Page 21 of 22
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Fri 27 Oct 2017, 10:15:10by ralfy
Ibon wrote:Have you guys ever done the simple math of what this thread title is stating? It means that after 90% of the worlds population is culled we would still have 750 million globalists remaining...... that is still a shit load of globalists!
Many of us have mentioned this figure of 500 million or a billion as being in the ball park of where we suggest our population has to fall back to.
Kind of odd eh?
Only if some imagined level of technology will allow that number to maintain a high level of industrialization while having a lot of time for leisure.
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Fri 27 Oct 2017, 10:26:05by Tanada
Plantagenet wrote:KaiserJeep wrote:
1) There is no central authority controlling prices or exploration or investments to recover newly discovered FF supplies. Chaos rules, modified by human psychological factors..
That’s not set in stone. We’d have a global treaty mandating CO2 reductions now if Obama hadn’t derailed the treaty signing at the 2009 COP meeting in Copenhagen
At some point we’ll boot out Trump and throw the Paris Accords in the trash and go back to trying to craft a UN treaty that will regulate, tax, and reduce FF use going forward
Cheers!
The UN is a toothless tiger and can't enforce anything beyond voluntary restrictions. Continuing to hope for human beings to cease their burning ways is nothing but self deception.
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Fri 27 Oct 2017, 10:44:21by asg70
Tanada wrote:The UN is a toothless tiger and can't enforce anything beyond voluntary restrictions. Continuing to hope for human beings to cease their burning ways is nothing but self deception.
Paris may have been a symbolic gesture, but being one of only two countries (Syria being the other) who won't participate is embarrassing.
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Fri 27 Oct 2017, 10:57:55by KaiserJeep
The point is moot anyway. There is a built-in delay of 50-70 years in most of the climate models. If a miracle happened and we stopped burning all FF's today, temperatures would still increase for at least that long, nobody alive today who's old enough to understand the controversy would ever see a difference. I happen to believe that the bulk of warming is natural, and the contributions of mankind insignificant, but the point is still a moot one, the temperatures are going to increase at least 1200-12,000 years, according to Milanković.
Tanada's correct, there is no controlling authority, and it would seem that both China and India are not committed to reducing either FF usage or population growth, so what anybody in the Western World does, absent a wall around their country, is also moot.
Climate changes are off topic in this thread, unless your intent was to make the point that CC is the mechanism of population control. Which I do not believe for one moment, it is the collective decision of virtually all 7.5B - AGW believers or not - that the stopping FF consumption is not for them, but for everyone else.
The litmus test for this is simple. True believers in AGW don't own vehicles with fuel tanks, don't consume grid electricity, and don't consume foods transported with petroleum fuels. So you can easily sort true believers from hypocrites in an instant.
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Fri 27 Oct 2017, 12:51:46by onlooker
I fail to see why you insist Kaiser on trying to paint AGW as irrelevenant. When in fact it is extremely relevant all the more so because I happen to agree with you and Tanada, that we are NOT collectively, goinig to stop using FF and emittiing CO2. So, I went as far as insinuating that we could possible go extinct because of climate change. Ibon is right that the population reduction will improve the negative impact we are having on the planet. So even with all the environmental degradation and dysfunctions evident now and into the future, I would not presume that we would go extinct as the Earth has a marvelous regenerative capacity. But AGW could be different as it qualifies in accord with the paleolithic record as something that causes MASS EXTINCTION EVENTS. It even is implicated in the worse one that happened about 250 million years ago. So, having read some about this, I cannot rule out that AGW by itself without even including the other environmental damages including nuclear fallout from all the nuclear reactors, could be daunting enough to cause our extinction. So in that context, your ruling out AGW as anything significant seems preposterous to me.
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Fri 27 Oct 2017, 13:48:21by KaiserJeep
It's an entirely pragmatic viewpoint. Once you accept that "stopping global warming" requires that the world at large stop using FF energy, you realize that won't happen until the time easily accessed FF's are exhausted. Then you factor in that there has been enough carbon spewed into the atmosphere already to cause the warming to continue for decades beyond today. Finally you realize that a human lifetime is not long enough to see who was correct about AGW, we are all going to die without having our opinions confirmed or disproved.
That's about as moot as it gets.
moot
mo͞ot/Submit
adjective
1.
subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainty, and typically not admitting of a final decision.
"whether the temperature rise was mainly due to the greenhouse effect was a moot point"
synonyms: debatable, open to discussion/question, arguable, questionable, at issue, open to doubt, disputable, controversial, contentious, disputed, unresolved, unsettled, up in the air
"a moot point"
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Fri 27 Oct 2017, 18:49:36by Ibon
KaiserJeep wrote:"a moot point"
I would say that moot is what you fix as a narrative in your mind. The future is only as fixed as you convince yourself it is. We can all safely predict that over population will create constraining pressures moving forward. That's about as broad a brush as I can paint the future with. I leave so much open as an unknown because we have no ability to pinpoint and predict the nature of the events that will unfold and how humanity will respond.
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Fri 27 Oct 2017, 18:55:09by Ibon
KaiserJeep wrote:
Tanada's correct, there is no controlling authority, and it would seem that both China and India are not committed to reducing either FF usage or population growth, so what anybody in the Western World does, absent a wall around their country, is also moot.
At this point in time yes. And moving forward I can hardly see how any nation will surrender their sovereignty over to a ruling authority in reference to limiting consumption for their population in any kind of global agreement especially when physical constraints move into the non discretionary part of survival like food security and basic infrastructure.
I am more and more convinced that the break down of globalization is one of the key conduits of solving our over population. Each continent, each nation, each bio-region will increasingly be left to their own resources. Global alliances will contract.
Looking back the Paris accords may end up being as good as it gets
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Fri 27 Oct 2017, 20:29:09by onlooker
And didn't we already get a taste of that with the election of Trump and his platform of Protectionism and closing the borders and bringing back the jobs and canceling trade agreements. It does seem that we Americans are sensing a diminuation of our prospects and are not looking favorably to acting with largese wtr to the rest of the world. Trump has also mentioned withdrawing funds from the UN and also asking for others of NATO to pay their fair share. So, he seems to be astutely tapping into the zeitgeist of our nation. Sorry a bit off topic
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Fri 27 Oct 2017, 22:01:08by asg70
onlooker wrote:And didn't we already get a taste of that with the election of Trump and his platform of Protectionism and closing the borders and bringing back the jobs and canceling trade agreements.
It seems that way, but it's not a reaction against Malthusian lifeboat ethics.
Trump's reactionary agenda is largely a reaction against globalism at a time when it is in full bloom. That is why most analysts see it as a futile gesture against the unavoidable tide. The xenophobia is mostly about the fears of those still reeling from the credit crisis not wanting to see greater competition for low-end labor, despite the fact those jobs are already vulnerable to the automation tsunami.
Remember that despite the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer in the US, we're not lacking in basic necessities. That is why even the poor are overweight let alone obese. We will not see lifeboat ethics until we start to see some serious shortfalls in global grain harvest leading to price spikes and shortages. It will take quite a while to get to that point because the global food system is surprisingly resilient, far more resilient than doomers give it credit for.
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Fri 27 Oct 2017, 22:48:19by KaiserJeep
I think that the petroleum fuels we use to plant, cultivate, and harvest grains and other food plants are less resilient. Not to mention that the refinery dregs are that viscuous "bunker fuel" used to transport food and everything else, and the coal that is mined with petroleum fuelled machinery and transported via diesel trains.
Of course, it's not like somebody will turn off a switch, there won't ever be a fast crash - it will take decades before oil breaks through the $100/barrel milestone for the long term. But I remember when it was $147/barrel in 2008, and even then the economy did not shut down, and it has since declined to $30 and this week was at $54.
Beware of The Agenda Behind “Population Control”
Posted:
Sat 10 Feb 2018, 00:52:19by AdamB
Population control --family planning, mother and child healthcare, reproductive health-- is back in the news with enhanced momentum. A few years ago some leaders who were encouraging their citizens to produce more children because the optimal size for economic development hadn't been reached have abruptly changed their minds. In support of population growth, they argued that Europe and North America developed fastest when the population was growing fastest. They reasoned that birth control for the Developing World advocated by the Industrialized World was designed to create conditions for the re-colonization and continued exploitation of countries in the South. The rapid population growth in the now developed countries provided adequate labor for industries and markets for finished products which the developing countries also need. They emphasized that ipso facto developing countries need more economically active population to drive national economies to take- off and into
Beware of The Agenda Behind “Population Control”
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Sat 10 Feb 2018, 09:19:27by dohboi
AB, that article is pretty...wacky...
In fact, populations control programs are vastly underfunded.
And anyway, if/when the 1% or whomever really want to 'cull 90% of world pop' they certainly have other cheaper and more lethal means available to them. Just alter some flu strains so they are harder to kill, spread even more easily and have much higher mortality rates....or...start a nuclear war, oh, wait...
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Sat 10 Feb 2018, 14:57:51by asg70
All I know is people are far more interested in the narrative of globalists wanting to cull the world's population than the culling that will happen anyway if population isn't brought under control.
It's a classic case of not seeing the forest through the trees.
(Demographic group worried about globalists population-control above)
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Sat 10 Feb 2018, 17:51:36by Newfie
Right to the point.
The compassion comes in stopping the carnage, not lamenting the consequences.
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Sat 10 Feb 2018, 19:15:22by onlooker
The only thing left is too alleviate suffering and chose where possible the lesser harmful of difficult choices as I think turbulence and die off at shocking levels is now baked into the cake
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Sat 10 Feb 2018, 19:43:20by jedrider
Which 90%? Surely, the 90% that don't contribute to the global economy are not necessarily the problem.
Northern Lattitudes would be a good start. Maybe, a nuclear fallout cloud. Then we're talking business.
Elites hiding in bunkers won't survive very long once they get out.
Not a bright future no matter how you look at it.
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Sat 10 Feb 2018, 20:07:26by Newfie
If you are truly non-racist, and believe all humans are equal, then it matters not which group lives or dies. The remaining ones will simply fill the niche left open.
Now if you believe in a significant difference between races then you can argue about which ethnicity should go or be saved depending upon your personal value system.
AND, TO RESTATE THE OBVIOUS
I’ve heard no one on this board state that they WANT 90% (or whatever number) of folks to die. What is said repeatedly is that, as things appear a 90% reduction will occur in order to reach sustainable levels; 1 billion or less. No one here is glad about that, we are simply stating what should be obvious to all.
Now there may be some snarky, weasealy globalist who is sitting in his bunker, wringing his hands and slobbering in anticipation of the mass die off, but I’ve not seen him here.
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Sat 10 Feb 2018, 21:26:37by dohboi
uuuuuh, newf, as far as I can see, you're the only one bringing up race here. Is it some kind of obsession of yours?
Meanwhile...yeah, we're pretty much all f'ed:
https://grist.org/article/geoengineerin ... ve-planet/
Devil’s Bargain According to a new study, we might be locked in this deadly embrace. Research by an international team of scientists recently published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters says that the cooling effect of aerosols is so large that it has masked as much as half of the warming effect from greenhouse gases. So aerosols can’t be wiped out. Take them away and temperatures would soar overnight.
Re: Globalists Want To Cull 90% Of World’s Population
Posted:
Sat 10 Feb 2018, 21:41:41by onlooker
Oh and from that same article above that Dohboi presented
But there’s a catch. Our surplus of aerosols is a huge problem for those of us who like to breathe air. At high concentrations, these tiny particles are one of the deadliest substances in existence, burrowing deep into our bodies where they can damage hearts and lungs.