Ehrlich 1967 : Everyone to Die By 1975, Unless The Government Poisons Us

Fifty years ago, Stanford climate expert Paul Ehrlich said we would all starve to death by 1975, unless the government poisoned our food and water supply. Ehrlich is a close associate of Obama’s science adviser, John Holdren.

17 Nov 1967, Page 9 – The Salt Lake Tribune at Newspapers.com

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Ehrlich 1967 : Everyone to Die By 1975, Unless The Government Poisons Us

  1. Hivemind says:

    I had completely forgotten about that.

  2. JMS Martins says:

    Allow me a small correction: Paul Ehrlich is not a “climate scientist”, he is a biologist with a somewhat tortuous mind and a militant Malthusianite. He is afraid of the growth of the population and made a few alarmist statements like the one you picked up and putting forward such nazi proposals. But we, biologists and agronomists, with our work and research, proved him wrong: foodstuff production increased tremendously since the 1960s.
    In any case, climate alarmist or population alarmist, the means and objectives are the same: ignoring science, trying to keep the people afraid of something, eventually mobilizing to take undemocratic action.

    Congratulations for your excellent blog.

    • Louis Hooffstetter says:

      Paul Ehrlich is a moron. Period.
      Journalists who believe him are morons as well.

    • tonyheller says:

      Ehrlich is frequently quoted by the press as a climate expert. When I write something, I have a reason for saying it.

      • JMS Martins says:

        No. His specialisation and university career were on population biology. From this ground he ressurrected the old Malthus doom predictions and transposed them to the present (early 1960s) growth of the human population. From then on, he recurrently issued “predictions” of hunger due to population growth, irrespective of the enormous progress in the productivity of foodstuffs production systems (taken as kg produced per acre, per dollar, per calorie,…). This intellectual background and personal ideology make him close and eager to befriend with all other prophets of doom who accuse humans of every presumed evil that crosses their crooked minds.

      • John DeFayette says:

        Just like Lumberjack Mike, the tree ring counter is cited as an expert in computer modeling, global temperature sensing, polar bear populations and psychology. As long as you support the right conclusions you, too, can be a climate expert.

      • AndyG55 says:

        “No. His specialisation and university career were on population biology.”

        Precisely, but TH is correct, the press often try to pass him off as a “climate scientist™” , just like they do with many others who have basically ZERO knowledge of the climate except what they are fed by the agenda.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Biophysical limits, women’s rights and the climate encyclical

      Paul R. Ehrlich & John Harte

      The Pope has made a strong call for action on climate change, but it fails to address the complex linkages between sustainable development and demographic growth.

      https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2795

      Author information
      Affiliations

      Paul R. Ehrlich is in the Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, USA
      Paul R. Ehrlich

      John Harte is at the Energy and Resources Group, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, USA
      John Harte

      Corresponding author
      Correspondence to Paul R. Ehrlich.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Yes, he built his “Progressive” reputation on Malthusian population alarmism.

      And yes, he uses every opportunity to tie his population growth alarmism to CAGW alarmism.

      And yes, he is frequently quoted by the press as a climate expert.

      Stanford Report, November 5, 2009

      Stanford’s Paul Ehrlich wins environmental award in Spain

      Four decades after publication of “The Population Bomb,” professor of ecology Paul Ehrlich remains an influential player on the environmental scene. “Americans should go childless, or limit themselves to a single offspring, as an act of patriotism,” he said before heading to Spain to receive the Margalef Prize.

      By Janelle Weaver

      Instead of pouring tax money into automobile industry bailouts, the government should invest in a new infrastructure to deal with changing climate patterns, said Paul Ehrlich, professor of ecology.

      But Ehrlich notes that real change cannot be brought about by governments alone. “The scientific community has known for a long time the direction of climate change,” he said. “The problem is in human behavior.”

      Ehrlich spoke to the Stanford Report before leaving for Spain to receive the Ramon Margalef Prize for lifetime achievement in Ecology and Environmental Sciences.

      Dodging environmental catastrophe and global population collapse is Ehrlich’s topic for his speech on Nov. 5 in Barcelona, where the climate change Talks 2009 are under way. The goal of this conference is to make plans for negotiating an international treaty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions beyond 2012, when the Kyoto Protocol expires.

      “The timing is exquisite,” said Ehrlich, who is taking advantage of the opportunity to persuade people to take climate change seriously. In his address, he will point out specific measures that countries can take to cope with climate change. For instance, a new water-handling system – including dams, pipelines and canals for agriculture – should be designed for enhanced flexibility.

      “Americans should go childless, or limit themselves to a single offspring, as an act of patriotism,” said Ehrlich, who warns that expanding consumption will damage our life-support systems – causing a decline of food security and depletion of water recourses – and a possibly severe decline in standards of living. “All of the additional mining, harvesting, building and manufacturing to provide for growing numbers of people increase greenhouse gas emissions and cause greater climate disruption,” he said.

      https://news.stanford.edu/news/2009/november2/ehrlich-environmental-award-110509.html

      [emphasis mine]

      As they say, read the whole thing.

  3. arn says:

    The problem is not that he was saying such BS,
    but that he was never punished for his worthless,dumb&unscientific predictions
    just as his fellas Mann and Hansen.
    And the others just follow their idols.

    Impunity combined with large salaries will always attract the worst of the parasites as there is no punishment.
    As there is 100% reward and zero punishment they’ll keep on lying because they know very well-telling truth=AGW collaps=my reputation goes down from world saviour to parasitic liar and i need a real job.
    And in real jobs one can allow 1 at best 2 huge failures before becoming jobless or ruining the own business,
    while in climate science the failures are called science.

  4. R. Shearer says:

    He stands by his predictions and says that the main flaw in his book (The Bomb) was its too optimistic position about the future.

  5. Kris Johanson says:

    Has Ehrlich ever done anything to help anyone? Has he ever spent his weekends building homes in Mexico, or tutored disadvantaged kids with their math, or packed food for families out-of-work, or served an afternoon at a Ladle Kitchen? Has he ever put his money and time where his big fat mouth is?

  6. Susan Riehl says:

    I and my husband attended a 4-day reunion at Stanford U for Class of ’75 MBAs several years ago. Over 200 attended the Global Warming seminar and presentation. My husband asked the presenting department head what caused the first 15,ooo years of the catapult/spike of his 20,ooo-year, vertical, CO2 hockey stick spike of that he displayed in an elephant-sized chart. The CO2 spike proved his warming case. My husband told him to forget about the last 5,000 yars of the spike, he only wanted to know what caused the first 15,000 years of this CO2 vertical spike, the cause of warming. Publicly, this fake faculty lounge scientist said that he didn’t know. Yep, he said that he didn’t know in front of over 200 astonished attendees!!! My husband blew-up his entire presentiopn by citing his own data that he displayed in his own conference/lecture auditorium.

    This confirms that SU is far too often nothing more than yet another “Church of What’s Happening Now” whose focus is putting clueless butts in very expensive seats. SU is too often nothing more than a cathedral of “the truth du jour” propaganda and brain-washing that is led by faculty lounge frauds focused on generating money. Veritas takes a back seat with this crowd.

    On one of those memorable 4 days, our reunion group spotted John Ehrlich still walking around the SU campus. That put an exclamation point on the entire ’75 reunion ! I’m still laughing.

Leave a Reply

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