, Henry Kissinger, Jimmy Carter, and Jacques Cousteau. All echo the same sentiments.

Anything presented from a whacko omg elites are running the world/want to take over context is generally not going to recieve too much attention from me, and probably al ot of other people.

Its all about how you deliver your information, and when you deliver it like that its going to be brushed aside.

and to be honest, i attach certain levels of credibility from certain posters, and a lot of yours come from the omg conspiracy theory type posts, so as a whole I dont really pay much attention to it (Dont mean to be mean, but well its the truth)

sorry!

They are whacko elites! depopulation should be the highest priority of U.S. foreign policy towards the Third World. - KissengerIn the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation. - Prince PhillipThis is a terrible thing to say. In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it’s just as bad not to say it."- Jacques Cousteau

It'd be nice if these quotes of yours were supported by anything other than the fever dream spouting of insanity personified.

As for population, we do need to curb population growth of the world. The best way to 'depopulate' third world nations is to promote self-limitation of child bearing.

I'm sorry, but India needs more 10 child families like I need a case of the clap.

I don't think Kissinger advocated killing off third world peoples ;) Call it a hunch.

A top scientist gave a speech to the Texas Academy of Science last month in which he advocated the need to exterminate 90% of the population through the airborne ebola virus. Dr. Eric R. Pianka's chilling comments, and their enthusiastic reception again underscore the elite's agenda to enact horrifying measures of population control.
...

Is that your personal summation of Pianka's lecture or are you quoting someone else? If it's the latter, post your source.

I'm sorry, but India needs more 10 child families like I need a case of the clap.Most third world countries virtually REQUIRE large families for their rural areas. The US is currently in a quandry over illegal aliens and the more menial jobs... what cheaper labor than the fruits of your own loins from age 1-16 or so? I'd love to see who's feeding the "survivors" of this revolution.
I can tell no one read the entire article. Prince Phillip, Sir Macfarlane Burnet, Henry Kissinger, Jimmy Carter, and Jacques Cousteau. All echo the same sentiments.I read it. And who among that "elite" would believe that he would be the first to go?

One question... in what context were these statements made by these wonderful "elite"? Without that bit of info, their statements carry little to no weight whatsoever.

And who decided that this "scientist" was a TOP scientist? Sounds like a freelance wacko to me.

This sounds like a late April Fool's joke. :P

Swifty, you are one paranoid dude.

This sounds like a late April Fool's joke. :PACK! Silly me! I should have known no legitimate quotes are ever posted without a source. DUH! Thanks Yrys. Good one Swiftfox! Ya got me! :wstupid:

Swiftfox,

If you wrote the first post, then fine.

If the post is from another source, please post a link to it. Don't plagiarize, please.

Most third world countries virtually REQUIRE large families for their rural areas. The US is currently in a quandry over illegal aliens and the more menial jobs... what cheaper labor than the fruits of your own loins from age 1-16 or so? I'd love to see who's feeding the "survivors" of this revolution.
I read it. And who among that "elite" would believe that he would be the first to go?

Oh, I understand why they have children. But, hopefully, as they become a more industrialized nation, that birthrate will drop.

One question... in what context were these statements made by these wonderful "elite"? Without that bit of info, their statements carry little to no weight whatsoever.

And who decided that this "scientist" was a TOP scientist? Sounds like a freelance wacko to me.

He's a freaking herpetologist. He studies reptiles. I think its safe to say he's not a top scientist in the field of population issues, other than how they effect repitles, perhaps.

He's a freaking herpetologist. He studies reptiles. I think its safe to say he's not a top scientist in the field of population issues, other than how they effect repitles, perhaps.
You can get a better representation of his background and credentials from the courses he teaches...

http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~varanus/courses.html

...and his web page:

http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~varanus/eric.html

Few would disagree that, from an ecological standpoint, the fewer humans on this planet, the better off this planet is. Humans abuse the planet, plunder nonrenewable resources, destroy natural habitats and the species that depend on them, have no natural predators (other than microorganisms), and have an endless supply of food.The best way to 'depopulate' third world nations is to promote self-limitation of child bearing.It's a great place to start, but China does it, and the country is vilified. The U.S. government will actually grant you asylum from China for this reason. And could you imagine the uproar from the religious nutcases if such a plan were implemented in the U.S.?

I seriously wonder how accurately that talk was reported. Here's a quote from the web page on why students should take a particular one of his courses:

Full text here. (http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/bio301/why.html)

If humans do not control their own population (and we seem unwilling and unable to do so), then other forces will certainly act to control our population. The four horseman of the apocalypse (conquest, war, famine, and death) are all candidates. Most likely, lethal virulent microbes like HIV and Ebola zaire will set limits on the growth of human populations. HIV, by allowing infected hosts to survive years while they spread the virus and infect new hosts, has already become a pandemic, but it will be years before it decimates the human population. Although Ebola kills 9 out of 10 people, outbreaks have so far been unable to become epidemics because they are currently spread only by direct physical contact with infected blood. However, a closely related virus that kills monkeys, Ebola reston, is airborne, and it is only a matter of time until Ebola zaire evolves the capacity to be airborne.

The entire page, while definitely on the strident side, is no more than standard pro-conservation arguments, and not the ravings of a genocidal maniac.

It's a great place to start, but China does it, and the country is vilified. The U.S. government will actually grant you asylum from China for this reason. And could you imagine the uproar from the religious nutcases if such a plan were implemented in the U.S.?

China enforces mandatory child limitations.

The entire page, while definitely on the strident side, is no more than standard pro-conservation arguments, and not the ravings of a genocidal maniac.
That was my take on it too.

Swiftfox swiftboated (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiftboated) Pianka. :)

"In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation."

--Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, as reported by Deutsche Pres Agentur, August 1998

Prince Philip Enraged At Technological Progress
Reuters August 17, 1992

Reuters wires carried a report on Prince Philip's meeting with the chairman of GIF (Global Infrastructure Fund) Research Foundation, Eishiro Saito, Saito is the former chief of Japan's biggest business group, Keidanren. Saito calls GIF his "pet project." He told Britain's Prince Philip, president of the World Wide Fund for Nature, of his dream to melt Himalayan snow and ice to form a huge reservoir which could be used, for example, to green the African desert. "The colour of his [the prince's] face changed and he became upset," recalled one Keidanren official present at the meeting. "He kept repeating `hopeless, hopeless'." Saito made clear he was looking far into the future, perhaps 200 to 300 years. "The prince told us the human species might not even last another 50 years," the Keidanren official said.


Prince Philip, "If I Were An Animal?
United Kingdom: Robin Clark Ltd., 1986

"I just wonder what it would be like to be reincarnated in an animal whose species had been so reduced in numbers that it was in danger of extinction. What would be its feelings toward the human species whose population explosion had denied it somewhere to exist....I must confess that I am tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus."

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh's, foreword to Fleur Cowles' book, If I Were An Animal, United Kingdom: Robin Clark Ltd., 1986.


London Daily Mail, December 8, 1988

A grid published in the London Daily Mail on Dec. 8, 1988:
Illustrating Prince Philip's point that there is no difference between hunting and killing an animal for money (i.e., meat consumption), Prince Philip said:
``I don't think a prostitute is more moral than a wife, but they are doing the same thing. It is really rather like saying it is perfectly all right to commit adultery, provided you don't enjoy it.''
At a WWF dinner, speaking on the alleged problem of the Chinese saving endangered species:
``I regret to say, they eat almost anything.''
In the Solomon Islands, when told of the country's birth rate:
``Five percent! You must be out of your minds. You'll have a massive economic crisis in 20 years' time and blame everybody else.''
During the royal visit to China in 1986, speaking to a British student in Beijing, Prince Philip said:
``If you stay much longer, you will go back with slitty eyes.''
Another insult to the Chinese, this one in Geneva when a Chinese delegate asked him about protocol at an Equestrian Federation meeting:
``As far as we are concerned, you can play Colonel Bogey and fly a pair of knickers [women's underpants] from the flagpole as your team enters the arena.''
When visiting a factory in Deeside, North Wales, where unemployment was 20%:
``Everybody talks about the unemployed. We would do much better to talk about the number of people who are employed because there are more of them.''
When asked by a farm magazine if conservation were not too important to be left to conservationists:
``I would say that farming is too important to be left to farmers.''



Prince Philip Fumes At Those Who
Believe That Population Growth is Desirable
"The New Road" October-December 1990

"The New Road" has, as its lead item, a speech by WWF president Prince Philip before a United Nations Fund for Population Activities-connected group. The speech appears under the title, "Population in Crisis."

His Royal Executioner states bluntly: "It must be obvious by now that further population growth in any country is undesirable.... It is incomprehensible to me that anyone can still argue that there is plenty of room for the present and even greater numbers of people on this planet." Here, he attacks those who claim that the growth of the population in India was desirable because it had stimulated agricultural output.

Furthermore, "anyone who believes that we can somehow push people out to find a new home on some other planet or some other solar system can only be a science fiction addict."

The racist Royal Consort elaborates: "Since it is the poor and disadvantaged who are most directly affected by the degradation of the natural environment, as resources become more scarce and the quality of the environment declines still further, even more people are bound to become poor and disadvantaged. The best hope of LIMITING THE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF SUCH PEOPLE would be if the world population could be stabilized." (emphasis added)

"AS THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE INCREASES, so does the damage to the global biological and physical systems," claims Prince Philip in his late-1990 "Population in Crisis" speech that is publicized by the World Wide Fund for Nature.

He raves: "Nature is a dynamic system which is constantly seeking a state of equilibrium or homeostasis. Left to itself, the system dictates that if the population of a species becomes too numerous for the size of its habitat or for its source of food, starvation and death redress the balance.... The natural systems of the planet are being distorted both by the sheer size of the human population as well as by its activities and its insatiable demand for all kinds of resources. All the evidence points to the conclusion that the human species has offended against one of nature's basic laws. We have over-stretched the carrying capacity of our habitat."

"HUMAN SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL GENIUS" SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE for having brought about the worldwide population problem, Prince Philip insists, in the brutal conclusion of his "Population in Crisis" speech.

He says: "There is no getting away from the fact that our planet is facing an ecological crisis, but it has not been created by human thoughtlessness. It was not brought about by the poor, the disadvantaged and the uneducated. The very opposite: it was brought about by human scientific and technological genius. It is the creation of the most highly educated and trained people the world has ever seen.... There can be no doubt at all about the facts. The human population explosion, sustained by human science and technology, is causing almost insoluble problems for future generations. It is responsible for the degradation of the environment through the pollution of the air and the water; it is consuming essential as well as non-essential resources at a rate that cannot be sustained and, above all, it is condemning thousands of our fellow organisms to extinction."


one down ... here's a whole society (http://www.eugenics-watch.com/briteugen/) dedicated to the cause.

So what's the discussion? There is a bunch of pessimistic stupid people in the world?

I know I for one always believe whatever Prince Phillip tells me to believe.:rolleyes:

There are a lot of organizations that looney tunes form. How many neo-nazis are still running around? How many people who believe they've been abducted by aliens? Shoot, just look at some of the stranger religions out there... NO NOT FSM!

I bet you could take any idea not matter how strange or repugnant and form a non-profit organization and actually get a few members.

But I do think you've definitely more than earned a tin-foil propellor beanie for your efforts here today.

Swifty, you are one paranoid dude.

'To be paranoid means to believe in delusions of danger and persecution. If the danger is real, and the evidence credible, then it cannot be delusional. To ignore the evidence, and hope that it CANNOT be true, is more an evidence of mental illness." 'There are none so blind as those who WILL not see "



'Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order [referring to the 1991 LA Riot]. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond [i.e., an ´extraterrestrial´ invasion], whether real or *promulgated* [emphasis mine], that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this *scenario*, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well--being granted to them by the World Government.'

-- Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991"



'How to Achieve The New World Order.'

-- Title of book excerpt by Henry Kissinger, in Time magazine (March 1994)."

'NAFTA is a major stepping stone to the New World Order'

-- Henry Kissinger when campaigning for the passage of NAFTA. "


"It [The New World Order] cannot happen without U.S. participation, as we are the most significant single component. Yes, there will be a New World Order, and it will force the United States to change it's perceptions."

-- Henry Kissenger, World Affairs Council Press Conference, Regent Beverly Wilshire Hotel , April 19th 1994


"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."

-- Henry Kissinger, quoted by Bob Woodward in The Final Days, 1976


"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."

-- Henry Kissinger

'We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.'

-- David Rockefeller"



http://www.planetquo.com/The-Haig-Kissinger-Depopulation-Policy

http://www.arcticbeacon.com/22-Jan-2006.html

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=84674

He considers us "useless eaters" although I cannot find the source of the quote.

At any rate these are the people rubbing elbows at Bilderburg and Club of Rome meetings. I don't believe there is any argument I can make to convince you of what I believe. However I do believe that I can encourage you to see the truth.

Good luck with that

Hey Swiftfox... I see you're still spouting your conspiracy theory crap :) . I find it disturbing that people like you are actually naive and impressionable enough to believe the stuff that you are quoting.

You read it on the Internet, so it must be true, right? :)

Complete drivel.

/e hums the theme song to the Twilight Zone.

I think you'll find that Prince Philip is elite, but neither powerful nor influential. If he's the great threat to mankind then we can all sleep easy at night.

I think you'll find that Prince Philip is elite, but neither powerful nor influential. If he's the great threat to mankind then we can all sleep easy at night.

But omg Anka he's the ruling elite !! infact I think he's one of the people David Icke says is a lizard :texla:

Haha, I actualy don't believe in the lizard / ufo stuff. Price philip was an example. Henry Kissenger is quite influential. I'm fairly certain he had a hand in the one child policy in China.

here's a quote from the Vice Prez
THE VICE PRESIDENT: That's correct. We had one report early on from another intelligence service that suggested that the lead hijacker, Mohamed Atta, had met with Iraqi intelligence officials in Prague, Czechoslovakia. And that reporting waxed and waned where the degree of confidence in it, and so forth, has been pretty well knocked down now at this stage, that that meeting ever took place. So we've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden [sic] was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming. But there -- that's a separate proposition from the question of whether or not there was some kind of a relationship between the Iraqi government, Iraqi intelligence services and the al Qaeda organization. source (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060329-2.html)




I guess they never said Osama was directly involved in 911. huh.. I could have swore they did...

Swiftfox has a tendancy to take quotes completely out of context and put his own interpretation to them.

Oh, and to suppose that the US had any say in China's one child policy is foolishness. The one child policy is a natural extension for a communist country of one billion people. Which is not to condone their enforcement techniques or even, necessarily, their policy. On the other hand, I feel fairly certain that a capitalist China would have had even worse starvation in the non-urban areas and that had China not implemented a one child policy they would have suffered a major crisis.

I don't know what the solution is. Hopefully India can come up with the solution soon...for their sake.

Today, Kissinger is often remembered by Chinese leaders as "the old friend of the Chinese people." The talks between Kissinger and Zhou were highly secretive; recently declassified documents show that the talk highly focused on the Taiwan issue. While Kissinger's diplomacy led to economic and cultural exchanges between the two sides, the establishment of official diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China would not occur until 1979 as the United States continued to recognize the Republic of China government on Taiwan. - source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Kissinger)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah .. I guess he has no pull with the Chinese. Yes, I see that this message is related to foriegn policy. However Since he is so Gung ho on Eugenics I'm pretty the topic came up.

Aidon has a tendancey to attack the messenger.

Oh, and to suppose that the US had any say in China's one child policy is foolishness.

PRI: In China Bush Must Extricate U.S. From
Crimes Against Humanity: Eugenics and Forced Abortion

By Steve Mosher

Extricating U.S. taxpayers from supporting atrocities committed by China's totalitarian regime, what Congressman Christopher Smith has described as crimes against humanity, is a priority.(1) This is why I and others will be addressing the human rights situation in China at PRI's upcoming Global Family Life Conference in Santa Clara, California, April 3-7.

Bankrolling Eugenics

It has just come to light that the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is offering $1 million to the Beijing University Health Science Center to carry out eugenics research in China. According to the program announcement, the grant establishes a "cooperative agreement" between the People's Republic and the United States for the "study of birth defects and other reproductive and developmental outcomes in China." The goal of the study is to promote "optimal birth outcomes in China."(2)

Why would China, notorious for its one-child policy, be considered by the CDC as the "most appropriate country" to conduct such a study?(3) Because the Chinese system of planned births, where "registration for marriage in required, and virtually all pregnancies are planned," is a perfect laboratory for studying birth defects.

The grant announcement, which appeared in Federal Register on February 14, mispresents China's 1995 eugenics law as a well-intentioned effort to promote a "healthy pregnancy" and a "healthy baby."(4)

In fact, however, eugenics, in the sense of breeding a better Chinese man and woman, has been an integral part of China's one-child policy from the beginning. The Chinese people are ceaselessly exhorted to "Wanhun, Wansheng, Shaosheng, Yousheng," a slogan meaning "Late Marriage, Late Birth, Few Births, Quality Births." The last is an open reference to a government-sponsored effort to improve the quality of the population, not unlike that attempted by the Nazis.

This comes through in China's 1995 Maternal and Child Health Law, which mandates forced sterilization for one, or both, of the parents if "inappropriate" genetic "predispositions" are detected by state officials. Individuals judged "mentally or physically handicapped" by state officials are often not allowed to get married at all, and forced abortions are imposed on those women whose pregnancies are unauthorized. Genetic testing prior to marriage is mandated by the state without exception.(5)

The actual practice in China is even more disturbing. Ethnic minorities are a particular target, since ethnic Han geneticists claim that they find higher rates of "cretins," "idiots," and "imbeciles" among minority populations like the Tibetans, and sterilize them in large numbers on eugenics grounds. Tibetan groups rightly denounce these actions, as well as the one-child policy itself, as genocidal.

And what of the "women who may be eligible to participate in clinical trials or other birth defects prevention programs"? They--and their unborn children--will be little more than human guinea pigs. Informed consent is virtually unknown in China, a one-party dictatorship, with its rigid system of reproductive controls. Little wonder that the program description gloats that, because of these same controls, participants "can therefore be identified early, at the time of registration for marriage"? (6)

Given the racist character of China's eugenics program, as well as the fact that it is rife with coercion, we should not be funding, directly or indirectly, any research in China which in any way relates to, or benefits from, Chinese one-child policy.

U.S. support of forced abortion

In addition to eugenics, the US has for the past few years been supporting the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which supports and defends China's one-child policy.

Fifty-five members of the U.S. House of Representatives have written a letter to President Bush urging him to zero-fund the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) because of its support for forced abortion and forced sterilization in China.(7) To do anything less than permanently zero-fund UNFPA, the Congressman argue, would be to violate the Kemp-Kasten amendment which prohibits U.S. funds from going to organizations that support forced abortion and forced sterilization abroad.

President Bush has already taken steps towards extricating the U.S. from complicity in these crimes against humanity by placing a hold on $34 million for UNFPA in 2002 and $25 million for 2003.

And at a 6 February 2002 hearing of the House Committee on International Relations, Congressman Chris Smith urged U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell to ensure the Administration would raise the issue of UNFPA and forced abortion during his visit to Beijing, February 21-22. "Forced abortion, as we all know, was properly ruled as a crime against humanity at the Nazi War Crimes Tribunals that were held in Nuremburg. China today, on a massive scale. use(s) forced abortion to exploit and to control women, and to murder their babies. Enablers like the U.N. Population fund have whitewashed these crimes for more than two decades," said Smith.

"[W]e are very sensitive to the concerns you raise," responded Powell, "and we will raise them with the Chinese later this month."(8)

The issue came up again at a 13 February hearing of the House Foreign Operations Subcommittee, when Rep. Roger Wicker (R-MS) questioned Powell about UNFPA practice of sharing office space with Chinese family planning cadres in Sihui county, Guangdong province.

Powell responded that "we're trying to get ground truth [about UNFPA] and we may have to send some people over [to China] to make an independent evaluation and take a look at it."(9)

But an official State Department investigation of UNFPA operations in China, conducted with the consent or foreknowledge of the PRC, would be unlikely to uncover any new evidence. The Chinese government, which vehemently denies that it practices forced abortions, would go to great lengths to disguise the truth about UNFPA complicity in forced abortions.

"Some Americans," China's Foreign Ministry stated, "acting regardless of the facts, have lobbied for the U.S. to cancel its donation to the UNFPA. This is with ulterior intentions, and is unfavorable for international cooperation in population control."(10)

The vast majority of Americans, of course, do not want to cooperate in "population control" with the People's Republic of China, or any other country, for that matter. No further investigations are necessary. President Bush has more than enough evidence to justify permanently zero-funding UNFPA.

To do anything less would be to condone, or cover up, forced abortion in China.

source (http://http://www.tcrnews2.com/genbioethics.html)

'To be paranoid means to believe in delusions of danger and persecution. If the danger is real, and the evidence credible, then it cannot be delusional. To ignore the evidence, and hope that it CANNOT be true, is more an evidence of mental illness." 'There are none so blind as those who WILL not see "
*slaps self on forehead* You're right! I'm going to stay far, far away from crazy herpetologists.

Today, Kissinger is often remembered by Chinese leaders as "the old friend of the Chinese people." The talks between Kissinger and Zhou were highly secretive; recently declassified documents show that the talk highly focused on the Taiwan issue. While Kissinger's diplomacy led to economic and cultural exchanges between the two sides, the establishment of official diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China would not occur until 1979 as the United States continued to recognize the Republic of China government on Taiwan. - source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Kissinger)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah .. I guess he has no pull with the Chinese. Yes, I see that this message is related to foriegn policy. However Since he is so Gung ho on Eugenics I'm pretty the topic came up.

Aidon has a tendancey to attack the messenger.

Kissinger was a friend of China. Nixon's visit to China opened the doors.

To suppose that any Jew, especially a contemporary of the Holocaust is big on Eugenics...it seems to be so unlikely as to be mind boggling.

Also, I think you misuse the word Eugenics. Eugenics is the culling of 'undesirables' via sterilization or outright death in order to 'better' the race.

Promoting reproductive responsibility in an attempt to limit the population explosion is not Eugenic.

Nothing, in that entire huge citation of yours, supports any claim that the US had a say in China's one child policy.

I think you'll find that Bush has stopped his grants to this odd UN body as he opposes abortion, irrespective of concerns over forced abortion. The million dollars that the US uses to study Chinese population patterns is peanuts, really. My thought is that the population controls in China are a necessary evil. It's hard to think of a more painless way to limit the population or any alternative solutions. Perhaps the policy is being cruelly implemented, I couldn't comment, but that's another issue.

For most western countries the most pressing issue of population growth is immigration. Only once the western countries have closed borders will anyone begin to consider national birth control.

The mad scientists who want to release the ebola virus are a concern. It wouldn't take that many fruitloops and apocalyptic visionaries to kill a great many people, given our given our growing understanding of biological weapons. Terrorism is nasty concept, but a post-terrorism enemy who wants to indescriminately kill for the sake of killing is actually worse.

Ebola would have to be mutated hugely to be able to transmit from person to person. Frankly, I'd be more afraid of someone accidently launching a missle with a nuclear war head.

Hmmm... I wonder if I can dig up that article about the "end of the world" scenarios. Most of them were just accidents that went out of control. I could really get Swifty into a tizzy.

Ebola would have to be mutated hugely to be able to transmit from person to person.
Ebola Zaire (90% kill rate) can already be transmitted from person to person via contact with the blood of someone who is infected. There have been airborne strains (Ebola Reston) but, thankfully, it didn't infect humans.

*gah!* So I guess this guy made the "TOP" scientist list because so few in the scientific community subscribe to this drivvel (I scanned through a few of the links on this site). This man's credentials are as good for this "talk" as mine are for nascar racing. The site and the article itself are proof positive that some "sheep" will eat anything if it's handed out freely. :rolleyes:

*gah!* So I guess this guy made the "TOP" scientist list because so few in the scientific community subscribe to this drivvel (I scanned through a few of the links on this site). This man's credentials are as good for this "talk" as mine are for nascar racing. The site and the article itself are proof positive that some "sheep" will eat anything if it's handed out freely. :rolleyes:
What site are you referring to?

The site linked in the first post to this thread.

I didn't look long enough, but a "search" may also find instructions for making tin foil hats on that very site. :D

Ebola Zaire (90% kill rate) can already be transmitted from person to person via contact with the blood of someone who is infected. There have been airborne strains (Ebola Reston) but, thankfully, it didn't infect humans.

Right, so unless you're exposing yourself to the blood of another human it'd be pretty hard to catch. Does it have to right into your blood supply? Or can you ingest it? Vampires beware!

From what I understood the people who caught it from other people were cleaning the dead, who happen to be oozing blood from all their orifices.

Oh, here we go, Wikipedia to the rescue:

Transmission

The transmission of Ebola can happen through various ways, but the only known transmission is from what people ate. Recent discoveries show that fruit bats carrying Ebola were regulary eaten by African peoples.

Although easy to demonstrate in laboratory conditions with monkeys, there has never been a documented case of airborne transmission in human epidemics.16,17,18 Nurse Mayinga may represent the only possible case. The means by which she contracted the virus remains uncertain.

So far all epidemics of Ebola have occurred in sub-optimal hospital conditions, where practices of basic hygiene and sanitation are often either luxuries or unknown to caretakers and where disposable needles and autoclaves are unavailable or too expensive. In modern hospitals with disposable needles and knowledge of basic hygiene and barrier nursing techniques (mask, gown, gloves), Ebola rarely spreads on such a large scale.

In the early stages, Ebola may not be highly contagious. As the illness progresses, bodily fluids from diarrhea, vomiting, and bleeding represent an extreme biohazard. Due to lack of proper equipment and hygienic practices, large scale epidemics are mostly problematic in poor, isolated areas without modern hospitals and/or well-educated medical staff. Many areas where the infectious reservoir exists have just these characteristics. In such environments all that can be done is to immediately cease all needle sharing or use without adequate sterilization procedures, to isolate patients, and to observe strict barrier nursing procedures with the use of a N95/P95/P100 or medical rated disposable face mask, gloves, (if possible) goggles, and gown at all times. This should be strictly enforced for all medical personnel and visitors.
[edit]

Vaccines

Recent efforts have produced vaccines for both Ebola and Marburg that are 100% effective in protecting a group of monkeys from the disease.1,15 Recent tests were conducted at USAMRIID in collaboration with Canada's National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg. A Dutch company: Crucell has also announced a successful tests of their commercial vaccine in monkeys. No human testing has yet been announced for any of these filovirus vaccines. Earlier vaccine efforts, like the one at NIAID in 2003 that was entering human trials have so far not reported any successes.14


I guess we'd better stop eating those fruit bat, eh?

The site linked in the first post to this thread.

I didn't look long enough, but a "search" may also find instructions for making tin foil hats on that very site. :D
I think you are confusing the conspiracy theory site (InfoWars) with the site of the guy who gave the talk (Eric Pianka). Apart from being trashed by them, Pianka has nothing to do with InfoWars. I posted links to Pianka's site above if you want to check his credentials.

Oh, here we go, Wikipedia to the rescue:
Uh, Pan, look at the paragraph immediately preceding the one you quoted.

Symptoms
Among humans, the virus is transmitted by direct contact with infected body fluids such as blood. The incubation period is 2 to 21 days. Symptoms are varied and often appear suddenly. Initial symptoms include: high fever (at least 38.8° C, 101° F), severe headache, muscle/joint/abdominal pain, severe weakness and exhaustion, sore throat, nausea, and dizziness. Before an epidemic is suspected, these early symptoms are easily mistaken for malaria, typhoid fever, dysentery, or various bacterial infections, which are all far more common. The secondary symptoms often involve bleeding both internally and externally from any opening in the body: Dark or bloody stools and diarrhea, vomiting blood, red eyes from swollen blood vessels, red spots on the skin from subcutaneous bleeding, and bleeding from the nose, mouth, rectum, genitals and needle puncture sites. Other secondary symptoms include low blood pressure (less than 90mm Hg) and a fast but weak pulse, eventual organ damage including the kidney and liver by co-localized necrosis, and proteinuria (the presence of proteins in urine). The span of time from onset of symptoms to death (from shock due to blood loss or organ failure) is usually between 7 and 14 days.

unless its airborne, imo its something with a longer incubation period that would pose a serious threat to humans as a whole... something like Ebola is too quick

Klath, your point being....?

unless its airborne, imo its something with a longer incubation period that would pose a serious threat to humans as a whole... something like Ebola is too quick
There have been airborne strains of ebola. There just haven't been any that could infect humans. An incubation period of 2-21 days on an airborne strain is plenty long enough to wreak havoc if an infected person were to pass through an airport.

Klath, your point being....?
I took your statement that "we'd better stop eating those fruit bat, eh?" as a challenge to my assertion that Ebola was spread via contact with the blood of someone who is infected.

An Editorial about this guy:
http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2006/2006-04-07/editorial-p/index.html

One of his Student's Blog used as an example.

http://brenmccnnll.blogspot.com/2006/03/dr.html

Btw, Ebola is his prefered way, but....

The audience laughed when he said, “You know, the bird flu's good, too.” They laughed again when he proposed, with a discernable note of glee in his voice that, “We need to sterilize everybody on the Earth.”
Source (http://www.sas.org/tcs/weeklyIssues_2006/2006-04-07/feature1p/index.html)

He posted his views on his page in:

"I do not bear any ill will toward humanity. However, I am convinced that the world WOULD clearly be much better off without so many of us. "
http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~varanus/Everybody.html

I think you are confusing the conspiracy theory site (InfoWars) with the site of the guy who gave the talk (Eric Pianka). Apart from being trashed by them, Pianka has nothing to do with InfoWars. I posted links to Pianka's site above if you want to check his credentials.Nah. I was scratching my head trying to figure out how he rated a "TOP" scientist title. When I looked at the site I determined that it was only because he made some statements that the site agreed with, hence elevating him to "top" scientist. He may be "outspoken" or even "noted", but I don't see anything in his credentials to even suggest that he is considered a "TOP" scientist by the state, country or world.

His words as well:

“And the fossil fuels are running out,” he said, “so I think we may have to cut back to two billion, which would be about one-third as many people.” At the speach mentioned in the original Post.

and from
http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/bio213/why.html

Crop failures would seem to be inevitable. People have lost touch with nature -- many seem to have forgotten where food comes from

In spite of the fact that we use less land for farming today, in the US, than we did in the first half of the 20th Century. And much land previously used as farmland is returning to it's natural woodland state. The great dust bowl was caused by bad farming techniques and modern farming is actually more environmentaly friendly today than any period before.

Unlimited cheap clean energy, such as that so ardently hoped for in the concept of cold fusion, would actually be one of the worst things that could possibly befall humans. Such energy would enable well-meaning but uninformed massive energy consumption and habitat destruction (i.e., mountains would be levelled, massive water canals would be dug, ocean water distilled, water would be pumped and deserts turned into green fields of crops). Heat dissipation would of course set limits, for when more heat is produced than can be dissipated, the resulting thermal pollution would quickly warm the atmosphere to the point that all life is threatened, perhaps the ultimate ecocatastrophe.

Nah. I was scratching my head trying to figure out how he rated a "TOP" scientist title. When I looked at the site I determined that it was only because he made some statements that the site agreed with, hence elevating him to "top" scientist. He may be "outspoken" or even "noted", but I don't see anything in his credentials to even suggest that he is considered a "TOP" scientist by the state, country or world.

You mean other than:

Pianka was a 1978 Guggenheim Fellow, and a 1981 American Association for the Advancement of Science Fellow, a 1990 Fulbright Senior Research Scholar.

Oh, and the fact that the speach was given at a conference where he was being named the 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist. That would at least put him in the State category.

Nah. I was scratching my head trying to figure out how he rated a "TOP" scientist title. When I looked at the site I determined that it was only because he made some statements that the site agreed with, hence elevating him to "top" scientist. He may be "outspoken" or even "noted", but I don't see anything in his credentials to even suggest that he is considered a "TOP" scientist by the state, country or world.
I think the only reason they are calling him a "top" scientist is because they want to shock people with the notion that prominent academics are pursuing a genocidal population control agenda. Their goal isn't to support him or his ideas but rather to unite people against them.

I took your statement that "we'd better stop eating those fruit bat, eh?" as a challenge to my assertion that Ebola was spread via contact with the blood of someone who is infected.

Oh yeah! It looks like the fruit bats might've started it off.


The transmission of Ebola can happen through various ways, but the only known transmission is from what people ate. Recent discoveries show that fruit bats carrying Ebola were regulary eaten by African peoples.

I wonder if you could catch it from a piece of fruit partly eaten by a fruit bat?

There was another virus, flu one I think, they linked to bats that were partially eating fruit, then the fruit would drop off the tree and it would get into pigs grazing nearby, from there it would bounce to ducks and fowl and eventually vector into humans.

So bizarre! Gotta really give whoever figured that one out a lot of credit.

Swifty, here... this should keep you up tonight: Grey Goo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_goo).

20 ways the world might end (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1511/is_10_21/ai_65368918)

Some of my favorites:

12 Particle accelerator mishap Theodore Kaczynski, better known as the Unabomber, raved that a particle accelerator experiment could set off a chain reaction that would destroy the world. Surprisingly, many sober-minded physicists have had the same thought. Normally their anxieties come up during private meetings, amidst much scribbling on the backs of used envelopes. Recently the question went public when London's Sunday Times reported that the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) on Long Island, New York, might create a subatomic black hole that would slowly nibble away our planet. Alternately, it might create exotic bits of altered matter, called strangelets, that would obliterate whatever ordinary matter they met. To assuage RHIC's jittery neighbors, the lab's director convened a panel that rejected both scenarios as pretty much impossible. Just for good measure, the panel also dismissed the possibility that RHIC would trigger a phase transition in the cosmic vacuum energy (see #3). These kinds of reassurances follow the tradition of the 1942 "LA-602" report, a once-classified document that explained why the detonation of the first atomic bomb almost surely would not set the atmosphere on fire. The RHIC physicists did not, however, reject the fundamental possibility of the disasters. They argued that their machine isn't nearly powerful enough to make a black hole or destabilize the vacuum. Oh, well. We can always build a bigger accelerator.

17 Mass insanity While physical health has improved in most parts of the world over the past century, mental health is getting worse. The World Health Organization estimates that 500 million people around the world suffer from a psychological disorder. By 2020, depression will likely be the second leading cause of death and lost productivity, right behind cardiovascular disease. Increasing human life spans may actually intensify the problem, because people have more years to experience the loneliness and infirmity of old age. Americans over 65 already are disproportionately likely to commit suicide.

Gregory Stock, a biophysicist at the University of California at Los Angeles, believes medical science will soon allow people to live to be 200 or older. If such an extended life span becomes common, it will pose unfathomable social and psychological challenges. Perhaps 200 years of accumulated sensations will overload the human brain, leading to a new kind of insanity or fostering the spread of doomsday cults, determined to reclaim life's endpoint. Perhaps the current trends of depression and suicide among the elderly will continue. One possible solution--promoting a certain kind of mental well-being with psychoactive drugs such as Prozac--heads into uncharted waters. Researchers have no good data on the long-term effects of taking these medicines.

20 Someone wakes up and realizes it was all a dream Are we living a shadow existence that only fools us into thinking it is real? This age-old philosophical question still reverberates through cultural thought, from the writings of William S. Burrows to the cinematic mind games of The Matrix. Hut of the Institute of Advanced Studies sees an analogy to the danger of the collapse of the vacuum. Just as our empty space might not be the true, most stable form of the vacuum, what we call reality might not be the true, most stable form of existence. In the fourth century B.C., Taoist philosopher Chuang Tzu framed the question in more poetic terms. He described a vivid dream. In it, he was a butterfly who had no awareness of his existence as a person. When he awoke, he asked: "Was I before Chuang Tzu who dreamt about being a butterfly, or am I now a butterfly who dreams about being Chuang Tzu?"

Jonathan Swift had the idea first (http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html)

LOL! There's something about the name of Swift that must cause one's thoughts to take a rather dreadful turn.

Jonathan Swift had the idea first (http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html)

Swift was a great satirist. :)

unrelated link...

http://www.pushback.com/environment/EcoFreakQuotes.html

Some other scary quotes from people who are cut from the same cloth as Pianka.

lol, this one just sounds funny...


The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States: We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the U.S. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are. And it is important to the rest of the world to make sure that they don’t suffer economically by virtue of our stopping them.

Jonathan Swift had the idea first (http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html)

LOVE IT!

Bill Gates and Ted Turner dontate Billions (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_16_15/ai_54543048) to eugenics. More (http://www.eugenics-watch.com/roots/chap12.html) on who is funding the eugenics movement.

The William H. Gates Foundation, which recently received $2.2 billion in Microsoft stock, plans to give the majority to Planned Parenthood and other population-control agencies, including a $1.7 million pledge during the next three years to the U.N. Population Fund.

The Buffett Foundation gave more than $3 million to family planning and population control in 1994 and more than $4.5 million in 1996, and plans to lavish the majority of its annual $100 million in grants on population programs after Buffett dies.

The David and Lucille Packard Foundation has pledged $9 billion toward population-control programs, including safe-sex campaigns and abortion clinics.

The U.N. Foundation will administer Turner's pledged $1 billion toward population-control efforts and health and environmental issues.




The US had been funding it for a while, but has since halted funding as Anka indicated, and supported by the article I had posted earlier.
President Bush has already taken steps towards extricating the U.S. from complicity in these crimes against humanity by placing a hold on $34 million for UNFPA in 2002 and $25 million for 2003.


A DECISION by President Bush to suspend £24 million of United States funding to a United Nations body accused of assisting forced abortions in China is threatening to cloud his visit to Beijing this month.

By withholding the money from the UN Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA), Mr Bush has made clear his opposition to China's extreme population control methods. Beijing is hoping to extend the controls, which restrict the majority of couples to one child, for another generation.

"The allegations by some American congressmen on the UNFPA's support for China's forced abortion and sterilisation operations is totally groundless," said a spokesman. "Some Americans, acting regardless of the facts, have lobbied for the US to cancel its donation to the UNFPA. This is with ulterior intentions, and is unfavourable for international co-operation in population control.
source (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/02/03/wabor03.xml)

How much did they get in years previous to these?

While not showing the US actualy had any say it does indicate that the US was supporting the forced abortions via the UNFPA

By the definition of Eugenics, it isn't being used quite right, however the relabeling of "poplulation control" to sound like a science for the betterment of the race certainly does clean it up. In this case it is all about population control (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_control)

also see (http://www.emmerich1.com/EUGENICS.htm)

Eugenics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics) is a social philosophy which advocates the improvement of human hereditary traits through social intervention. The goals have variously been to create healthier, more intelligent people, save society's resources, and lessen human suffering. Proposed means of achieving these goals most commonly include prenatal testing and screening, genetic counseling, birth control, selective breeding, In vitro fertilisation, and genetic engineering.

Selective breeding was suggested at least as far back as Plato, who believed human reproduction should be controlled by government.

You keep posting quotes of other people.

What do YOU have to say about all this?

Swiftfox, are you against all forms of population control?

Personally, I agree with Pianka that human life is out of balance with its habitat and that if humans don't address the problem, nature will. I'm encouraged by the fact that there are powerful people who are using the knowledge and resources at their disposal to try to address the problem.

Condoms are a form of birth control
Birth Control is a form of population Control
Population Control is a eugenics

CLEARLY THE ELITES MADE CONDOMS SO THE LOWER CLASSES WONT REPRODUCE SO THEY CAN STAY ON TOP

OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG

ALEART THE PRESSERS OMG OMG OMG OMG

Dang, I'm not doing the lurking job I should be..

Just a quick comment this time though.

I wonder what would be the reaction of that audience, if after (Pianka) "gleefully advocated airborne ebola as his preferred method of exterminating the necessary 90%", someone in the audience were to totally, completely agree with him, but had a different "preferred method", and pulled out a semi-automatic rifle, and shot him and 90% of the cheering audience?

Would he and they be cheering you on, perhaps saying "Way to go!" as they were killed? Need the question even be asked?

The very fact that he is talking about it, rather than doing it, shows he truly doesn't believe it should be done. Or he would be doing it.

I'm not sure what his point truly is. Does he even have a point? Perhaps he is trying to get one of the lecture attendees to attempt something like this? I cannot wrap my mind around someone who sincerely thinks that an acceptable means of "saving the planet" would be killing off 90% of the human population. One who thinks that such an action would be logical and straightforward is incomprehensible to me.

I love the USA, and it's 2nd amendment rights. We never have to fear crazies like this instituting a "population control" program here.

"You want to infect all my family with airborne ebola? I beg to differ. Have you met my good friend, Mr. Wesson?"

Dang, I'm not doing the lurking job I should be..
The contents of the original post are not an accurate representation of Pianka's views. Don't take my word for it though, take a look at the source of the information (http://www.infowars.com/) and make a determination for yourself as to whether you want to trust them.

A more balanced discussion of his views can be found at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Pianka

I avoid posting my own thoughts for the most part for 2 reasons. It opens the door for personal attacks, and I'm not one who can write quite as well as some of you.

As for population control, I do agree that there are some who should not have children, but that being said, I also don't believe I have the right to draw the line at who should and should not have them. As far as I am concerned a lot of the medical problems today have been caused by people. I'm also considering the possibility that this question was bait. There are other people of influence who whole heartedly agree the human herd needs culling to around 500,000,000 (http://www.radioliberty.com/stones.htm).

As for population control, I do agree that there are some who should not have children, but that being said, I also don't believe I have the right to draw the line at who should and should not have them.
Then wouldn't it make sense to educate people about methods of birth control and let them make the decision for themselves?

I am totaly for the individuals right to choose not to have children. Population control by forced or covert sterilization is not a choice.

What about overt?

China is pretty Overt.

Population control != Eugenics or mass murder.

I am totaly for the individuals right to choose not to have children. Population control by forced or covert sterilization is not a choice.
How about by providing incentives (tax breaks, grants, etc...) for people to have no more than one child or to voluntarily get sterilized?

There are those who are of the opinion that AIDS was man made as a Covert population control. I'm only about 55% convinced that it is the case. in addition to that there is some evidence to suggest DDT was banned because it was contributing to overpopulation, therefore they allow malaria to help keep the population down. Again I don't have sufficient proof but it is a convienient theory. I'm not sold on the soft eagle eggs bit either.

How about by providing incentives (tax breaks, grants, etc...) for people to have no more than one child or to voluntarily get sterilized?

Sure, it involves personal choice does it not?

In the US the biggest population problem we face imo is children born to people who do not have the time, money, or inclination to raise them.

And that is an extremely hard problem to solve.

How about by providing incentives (tax breaks, grants, etc...) for people to have no more than one child or to voluntarily get sterilized?

See above, (for the US, and most "western" countries the problem is that the people most likely to take advantage of those are people who would have the time, money and skills to actually raise the child.

The countries that have serious overpopulation (as a whole) are places like India and China.

The countries that have serious overpopulation (as a whole) are places like India and China.
Why wouldn't incentives for voluntary population reduction work in places like India and China? The costs may be high but they're probably nowhere near the long-term costs of overpopulation.

Why wouldn't incentives for voluntary population reduction work in places like India and China?

Incentives might allow the rich to have children (as they can ignore the incentives) and stop the poor from breeding. That may be exactly what's needed to balance the demographics, but it suffers from dubious morality. Whatever's said about the Chinese methods they remain very egalitarian.

Why wouldn't incentives for voluntary population reduction work in places like India and China? The costs may be high but they're probably nowhere near the long-term costs of overpopulation.

It is in essense voluntary in China.

A Chinese friend tells me that you MAY have more than one child, you just have to pay a fee to have the second or more child.

Between 2,000 and 10,000 dollars, depending.

The scenario where some red shirted police come in the middle of the night to force every woman have an abortion, is not accurate.

Incentives might allow the rich to have children (as they can ignore the incentives) and stop the poor from breeding. That may be exactly what's needed to balance the demographics, but it suffers from dubious morality.
They'd just be incentives, not requirements. I agree that they would appeal less to the wealthy but, ultimately, nobody would be being forced to do anything they didn't want to do.

A Chinese friend tells me that you MAY have more than one child, you just have to pay a fee to have the second or more child.
Yeah, the disincentive approach works too. :)