45 Years Since All Scientists Agreed That Mankind Was Doomed By The Year 2000

Posted on December 21, 2014 by Tony Heller

Below350.org

Below350.org

Below350.org

Below350.org

Below350.org

http://news.google.com/newspapers

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to 45 Years Since All Scientists Agreed That Mankind Was Doomed By The Year 2000

  1. Louis Hooffstetter says:
    December 21, 2014 at 1:01 pm

    Ehrlich is a scientist like Hitler was a humanitarian.

    Reply
  2. Baa Humbug says:
    December 21, 2014 at 1:24 pm

    Dr Ehrlich believes the worst is yet to come

    And so he was absolutely right. Not because of Climate Change, but because of HOPE n CHANGE

    Reply
  3. R. Shearer says:
    December 21, 2014 at 1:34 pm

    Ehrlich received the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement in 1998. LOL

    Reply
  4. David Bennett Laing says:
    December 21, 2014 at 1:37 pm

    Ehrlich was right, obviously. Earth’s capacity to sustain any population, human or otherwise, IS limited. So far, we’ve been able to stave off an inevitable reckoning with various technological fixes like recycling, the green revolution, and genetic engineering, but only a total idiot would claim that Earth’s human population can go on growing indefinitely. In fact, all these tech fixes have just swept the problem under the rug, thereby rendering the ultimate reckoning far worse. Consider, for example, what will happen when we run out of phosphate rock reserves, which will happen well before the end of this century. Without phosphate fertilizer, Earth has enough naturally fertile land to sustain about 2 billion people. At that point, six or seven billion of us will need to start checking craigslist for some other habitable planet on which to live. Good freakin’ luck!

    Reply
    • stevengoddard says:
      December 21, 2014 at 1:58 pm

      Far fewer people are starving, and far more people are obese now.

      Reply
    • gator69 says:
      December 21, 2014 at 2:00 pm

      Ehrlich was never right. I can grow enough food on my property to feed dozens year round with nothing but renewable organic fertilizers. Population growth, even in third world countries, has slowed drastically and some populations are shrinking.

      “The fertility rate in the developed world has fallen from 3.3 in 1950 to 1.6 per couple today. These low fertility rates presage declining populations. If Japan’s catastrophically low birthrate is not raised at some point, in 500 years there will be only about 15 Japanese left on the planet. The average number of births to women in poor countries has dropped from 5 to 3 in just the past 50 years.

      We used to worry about our capacity to feed the planet, but in the United States these days, we have to pay farmers to stop growing so much food. The dean of agricultural economists, D. Gale Johnson of the University of Chicago, has documented “a dramatic decline in famines” in the last 50 years. Fewer than half as many people die of famine each year now than did a century ago – despite almost a quadrupling of the population.”

      http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/defusing-population-bomb

      Let’s bury Malthus once and for all.

      Reply
      • Gail Combs says:
        December 21, 2014 at 4:02 pm

        The Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus was born the 13th of February 1766 and died the 23rd of December 1834. His essay on population growth was written in 1798.

        The Malthus never had a chance to see the exponential growth of technology. The reality of that exponential growth hit me over the head while talking to an old lady in Washington DC. in the mid 1970s. She had been born in the 1880s and watched the USA go from the horse and buggy era to man’s landing on the moon. INCREDIBLE!

        The Wright Brothers – First Flight, 1903.
        The first automobile patent in the United States was granted to Oliver Evans in 1789 and Henry Ford gave us the mass produced Model T in 1908
        The Soviet Union launched Sputnik, the first satellite ever, on October 4, 1957.

        That is the type of advance we humans are capable of in a mans life time, in a HALF DECADE, if allowed freedom.

        And fools like Ehrlich and Holdren are wetting their pants over some possibility laid out by a guy in 1798 and want the world to STOP to RETREAT back to the same 1700’s. Worse we have fools in prominent places pushing this crap because they know a poor ignorant starving populus is easier for them to dominate and control. Their vision for the world is North Korea.

        Reply
      • Tel says:
        December 22, 2014 at 1:16 am

        gator69: They were cutting up piglets and ploughing perfectly good crops under the soil during the Great Depression, in the hope of keeping food prices high. No one learned a thing in the last 100 years.

        Reply
        • Gail Combs says:
          December 22, 2014 at 2:06 am

          Actually you are missing a bit of the history.

          The Depression began after the stock market crash in October 1929
          The Dust bowl was from 1934 to 1937. “Recurrent dust storms wreaked havoc, choking cattle and pasture lands and driving 60 percent of the population from the region. “

          There was also some finagling going on with the Federal Reserve to recoop the money spent in high wages to workers and farmers during WWI

          SECRETS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE
          CHAPTER EIGHT
          World War One

          …One of the main lies about the Federal Reserve Act when it was being ballyhooed in 1913 was its promise to take care of the farmer. Actually, it has never taken care of anybody but a few big bankers. Prof. O.M.W. Sprague, Harvard economist, writing in the Quarterly Journal of Economics of February, 1914, said:
          “The primary purpose of the Federal Reserve Act is to make sure that there will always be an available supply of money and credit in this country to meet unusual banking requirements.”

          There is nothing in that wording to help the farmer.

          The First World War had introduced into this country a general prosperity, as revealed by the stocks of heavy industry on the New York Exchange in 1917-1918, by the increase in the amount of money circulated, and by the enormous bank clearings during the whole of 1918. It was the assigned duty of the Federal Reserve System to get back the vast amount of money and credit which had escaped their control during this time of prosperity. This was done by the Agricultural Depression of 1920-21.

          The operations of the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee in 1917-18, while Paul Warburg was still Chairman, show a tremendous increase in purchases of bankers’ and trade acceptances. There was also a great increase in the purchase of United States Government securities, under the leadership of the able Eugene Meyer, Jr. A large part of the stock market speculation in 1919, at the end of the War when the market was very unsettled, was financed with funds borrowed from Federal Reserve Banks with Government securities as collateral. Thus the Federal Reserve System set up the Depression, first by causing inflation, and then raising the discount rate and making money dear.

          In 1914, Federal Reserve Bank rates had dropped from six percent to four percent, had gone to a further low of three percent in 1916, and had stayed at that level until 1920. The reason for the low interest rate was the necessity for floating the billion dollar Liberty Loans. At the beginning of each Liberty Loan Drive, the Federal Reserve Board put a hundred million dollars into the New York money market through its open market operations, in order to provide a cash impetus for the drive. The most important role of the Liberty Bonds was to soak up the increase in circulation of the medium of exchange (integer of account) brought about by the large amount of currency and credit put out during the war. Laborers were paid high wages, and farmers received the highest prices for their produce they had ever known. These two groups accumulated millions of dollars in cash which they did not put into Liberty Bonds. That money was effectively out of the hands of the Wall Street group which controlled the money and credit of the United States. They wanted it back, and that is why we had the Agricultural Depression of 1920-21.

          Much of the money was deposited in small country banks in the Middle West and West which had refused to have any part of the Federal Reserve System, the farmers and ranchers of those regions seeing no good reason why they should give a group of international financiers control of their money. The main job of the Federal Reserve System was to break these small country banks and get back the money which had been paid out to the farmers during the war, in effect, ruin them, and this it proceeded to do.

          First of all, a Federal Farm Loan Board was set up which encouraged the farmers to invest their accrued money in land on long term loans, which the farmers were eager to do. Then inflation was allowed to take its course in this country and in Europe in 1919 and 1920. The purpose of the inflation in Europe was to cancel out a large portion of the war debts owed by the Allies to the American people, and its purpose in this country was to draw in the excess moneys which had been distributed to the working people in the form of higher wages and bonuses for production. As prices went higher and higher, the money which the workers had accumulated became worth less and less, inflicting upon them an unfair drain, while the propertied classes were enriched by the inflation because of the enormous increase in the value of land and manufactured goods. The workers were thus effectively impoverished, but the farmers, who were as a class more thrifty, and who were more self-sufficient, had to be handled more harshly….

          Senator Robert L. Owen, Chairman of the Senate Banking and Currency Committee, testified at the Senate Silver Hearings in 1939 that:

          “In the early part of 1920, the farmers were exceedingly prosperous. They were paying off the mortgages and buying a lot of new land, at the instance of the Government–had borrowed money to do it–and then they were bankrupted by a sudden contraction of credit and currency which took place in 1920. What took place in 1920 was just the reverse of what should have been taking place. Instead of liquidating the excess of credits created by the war through a period of years, the Federal Reserve Board met in a meeting which was not disclosed to the public. They met on the 18th of May, 1920, and it was a secret meeting. They spent all day conferring; the minutes made sixty printed pages, and they appear in Senate Document 310 of February 19, 1923. The Class A Directors, the Federal Reserve Advisory Council, were present, but the Class B Directors, who represented business, commerce, and agriculture, were not present. The Class C Directors, representing the people of the United States, were not present and were not invited to be present. Only the big bankers were there, and their work of that day resulted in a contraction of credit which had the effect the next year of reducing the national income fifteen billion dollars, throwing millions of people out of employment, and reducing the value of lands and ranches by twenty billion dollars.”

          I think you get the picture. The farmers were frantic to pay their mortgages and the Banksters were making very sure they were bankrupted. This scenario has been played out a couple more times to shift Independent Americans Farmers off the land into the cities where they are dependent on the corporations for jobs or the government for benefits. The last shift is happening now with the Food Safety Modernization Act and the redefining of ‘Farmland’ so small farmers will now pay property taxes at the rate for house lots while at the same time having to deal with the costs of ‘improvements’ required by FDA/USDA inspectors not to mention fines.

    • Morgan Wright says:
      December 21, 2014 at 2:12 pm

      We can always get phosphate from the bones of the people who starved to death.

      Reply
      • Gail Combs says:
        December 21, 2014 at 4:23 pm

        Bone meal, a great source of phosphorus as is the bodies of the dead….

        Limestones and mudstones (sedimentary rock) are common phosphate bearing rocks.

        APATITE AND ROCK PHOSPHATE are the two important minerals of phosphorous.
        Apatite is of igneous origin and is found in veins. Rock phosphate cannot be strictly called a mineral, as it has no definite chemical composition. It is a secondary deposit formed due to the accumulation of organic remains, like bones and by replacement of limestone, calcite, etc., by phosphoric solutions to form a mixture of calcium phosphate. The rock phosphate is commonly termed as ‘phosphate nodules’ as it is found in nodular form. It is customary in the trade to give or indicium Phosphate of Lime (TPL). It is also termed as Bone Phosphate of Lime (BPL). …

        Apatite and rock phosphate are valued mainly for their phosphorous content. These minerals, are mostly utilized for the manufacture of fertilizers…..
        http://www.mineralszone.com/minerals/apatite-rock-phosphate.html

        For some reason the Catastrophists seem to think that just because we use a metal or whatever it is completely destroyed and annihilated. With nuclear power we can not only desalinate water we can also recapture a heck of a lot of useful chemicals. For example, sea water contains about 0.1-2 mg/tonne of gold dissolved in water (average 1 mg/tonne). That is just looking at what is dissolved and not the mining of the sea beds.

        There is also the possibility of capturing minerals as they are washed into the sea. After all that is what panning for gold is. The key of course is a cheap source of energy and the inventive mind of man.

        Reply
      • Tel says:
        December 22, 2014 at 1:19 am

        You would think that the phosphate on Earth tomorrow is going to be fairly similar to the phosphate on Earth yesterday. I mean, where else is it going?

        Reply
    • Latitude says:
      December 21, 2014 at 2:55 pm

      “A simple calculation of PR reserve longevity using current reserve and production figures indicates that the world has over 300 years of reserves and over 1400 years of resources. Thus the world will not soon face a PR crisis. It should again be emphasized that estimates for PR reserves are subject to change with updated information and discovery, and with changes in economics and technology.”

      http://www.ifdc.org/world-reserves-of-phosphate-rock-a-dynamic-and-unf/

      …just like peak oil

      Reply
    • Latitude says:
      December 21, 2014 at 3:07 pm

      David, on another note…..increased CO2 allows plants to utilize P much more effectively and a lot less P is required….
      or another way of putting that

      Because CO2 levels have been limiting, we have had to add huge quantities of P in order to make any available to plants….

      We will just have to use a lot less fertilizer as CO2 increases

      Reply
    • Gail Combs says:
      December 21, 2014 at 3:11 pm

      David,
      None of us support unlimited population growth. What we do support is the fact that the move advanced the civilization the fewer people have a lot of children. It just plain costs to much to raise a kid to 21 and educate him. In a subsistence culture children are seen as cheap labor, they often die before the age of five and they can be sold. (The underground slave markets are thriving.)

      Therefore the intelligent position is not to stifle technology development and to ‘de-develop the USA’ but to spread advanced civilization and hopefully get of this rock some time in the future. (So I am a dyed in the wool Science Fiction addict.)

      THIS is the statement we are protesting.
      “A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States,” – Holdren

      It is a completely wrong headed approach to the problem. For one thing you only get a high-quality environment WITH advanced technology because people can worry and divert energy to things besides survival.

      I suggest you read “The Great Horse-Manure Crisis of 1894”

      NOTE: The only reason the population in the EU and the USA is growing is because of all the first generation immigrants from third world countries having lots of kids. even so the latest CIA report says the Total fertility rate (TFR) for a woman is:
      United States 2.01
      United Kingdom 1.90
      Sweden 1.88
      Iceland 1.88
      Australia 1.77
      Canada 1.59
      Austria 1.43
      Germany 1.43

      Reply
    • hannuko says:
      December 21, 2014 at 4:33 pm

      Remember that excluding nuclear reactions and fossil fuels, the material we use isn’t actually going anywhere. It’s still here even after we have discarded it – piled in garbage dumps. And what we need now is not necessarily what we need tomorrow.

      Delingpole’s book “Watermelons” had a pretty good comparison. It is likely that a stone age man said to another at one point: “The future looks bleak. Mammoths are becoming increasingly rare and all our caves are already crammed full of people.”

      If we run out of phosphate rock, we’ll start to utilize phosphate found from somewhere else (like lake sediments). It’ll be somewhat more expensive, but not much. That’s the great thing in free market societies. If something becomes rare, it becomes more expensive and therefore it becomes profitable enough to mine those deposits that are yet not profitable enough.

      In practice this means we’ll never run out of anything. Everything only gets more and more expensive while advances in technology tend to compensate this by making everything cheaper and cheaper.

      Recently it has been discovered that even the mascot of the “we’ll run out of everything” -movement – the population of the Easter Island – did not destroy their environment and cause the destruction of their culture, like so many greens want us to believe. The whole story was a fairytale – a kind of wishful thinking. Archeologists have now found that:

      1) The island was habited much later than previously estimated. Not in the 400’s, but between the years the 1200 – 1600.

      2) The population was never larger than it was when the island was found by westerners.

      3) The trees were not lost because the people over-harvested them, but because rats ate all the seeds.

      4) Losing the trees was not a big deal for the population. They were fit and healthy when they were found.

      5) The collapse that came later was caused by smallpox and STD’s that came with the first europeans that found them. Later many were taken as slaves.

      So if a low-tech population can prosper in a tiny isolated treeless island with extremely limited resources and ravaged by rats, what do we have to worry about?

      Reply
    • catweazle666 says:
      December 21, 2014 at 4:58 pm

      “Consider, for example, what will happen when we run out of phosphate rock reserves, which will happen well before the end of this century. “

      Yawn. Here we go again…

      So, “Peak Phosphate” is what you Moonbats have dreamed up to replace “Peak Oil” is it?

      You were wrong about the oil, and you’re going to be wrong about that too.

      Of course, if you really believe this BS, you know what you must do for the benefit of humanity, right?

      Reply
    • James Strom says:
      December 22, 2014 at 12:00 am

      Sorry, Ehrlich was right only in the mathematical sense that an exponential growth rate produces some pretty big numbers eventually. Population graphed out like an exponential curve for a period of time, but it does not any more. All of the industrialized nations have transitioned to a birth rate of replacement or lower. Russia, Japan, and most of Europe are significantly below replacement, and the US is hovering close to replacement fertility, thanks to immigration. Russia and Japan are worried about population collapse. There has been a slowdown even in countries with traditionally high birth rates where a typical woman, who would have borne eight children in 1930 will most likely bear three or four today.

      Google “birth dearth” or “demographic transition” to explore further.

      Reply
  5. scizzorbill says:
    December 21, 2014 at 2:27 pm

    This comes under the law of Survival of the Fittest. All life is subject to natures law. If a species cannot compete, it will become extinct, humanity included. Some people like to think they know better, and clamor for human population reduction now to avoid population reduction by natural means. Climate, and other doom sayers, crawl back in your totalitarian caves and shut up.

    Reply
  6. Gail Combs says:
    December 21, 2014 at 2:51 pm

    Ehrlich and his buddy Holdren are either nuts or sadists. Either way they do not deserve to be called scientists.

    Heck Ehrlich is an entomologist specializing in Lepidoptera (butterflies) and Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar, is trained in aeronautics, astronautics and plasma physics.

    Neither is trained in statistics or population science or even politics. If ‘denier’ scientists can not say anything about CAGW because it is not their “field” how do these buffoons get off writing whole books on population and the best political form of government? Books that are then used in universities as textbooks!

    It is truly mind boggling when you actually think about it.

    Forced abortions. Mass sterilization. A “Planetary Regime” with the power of life and death over American citizens.

    The tyrannical fantasies of a madman? Or merely the opinions of the person now in control of science policy in the United States?….

    ….Impossible, you say? That must be an exaggeration or a hoax. No one in their right mind would say such things.

    Well, I hate to break the news to you, but it is no hoax, no exaggeration. John Holdren really did say those things, and this report contains the proof. Below you will find photographs, scans, and transcriptions of pages in the book Ecoscience, co-authored in 1977 by John Holdren and his close colleagues Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich. The scans and photos are provided to supply conclusive evidence that the words attributed to Holdren are unaltered and accurately transcribed.

    Toward a Planetary Regime
    …
    Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime—sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.

    The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.

    http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/

    Our government/society has truly gone mad when nutters like these are placed in high office instead of padded rooms.

    The Zombietime article is worth a read.
    “[UPDATE: Make sure to read the new statements issued by the White House and by John Holdren’s office in response to the controversy raised by this essay — you can see them below….]”

    Seems Zombietime kicked a hornets nest. He/She does a beautiful job of backing up his statements with direct quotes from Holdren

    From his blog where he asked his commenters to do the digging is this telling comment:

    14Druid on Jul 16, 2009 at 5:36 pm:

    And who wants to take up the challenge from the Ehrlichs issued by the White House to look into “some of the dozens of publications that we and he separately have produced in more recent times” to uncover “what we and/or Professor Holdren believe”?

    Recent times? RECENT TIMES?!

    In his own Curriculum Vitae, “Recent publications”, proudly presented as Item #3, Ecoscience (1977).

    http://tinyurl.com/ngd96e

    You’d think if he renounced it he wouldn’t plug it as “Recent publications”,

    rhetorically speaking, does Byrd still list his KKK work on his CV…
    http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=580

    Reply
  7. Latitude says:
    December 22, 2014 at 12:13 am

    Anyone else ever notice that the loons always believe in “exponential” in either direction?…..

    Reply
  8. Centinel2012 says:
    December 23, 2014 at 3:06 pm

    Reblogged this on Centinel2012 and commented:
    This is why we have UN Agenda 21 which used CO2 as the lever to get what they want which is De-population as my Gates calls it!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *