Control: Communism, Environmentalism and the Overpopulation Myth

Need for population control activities according to UNFPA

Control: Communism, Environmentalism and the Overpopulation Myth.    

The roots of environmentalism go back to the eighteenth century in the form of the overpopulation myth of Malthusian-ism, which was all about limiting the human population to prevent a predicted Malthusian Catastrophe, i.e. mass starvation, and for genetic purity, especially among supposedly genetically inferior groups e.g. certain races, cultures and the chronically poor. Malthus was influenced by the utopian socialist beliefs of his father, David Hume and Jean James Rousseau that the poor were incapable of advancing and were preventing the establishment of a perfect utopian society. This belief, in turn, is based on the progressive philosophies of materialism, (i.e. there is no spiritual side, only the material we can see and touch), and humanism, (i e. man is the measure of everything and determines morals to suit his circumstances).  From these progressive philosophies grew socialism, communism, fascism, the eugenics[1] movement and environmentalism, all of which are about control of the masses by an elite few, and all are basically anti-human, anti-development and anti-freedom.

In 1798 Thomas Malthus published An Essay on the Principles of Population[2]  in which he predicted future starvation based on the assumption that the rate of population growth would far surpass the growth rate of food supplies. Using this belief, he proposed draconian measures to “fix” an assumed overpopulation problem at a time when world population was below one billion.  Malthus made two major erroneous assumptions:

  1. Genetic inferiority and enhanced fertility of less accomplished peoples
  2. No improvement in crop yields per acre.

He assumed that the only way to grow more food was to increase the number of acres under cultivation, which limited the total “carrying capacity” of any region and indeed the world. We now know that yields have improved by orders of magnitude through things such as introduction of more prolific, disease resistant plant varieties and high yield hybrids, use of nitrogen and mineral fertilization, mechanization and controlling insect and rodent pests. Nor did he foresee the natural reduction of family size that usually occurs when people are raised beyond near-starvation subsistence, and when diseases are controlled so that high childhood mortality is reduced.

Using these false assumptions as a “reason,” he advocated government measures to reduce population growth rates among the poor such as regulating marriage, educating for moral abstinence, as well as birth control and sterilization. However, he opposed nutritional relief and improved hospital access that would have reduced infant mortality and extended life spans among the poor.  In his opinion, helping the poor only made the supposed overpopulation problem worse.  He extended the same philosophy to Africa where he observed that the Tsetse fly and Malaria helped to keep human population numbers and lifespans low, which he saw as a good thing.  Later, based on Malthus’ theories, the British government contributed to the misery and starvation during the Irish Potato Famine by refusing to provide food aid while continuing to ship wheat from estates in Ireland to England. 

The same upside down philosophy persists today among progressives who only typically want to manage the poor while keeping them poor.  Malthus was pushing evolution and eugenics long before Charles Darwin[3] and Frances Galton[4].   In The Descent of Man, Charles Darwin assumed that the superior races (white Europeans) would eventually cause the extinction of the inferior races (black and brown). Francis Galton coined the term eugenics for a theory about improving the human race through selective breeding and exclusion from reproduction of supposedly genetically inferior groups.


“At some future period, not very distant as measured in centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world.”

—Charles Darwin, Descent of Man


Because genetic inferiority of certain races, cultures and the poor has largely been rejected by more enlightened geneticists and the public in general, (but apparently not for powerful population control supporters), along with vastly improved food production rates, environmentalism is the latest cause celebre to cover brutal inhumanity to man in the form of forced or coerced population control in places like China, India and Africa.  The shift from eugenics or racial purity to environmentalism is based on the false assumption that the world is overpopulated, resulting in harm to the environment.  This makes environmentalism and population control a perfect match and a good fit for the progressive elite seeking control.

Is it true that the world overpopulated? Only if agriculture had remained as it was in the eighteenth century.  However, the advances in crop yields are more than enough to feed the world.  There is more than enough food for all.  The reason for starvation and poor nutrition is usually political mismanagement or worse, such as well-meaning environmental and population control philanthropic societies, NGOs, UN and local governments intentionally keeping the poorest in their disease ridden squalor without adequate infrastructure to provide for basic needs as a means to control the people.  A healthy and educated population is much harder for a dictator to control and thereby remain in power.

The best way to stabilize population, if that is the goal, is to raise the standard of living by providing employment, transportation, electricity, medical care, education, clean water and adequate food.  It is a well known fact that family size is naturally reduced when living standards are improved beyond the point where excess children are needed to insure replacement of those lost in early childhood to disease and malnutrition.  It can be argued that the healthy population is too low in many areas to provide the cooperation and man power to provide better facilities without outside aid. Only cities are overpopulated, and that is usually by choice. As population numbers have grown, the world has seen an increase in the standard of living, as reflected in the global GDP per capita, due to division of labor and shared responsibility for both agriculture and developing infrastructure.  We should be doing all we can to raise the world’s poor out of poverty. Caring for the environment is the last thing on the minds of people who are having difficulty feeding their children.  Raising their standard of living is the best thing we could do to stabilize the population and protect the environment. Unfortunately, the progressives would rather do the opposite for ideological reasons.

I have seen the benefits of higher population and the negative side of low population myself. I grew up in an area of the Appalachian Mountains where population is low. Services that are available in the cities and towns a couple of hours away are historically not or only marginally available in these mountainous rural areas.  Even finding a plumber or electrician is difficult.  Although the situation is better now because of improvements in highways, many in the area still must travel to the cities for proper medical care.  Lower population means lower tax basis, fewer businesses, less opportunity. It has been difficult getting businesses, whether they are medical facilities, manufacturing, commercial or food and entertainment,  interested in locating in an area where the customer and workforce base are low.  It has been particularly difficult getting doctors to come and stay.  It hasn’t been that long since the first fast food restaurant came into the area.  I bring this up to illustrate the logic of raising the population to improve living standards.  Granted, this is a far cry from poor villages in other countries, but it still illustrates the point that higher population brings higher living standards.

NOTE:  Updated from Anti-humanism, Communism, Environmentalism and the Overpopulation Myth, June 2018.

[1] Eugenics is the “science” of improving the human race by selective breeding of genetically superior people and preventing supposedly genetically inferior people from reproducing.

[2] Thomas Robert Malthus, An Essay on the Principles of Population, 1798, London

[3] Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species , 1858, London, The Descent of Man, 1871

[4] Francis Galton, 1865 article “Hereditary Talent and Character”, Hereditary Genius., 1869, Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development, 1883.

The Truth About DDT and Population Control

Population Control by Insect Borne Diseases.  

It is time to bring back DDT to save Africa and other impoverished areas. Although much maligned, DDT is Safe for Humans and the Environment according to extensive research.  See evidence below. 

Over 80% of infectious diseases in poor countries are carried by insects and other arthropods.  DDT is desperately needed in impoverished countries where insect borne diseases kill and sicken millions every year, cutting lifespans and productivity.  Africa, India, Southeast Asia, Oceana and South-Central Americas are most affected.  This unpardonable crime amounts to continuing genocide of black and brown races by western powers, which is based on the myth of overpopulation

Without these insect borne diseases and with access to clean water, populations may increase at first, but better health can facilitate the building of infrastructure and industry that can raise millions out of poverty, ignorance and hopelessness. Historically, raising people’s standard of living also stabilizes the population by reducing early childhood mortality and the need to have more children in anticipation of those loses. 

“How much labor and waste of time these wicked insects do cause, but a ray of hope, in the use of DDT, is now held out to us.”    

       — Out of My Life and Thought, Dr. Albert Schweitzer  (autobiography translated from Ma Vie et Ma Pensee)

Global Malaria Risk, 1900 to 2002[1]

Most people assume that malaria is a tropical disease, but before DDT was introduced and widely used for 30 years, malaria was prevalent worldwide as far north as Siberia. DDT worked so well that malaria and similar insect borne diseases were eradicated in most developed countries and were near eradication in poorer countries where it was used prior to DDT being banned in 1972 by the EPA. In spite of an overwhelming body of research that failed to find any harm to humans or the environment DDT was banned for political reasons.  See evidence and references below. 

 “To only a few chemicals does man owe as great a debt as to DDT.  It has contributed to the great increase in agricultural productivity, while sparing countless humanity from a host of diseases, most notably, perhaps, scrub typhus and malaria. Indeed, it is estimated that, in little more than two decades, DDT has prevented 500 million deaths due to malaria that would otherwise have been inevitable. Abandonment of this valuable insecticide should be undertaken only at such time and in such places as it is evident that the prospective gain to humanity exceeds the consequent losses. At this writing, all available substitutes for DDT are both more expensive per crop-year and decidedly more hazardous.” 

               — National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Research in the Life Sciences of the Committee on Science and Public Policy, The Life Sciences: Recent Progress and Application to Human Affairs, The World of Biological Research, Requirements for the Future (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1970), 432.                             (Emphasis added)

 

Rachel Carson’s 1962 book, Silent Spring, was filled with lies, half-truths, misinterpretation of research results and wild speculations.  Rather than being an attempt to protect humans and the environment as stated, it was really part of an anti-human, anti-progress movement with a goal of stopping assumed overpopulation, especially in Africa, India and other impoverished countries.

The Population Bomb by Paul Erilich (1968) was a book based on Malthusian, eugenicist, racist lies, aka propaganda, that claimed worldwide catastrophic starvation would occur unless the global population was immediately reduced. None of it was true.

“The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate…”

— Paul Ehrlich, The Population Bomb, 1968

Population control groups such as the Club of Rome, supported by charitable foundations such as the Rockefeller Foundation, continue to spread the myth of overpopulation.  Many rural areas have too few healthy people to build roads and other infrastructure, and develop industry.

“My own doubts came when DDT was introduced for civilian use. In Guyana, within two years it had almost eliminated malaria, but at the same time the birth rate had doubled. So my chief quarrel with DDT in hindsight is that it has greatly added to the population problem.”

—Alexander King, co-founder of the Club of Rome, 1990

DDT was a God-send to millions at the end of WWII, saving millions.  Among other uses, it was administered directly onto soldiers’ and refugee’s clothing as a powder to fight body lice, ending a deadly Typhus epidemic.  There were no reports of harm in this practice.  It was used in developed countries to fight deadly diseases and agriculturally to increase food and fiber production. However in 1972 DDT was banned by US EPA Administrator William Ruckelshaus[2] in spite of overwhelming scientific evidence presented at hearings that refuted claims of harm by activist groups such as Environmental Defense Fund and Audubon Society.

“DDT is not a carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic hazard to man. The uses under regulations involved here do not have a deleterious effect on fresh water fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds, or other wildlife…and…there is a present need for essential uses of DDT.”[3]

                      — EPA Administrative Law Judge Edmund Sweeney, after months of hearings, “In the Matter of Stevens Industries, Inc., et al., L.F. & R. Docket Nos. 63, et al.). Hearing Examiner’s Recommended Findings, Conclusions, and Orders, April 1972.” (40 CFR 164.32).  (Consolidated DDT Hearings)       As summarized in Barrons, May 1, 1972. Source:  J. Gordon Edwards, “DDT: A Case Study in Scientific Fraud,” Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Volume 9, Number 3, Fall 2004

Beginning in the 1970’s, agencies such as USAID, UN WHO, UNESCO and the World Bank pressured leaders of poor countries to discontinue DDT as a prerequisite to receiving essential aid.  This continues to the present with exception of the UN WHO recently allowing limited spraying of interior walls in selected areas of Africa. Leaders of most poor countries felt they had no choice but to discontinue its use. India did not comply and has continued to manufacture and use DDT to periodically spray interior walls in malaria prone areas. 

Annual Malaria Deaths by Region, WHO 2016   Note that India is included in the South East Asia section

 

 

Although DDT is the most studied pesticide on the planet, it is still listed as an environmental toxin and possible carcinogen because the EPA listing has not changed, in spite of all of the studies that failed to find harmful effects on humans or the environment.  It is much safer to handle and use, and more economical than any of the replacements. 

 Verifying the Claims of Silent Spring

None of Rachel Carson’s “facts” about environmental and human harm were true. Most of the facts below, except where noted, are from “DDT:  A Case Study in Scientific Fraud,” by J. Gordon Edwards, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Volume 9 Number 3 Fall 2004.[4]  (See link below.)

Dr. Edwards, who had been a witness in the EPA hearings, examined each of Silent Spring’s claims and found them wrong and possibly fraudulent. In his report, Dr. Edwards cites the many scientific studies on which his conclusions were based and lists them as references so that the sources can be examined by the reader.

Not one person has been harmed or died from DDT.

  • The only death associated with DDT was a 3 yr. old child that drank a solution of DDT in kerosene, which is a hydrocarbon known to be toxic.
  • DDT in high doses can cause temporary, reversible tremors and liver changes.
  • Gordon Edwards was a PhD entomologist who sometimes ate a spoonful of DDT powder at his lectures as a demonstration of its safety. He suffered no significant ill effects and died of a heart attack at age 84 while hiking in the Rockies.

DDT is not carcinogenic, mutagenic or teratogenic

  • “Workers in the Montrose Chemical Company had 1,300 man-years of exposure, and there was never any case of cancer during 19 years of continuous exposure to about 17mg/man/day.”
  • “Concerns were sometimes raised about possible carcinogenic effects of DDT, but instead its metabolites were often found to be anti-carcinogenic, significantly reducing tumors in rats.”
  • Expected rise in leukemia in children and breast cancer years later in girls exposed during puberty never happened.

DDT is not an endocrine disrupter or estrogen mimic

  • Examples cited for this claim were of Alligators in a heavily polluted lake in Florida which showed smaller penises, but the lake received sewage which contained birth control hormones from the city of Winter Garden and other farm pollutants.
  • Other research failed to find any cause and effect link to DDT, although activists and some international organizations still claim this without evidence.

Bird deaths, thin egg shells and buildup in the environment have proven to be false.

  • Bird deaths at the University of Michigan, cited by Carson, were not from DDT, but were probably from soil fungicide containing mercury. In later tests, mercury was found in the soil and earthworms there. Other areas did not experience bird deaths from spraying of DDT. Carson’s Source was: Bird Mortality in the Dutch elm disease program in Michigan, Bulletin 41, Cranebrook Institute of Science by George John Wallace; Walter P Nickell; Richard F Bernard
  • “The counts of raptorial birds migrating over Hawk Mountain, Pennsylvania, indicated that there were many more hawks there during the “DDT years” than previously. The numbers counted there increased from 9,291 in 1946 (before much DDT was used) to 13,616 in 1963 and 29,765 in 1968, after 15 years of heavy DDT use.”
  • According to Audubon Society Annual Christmas Bird Counts, bird populations actually increased during the thirty years of DDT use. Numbers rose from 90 birds seen per observer in 1941 to 971 birds seen per observer in 1960. Other examples are given in Edwards’ report.
  • The eggshell thinning studies cited by Carson could not be replicated and had actually reduced dietary calcium, which is needed to build egg shells, of experimental birds to get that result.
  • Museum specimens compared to wild population eggs may have led to false claims of thinning because the museums used the best specimens available; natural variability in the wild may have been interpreted as thinning.
  • DDT is not metabolized by birds and is rapidly excreted in their droppings.
  • “The whole idea that pesticides are concentrated as one moves up the food chain, which is crucial to Carson’s arguments about distant and delayed effects, has become increasingly dubious in the years that followed,” Donald Fleming quote from “Roots of the New Conservation Movement,” 1972, in “Reading Rachel Carson” by Charles T. Rubin, The New Atlantis, September 27, 2012.
  • DDT attaches to soil particles and does not migrate to ground water or streams due to this attachment and its insolubility in water.  EPA and CDC report that soil DDT has a half-life of 2 to 15 years due to sunlight and microbial action. Reports of longer persistence are probably mis-identification of other chlorinated substances by a non-specific test. Supposedly, DDT, which is not present in nature, was found in museum soil samples collected before it was even invented. Obviously, a mis-identification.
  • Note that “presence” does not imply harm as some advocacy groups claim. Before it was banned, DDT was widely used in agriculture and for open air fogging in malaria prone areas.

Aquatic life has not been harmed by DDT; it is practically insoluble in water, with only 1.2 ppb (parts per billion) at saturation.

  • A study cited by Carson claimed 500 ppb DDT in seawater inhibited photosynthesis and killed algae. The problem with this study is that alcohol was added to the tank to dissolve the DDT in the water. Alcohol alone would cause the observed effect.
  • The assumption of persistence of DDT in seawater for decades was also challenged.  Tests showed DDT and its metabolites disappeared in as few as 38 days from microbial action and other factors. 

Further reading

  1. “DDT: A Case Study in Scientific Fraud,” by J. Gordon Edwards, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Volume 9 Number 3 Fall 2004. Available online at: http://www.jpands.org/vol9no3/edwards.pdf
  2. “The Lies of Rachel Carson,” J. Gordon Edwards, 21st Century Science and Technology Magazine. Transcript of speech at 21st Century Science meeting, summer, 1992. Available online at https://21sci-tech.com/articles/summ02/Carson.html
  3. “The Truth about DDT and Silent Spring” by Robert Zubrin, adapted from Robert Zubrin’s book Merchants of Despair: Radical Environmentalists, Criminal Pseudo-Scientists, and the Fatal Cult of Antihumanism,” published in 2012, in New Atlantis Books series. Online at: www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-truth-about-ddt-and-silent-spring
  4. “Reading Rachel Carson” by Charles T. Rubin, The New Atlantis, September 27, 2012; available online at https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/reading-rachel-carson

______________________________

[1] “The global distribution and population at risk of malaria: past, present, and future,” Simon I Hay et al, Lancet Volume 4, Issue 6, p327-336, June 1, 2004, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(04)01043-6

[2] Federal Register vol. 37, no. 13, Friday, July 7, 1972. Environmental Protection Agency [I. F. & R. Docket Nos. 63, etc.] Consolidated DDT Hearings, Opinion and Order of the Administrator …William D. Ruckelshaus, June 30, 1972.

[3] Actual text from 40 CFR 164.32, Environmental Protection Agency, Consolidated DDT Hearings, Hearing Examiner’s Recommended Findings, Conclusions, and Orders, April 1972. p. 93-94; Conclusions of Law: findings are as follows: (omitted 1-8 which are about adequacy of the evidence and finding that DDT was not misbranded.) “9. DDT is not a carcinogenic hazard to man. 10. DDT is not a mutagenic or teratogenic hazard to man. 11. The uses of DDT under the registrations involved here do not have a deleterious effect on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds, or other wildlife.” (omitted 12-16 that discuss other evidence and that vacated earlier rulings of misbranding) “17. There is a present need for the continued use of DDT for the essential uses defined in this case.”   A photocopy of the original is available as a downloadable pdf file at https://www.thenewatlantis.com/docLib/20120926_SweeneyDDTdecision.pdf

[4] http://www.jpands.org/vol9no3/edwards.pdf

***********************************

If you like this post share it with your friends, and sign up to follow my blog by email at http://Savingafricafromliesthatkill.com. Thank you.

The book: Saving Africa from Lies that Kill: How Myths about the Environment and Overpopulation are Destroying Third World Countries is available in print and eBook online at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Books a Million and in bookstores. 

If you like the book, please leave a review online at Amazon.com or other outlet.

Award-Winning Finalist in the Social Change category of the 2019 International Book Awards

Read the first chapter free through Bookfunnel at www.bit.ly/savingafricachapter1

Internat’l Orgs Deny Essential Services to Control Poor Countries, Part 1

International Organizations Deny Essential Services to Control Poor Countries, Part 1.
Worldwide Need for UNFPA services – UN Population Fund at http://www.unfpa.org/data

Most people assume that trusted international leaders and nonprofit organizations would value life and want to raise the standard of living and lifespans of people in less developed cultures. This has apparently not been the case for many internationally recognized governmental and non-governmental agencies. Among the preponderance of international organizations, the focus is on reducing the population and maintaining the status quo, not on humanitarian aid or developing underdeveloped cultures.  Although this is slowly changing through various charitable organizations, most official international agencies give only enough aid and support to barely sustain the under-privileged, but not enough to raise their standard of living, develop their infrastructure or change their long range outcome.  It has repeatedly been demonstrated that raising the standard of living and health of impoverished peoples is the best way to both stabilize the population and protect the environment.

Haiti & Dominican Republic border – Effect of biomass burning vs. hydroelectric power. [1]
For those dealing with high infant and childhood mortality and struggling to feed their families, high birth rates in anticipation of those losses, and to provide farm labor for subsistence farming along with an inability and unwillingness to protect the environment are the natural consequences. Destitute people will do whatever is deemed necessary to survive, including harming the environment. You would, too.  Thus, progressive policies that keep indigenous peoples in their poverty and squalor for “cultural preservation” or to “save the planet” have the opposite effect of their stated ends of preserving the environment and improving human life.

Many international organizations propagate drastic population control measures under the radar while publicly advocating and providing (some) aid to the poor and endorsing environmental concerns. This includes governmental and nongovernmental organizations (NGO) such as UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), UNFPA (United Nations Fund for Population Activities), The World Bank, USAID (United States Agency for International Development), the Club of Rome and its many spin-offs, Worldwide Fund for Nature, formerly called World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Green Peace, Population Council, International Planned Parenthood Federation, and many others. Many of these organizations swap and share members and leaders, and cooperate to help each other toward common population control goals.

The Population Control agenda is rooted in the Eugenics movement that considered brown and black people to be inferior to the white race.  When that became unpopular, they hid this origin and emphasized the overpopulation myth and population control “for the good of the planet.”  Meanwhile they still maintaining an attitude that brown and black people are incapable of improvement and need to be taken care of and led.  This is a pernicious lie!  The present state of environmental and economic suppression and control is still a form of colonialism.  There is hope for Africa and other underdeveloped countries to become economically independent, but priorities and attitudes must change.

The Club of Rome describes itself as “a group of world citizens, sharing a common concern for the future of humanity.” Its members includes current and former heads of state, UN bureaucrats, high-level politicians and government officials, diplomats, scientists, economists and business leaders from around the globe. Ostensively a charitable organization, it really advocates for control of population in underdeveloped countries as its primary goal and attempts to influence governments through its high-level members.  In 1972 it published a report entitled The Limits to Growth. In its own words, its mission is “to act as a global catalyst for change through the identification and analysis of the crucial problems facing humanity and the communication of such problems to the most important public and private decision makers as well as to the general public.”  As such, it has been one of the primary promoters of government and NGO policies limiting reproduction in poor countries by withholding aid and loans unless strict population control measures are in place.


“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.  All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” (emphasis added)

— The Club of Rome


Although, as a part of the population control agenda, people in developed countries have been encouraged into voluntary sterilization, birth control and abortions, especially among the low income populations [2], the main focus is on targeting the poorest and most vulnerable people in underdeveloped countries.  Aid money to impoverished nations is often linked to a demand for population control quotas on mandatory (forced or coerced) sterilizations, implantation of IUDs and injected birth control chemicals for the poorest people.  This is the ugly secret hidden behind the humanitarian image projected for donations.  Their websites and other publications hide this agenda under euphemistic and colorful terms such as “family planning,” “research” and “improving the lives of the poor.”

In addition to enforced sterilization, abortion and birth control methods, other means of limiting both population and life span have been applied and are often tied to reception or denial of aid. See below for summary and more detail in Part 2 in next post; the list includes denial or failure to provide/ promote :

  • DDT for control of insect borne diseases. (80% of diseases) Aid denied unless banned. See DDT Needed Now in Underdeveloped Countries for safety information. DDT was demonized and banned for political, not scientific, reasons.
  • Power Plants except unreliable (aka green) wind and solar.  (IPCC/UN/ World Bank deny funds for all but wind and solar.)
  • Clean Water and Sanitation to reduce diseases. Some charities are trying to fix this.
  • Transportation: roads and railroads for access to markets, industry/employment and clinics
  • Modern agriculture is discouraged in favor of slash & burn subsistence (so-called “sustainable”) agriculture that causes land depletion and deforestation.
  • Access to EU markets is denied if genetically modified or high yield crops are grown
  • Industry investment outlook is poor due to high absenteeism from disease (see DDT)
  • Medicine: poor facilities and supplies, except for sterilization and birth control supplies
  • Education: failure to train in hygiene, child care, agriculture, trades and small business
  • HIV/AIDS diagnosis without confirmation as excuse for not treating TB, Malaria, etc.
  • Cultural Preservation in toto is encouraged, rather than economic development.
  • Political Unrest is allowed to persist that discourages involvement by charities, investors.
  • Anti-Colonial Propaganda is used to scare people from accepting assistance/expertise.

Of these, disease control and electrical power are the most important because they can facilitate many of the other items on the list, and kick-start the economy.  A healthy workforce and power to run industry, business, medical facilities and transportation are key to economic development. Although many African countries need foreign aid and international loans now, the goal should be to help them raise their economy to the point where they are net contributors to the world economy or at least are self sufficient.  Longterm gov’t to gov’t foreign aid props up corrupt dictators instead of developing infrastructure, encouraging investments and raising the economy.  Accountability is needed. Developing countries need Infrastructure, Investment, Education, Employment and Disease Control, not handouts that keep them dependent.

[1] Photo from WUWT, post reposted here:  How Environmental Organizations Are Destroying The Environment

[2] The population control agenda has been so successful in developed countries that for many countries birth rates are below replacement levels of 2+ children per couple.  This is becoming a problem for countries like Japan and Germany where employment quotas for even essential services are hard to fill and an aging population is dependent on the care of fewer offspring.  This will remain a problem until birth rates rise again to above replacement rates.

***********************************

If you like this post share it with your friends, and sign up to follow my blog by email at http://Savingafricafromliesthatkill.com.   Thank you.

The book: Saving Africa from Lies that Kill: How Myths about the Environment and Overpopulation are Destroying Third World Countries is available in print and eBook online at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Books a Million and in bookstores. If you like the book, please leave a review online at Amazon.com or other outlet.

Read the first chapter free through Bookfunnel at www.bit.ly/savingafricachapter1

This is the second in my Modern Mythology Series. My first book, Perverted Truth Exposed: How Progressive Philosophy has Corrupted Science was published in 2016. It is available in print and ebook, on line only, through World Net Daily store, Amazon, Books-A-Million and Barnes & Noble.  See the companion blog at www.realscienceblog.com  for related posts and pages.

Anti-humanism, Environmentalism and the Overpopulation Myth

Saving Africa from Lies that Kill – New Book to Help Solve Old Problems

Saving Africa from Lies that Kill: How Myths about the Environment and Overpopulation are Destroying Third World Countries is a new book exposing the abuses of the poor in developing countries by international organizations that keep them from developing beyond their primitive state.  These agencies include UN agencies such as UNESCO, UNFPA, WHO and IPCC; the World Bank, USAID, International Planned Parenthood, Population Council, WWF, (Worldwide Fund for Nature, formerly World Wildlife Foundation), The Club of Rome, European Union Food Safety Authority, and Green Peace.. 

Based on environmental, climate change and overpopulation myths these organizations advocate population control quotas in exchange for foreign aid, and block the improvements that could reduce infant and child mortality, reduce and treat endemic diseases, provide electricity, clean water and sanitation, roads, railroads and airports, encourage investment and generally raise their economy and standard of living. 

These myths and the actions based on them are actually long standing colonialist/ communist/ socialist agendas to control the people and stop progress. Communist propaganda falsely paints these improvements as exploitive and harmful rather than building the economy.  Often, corrupt local governments are complicit and profit from the programs, reaping most of the foreign aid dollars. Although Africa has been used as the “poster child” in my book, the same principles apply to impoverished areas in other developing countries. Here are some important facts from the book.

  •  Poverty, not overpopulation is the cause of environmental damage.  Raising the standard of living and preventing high infant mortality will allow for better stewardship of the environment and stabilize the population.
  • Modern agricultural practices would eliminate deforestation from slash and burn subsistence agriculture, which depletes the soil. 
  •  High yield crops, first introduced in the Green Revolution of the 1960s, and genetically enhanced crops (GMO) that are higher in nutrition and more disease and drought resistant have made it possible to feed everyone. The European Union has banned imports from countries that grow GMO crops so many developing countries are forced to pass up this opportunity.  Starvation and malnutrition are often linked to corrupt governments and denial of these improvements to the rural poor.
  • Medical clinics are overstocked with sterilization, abortion and contraceptive products, but often lack emergency equipment and basic medicines for malaria, intestinal worms, and other endemic diseases.
  • Energy poverty is a major problem.  Environmentalists have prevented over 200 hydroelectric dams in Africa alone.  Africa has more than enough hydroelectric capacity for the foreseeable future, but few dams have been developed. India has solved most of its energy poverty with hydroelectric power. 
  • With electricity from hydroelectric dams or fossil fuel plants, other rural development is possible including roads and railroads, irrigation of fields, purified water, sanitary waste treatment, natural gas and electricity for homes, small businesses, agriculture, hospitals and industry. 
  • Water behind dams could provide plenty or water for homes, agriculture and industry, which is contrary to the environmentalists’ water shortage myth. 
  • Climate change agreements only support solar and wind power, which are unreliable and intermittent so they can’t be used as primary power for hospitals or industry. These poor countries can’t afford to settle for such luxuries. They need reliable power now.
  • Education is the most important element for clean water, sanitation and disease prevention.  Even without electrically powered water and sewage systems, with a knowledge of  invisible microbes, people can be taught how to dig wells, filter and purify water, make and use soap, and build toilets to end open defecation and use of raw feces on fields and in streams.
  • Africans aren’t lazy; they’re anemic and weakened from malaria, parasites and diarrhea. 80% of diseases are from insects. DDT and cheap medicines could end most of this and provide a healthy work force for development. 
  • Extensive research shows that DDT is harmless to humans and the environment, but it has been demonized to prevent its use in supposedly overpopulated, underdeveloped countries by population control advocates.  See references below.

 Solutions to these problems, which are self-evident from the list above, include exposing the organizational abuses and garnering assistance from both charitable organizations and investment by private industry to build infrastructure and to educate people in hygiene, modern agriculture, mining, technology, building and mechanical trades and small business administration. Foreign aid is only a Band-Aid that can only alleviate immediate emergency needs.  Investment, along with Employment, Education, Infrastructure and Disease Control, will end this unnecessary misery.

The last chapter highlights the many ways you can help.

References:

Related post:  DDT Needed Now in Underdeveloped Countries

Edwards, J. Gordon. “DDT: A Case Study in Scientific Fraud.” Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Volume 9 Number 3 Fall 2004.  at http://www.jpands.org/vol9no3/edwards.pdf

 ********************************************

Available online and in book stores everywhere. In print and eBook through Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Books a Million.  Note: some bookstores may not have it yet, but asking for them to order it for you may help to get it on the shelves faster.

After reading the book, please remember to review it online at any of the online stores above; share it with a friend and do your part to end bad practices. Like my Facebook page. Visit my blog for more information and to sign up for email updates at https://savingafricafromliesthatkill.com/

 

 

New book to be released November; preorder now; get Kindle eBook today.

SAVING AFRICA FROM LIES THAT KILL:

HOW MYTHS ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT AND OVERPOPULATION ARE DESTROYING THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES

New book to be released November 13, 2018; preorder on Amazon now; get Kindle eBook TODAY.  My new book reveals the abuses of developing countries by international organizations, based on the overpopulation myth and false assumptions about genetic inferiority and environmental damage.  Learn how you can help to end these practices and bring these cultures into the twenty-first century. Investment, Infrastructure, Education and Employment are the answers to building these economies, improving the lives of their peoples, stabilizing the population and protecting the environment.

New book to be released November 13, 2018

Back cover:  In Saving Africa From Lies That Kill, Kay Kiser exposes the long-standing crimes committed against developing nations by the United Nations, World Bank, USAID and Planned Parenthood. Under their guise of “aid,” these organizations mire the underprivileged in isolation, poverty, sickness and ignorance.

In her book, Kiser argues:

    • Poverty, not overpopulation, causes environmental damage.  Higher standards of living and lower infant mortality can improve the environment and stabilize the population.

    • Developing nations need access to reliable electricity in order to end energy poverty. This will, in turn, provide clean water, develop transportation, and power hospitals, homes and industrial investment.

    • Africans aren’t lazy; they’re weakened from malaria, parasites and dysentery. They need insect and disease control for a healthy workforce.

    • The Green Revolution and modern agriculture can feed everyone and end deforestation. 

available in bookstores and online, in paperback or e-book November 13, 2018. Preorder on Amazon now. GET Kindle E-book today.

New book to be released November; preorder now; get Kindle today.

SAVING AFRICA FROM LIES THAT KILL:

HOW MYTHS ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT AND OVERPOPULATION ARE DESTROYING THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES

My new book reveals the abuses of developing countries by international organizations, based on the overpopulation myth and false assumptions about genetic inferiority and environmental damage.  Learn how you can help to end these practices and bring these cultures into the twenty-first century.

New book to be published in November, 2018

Back cover:  In Saving Africa From Lies That Kill, Kay Kiser exposes the long-standing crimes committed against developing nations by the United Nations, World Bank, USAID and Planned Parenthood. Under their guise of “aid,” these organizations mire the underprivileged in isolation, poverty, sickness and ignorance.

In her book, Kiser argues:

    • Poverty, not overpopulation, causes environmental damage.  Higher standards of living and lower infant mortality can improve the environment and stabilize the population.

    • Developing nations need access to reliable electricity in order to end energy poverty. This will, in turn, provide clean water, develop transportation, and power hospitals, homes and industrial investment.

    • Africans aren’t lazy; they’re weakened from malaria, parasites and dysentery. They need insect and disease control for a healthy workforce.

    • The Green Revolution and modern agriculture can feed everyone and end deforestation. 

available in bookstores and online, in paperback or e-book in November. Preorder on Amazon now.

Malaria as an effective population control tool

Population Control by Insects, Parasites, and Disease

Thomas Malthus (1798), William Vogt (1948), Paul Ehrlich (1968), and Alexander King of the Club of Rome (1990) all observed that insects in poor countries keep the population low, lifespans short, and childhood mortality high. All of them saw this as a good thing that would save the environment from damage by supposed human overpopulation. Note that the myth of overpopulation has continued since the eighteenth century to the present day among  strong population control organizations such as Planned Parenthood, Marie Stopes, UNFPA, UNESCO, Population Council, Club of Rome, and until recently USAID.

Malaria and Other Insect-Borne Diseases as Effective Tools for Population Control

Most of the diseases of poor countries are either caused, carried, or vectored by insects such as mosquitos, flies, fleas, lice, and parasitic worms, mites, and flukes, as well as contaminated water. Malaria is one of the deadliest insect-borne disease. It is the second most deadly disease in the Africa and the developing world, just behind tuberculosis. Why is malaria worse than other insect-borne diseases such as yellow fever or dengue fever? Is it because more insects carry it than any other? No, it is because it produces incomplete immune response with two outcomes: horrible, quick death or chronic recurrent bouts with severe anemia, organ and tissue damage. Because of incomplete immune response, protection from a previous infection is temporary, making reinfection possible. The malaria parasite is most effective if it does not kill the host outright, but rather keeps the host alive but badly compromised. It is difficult to control because it goes through two types of hosts, one of which has an aquatic life cycle phase and one of which can carry it for life unless treated.

Other insect-borne diseases present similar problems with control and eradication. These diseases further erode the suitability of the people for work that could raise them from abject poverty to a higher standard of living. In addition to insect-borne diseases, contaminated water is a major source of infection and disease, especially dysentery, amoebic dysentery, diarrhea, cholera, typhoid, polio, and giardia, which kill many infants and children before their fifth birthday. From all of this, it is evident that medical facilities, hygiene education, proper waste disposal, clean water, and insect eradication are critical to reducing and treating diseases and maintaining a healthy, strong workforce.

We are all familiar with the mosquito as a vector and/or carrier of malaria, yellow fever, dengue fever, chikungunya, zika, and various encephalitis types. What is sometimes forgotten or overlooked is the huge contribution by flies that carry and spread major diseases. As a specific disease, tuberculosis (TB) is the top killer in these countries; the second is malaria; additionally, the many diarrheal diseases from contaminated water are the top killers of infants and children under five. Tuberculosis is often carried by flies from feces or sputum of infected people to infect healthy children. Flies can spread many other serious diseases. Worms can cause diseases and are prevalent in poor countries, including hookworm, pin worm, round worm, tape worm, whip worm, and liver fluke. For example, hookworms can be acquired through bare feet on infected soil. Pin worm eggs are so tiny they can be inhaled or ingested in dust.  From there most of these worms make their way to the gut where they sap the strength of the host while laying eggs that leave the body through the anus and drop to the ground to infect the next host. Using raw human waste to fertilize crops adds to this menace so hygiene such as proper toilets and clean water are critical as well as shoes to prevent worms.

Since malaria is a major insect-vectored[1] disease, it deserves a closer look. The transmission of malaria is far from simple, with several points where the cycle can be stopped. It is not communicable from person to person because part of its life cycle requires a mosquito vector. Mosquitos aren’t born infected. They must acquire the parasite from an infected human. No infected humans means no malaria infected mosquitos. It takes days to weeks for a mosquito that picked up the parasite from an infected person to transmit it to a healthy person. This is called the incubation period. After the incubation period, it can bite more than one human, but this is limited by the amount of blood it can consume. The lifespan of a mosquito is about the same as the incubation period, so time can be used to defeat it. Let’s look at the stages of its life cycle to identify key points when the cycle can be interrupted.

Life Cycle of Mosquito and Malaria Parasite
The Life Cycle of Malaria and the Mosquito

(points to stop the cycle are marked with an asterisk)

  1. An uninfected female Anopheles mosquito emerges from the surface of standing water. *(You can kill the mosquito by emptying standing water or spreading a thin film of oil on the water to kill larvae.)
  2. It then bites a symptomatic person infected by the malaria protozoan and acquires the malaria gametocyte stage from their blood. *(protect and treat symptomatic humans; kill mosquitos)
  3. Gametocytes move to the mosquito’s mid gut.
  4. In twleve days the gametocytes mature and sexually reproduce, forming the sporozoite stage. *(kill mosquitos during this time)
  5. Sporozoites move to the mosquito’s salivary glands.
  6. Mosquito bites an uninfected human and transfers sporozoites to their blood. *(Protect humans; kill mosquitos.)
  7. Sporozoites migrate to the liver and infect it.
  8. In ten days sporozoites sexually reproduce to form the merozoite stage.
  9. Merozoites re-enter the bloodstream and infect red blood cells.
  10. Red blood cells are killed as the merozoites use the hemoglobin to asexually reproduce forming the gametocyte stage.
  11. The red blood cell bursts releasing gametocytes and merozoites, which can form more gametocytes inside other red blood cells.
  12. Person suffers fever, shakes, pain and debilitating weakness. *(Protect symptomatic humans; give anti-malaria drugs as early as possible.)
  13. Gametocytes infect other tissues of the body causing damage to kidneys, liver, heart, brain, and other organs.
  14. If malaria species is Plasmodium falciparum (the most prevalent type), red blood cells become sticky, may clump, cause clots, and block arteries, causing stroke or heart attack.
  15. If the infected person dies, the cycle ends. If the infected person lives, only incomplete immunity is acquired so repeated infections are possible.
  16. Anti-malaria drugs can kill the infection and cure the disease if caught early before permanent damage occurs.
  17. Each bout with malaria, Plasmodium falciparum, destroys red blood cells equivalent to a pint of blood, leaving the person chronically anemic, weakened and possibly with permanent kidney or liver damage. Cerebral malaria can kill in as little as one day after symptoms appear.
  18. A newly hatched female Anopheles mosquito bites the infected person and acquires gametocytes. *(Protect symptomatic humans; kill mosquitos)
  19. The cycle repeats. See number 2 above.
  20. Meanwhile, using the blood ingested, the original mosquito mates and lays eggs on the surface of standing water. Anopheles mosquitos lay single eggs, not rafts like Aedes species. *(Cover or drain standing water; apply oil to water surface; kill mosquitos.)
  21. Malaria is not transferred to the eggs so that eggs, larvae, and emerging adults are free of infection. *(Cover or drain standing water; apply oil to water surface.)
  22. In forty-eight hours, the eggs hatch and sink to the bottom to feed but must come to lie on the surface to breathe. (Anopheles do not have siphons like Aedes species) *(Cover or drain standing water; apply oil to water surface.)
  23. Larvae eat microscopic organisms and may be eaten by predators such as frogs, fish, and the like.[2] *(Raise fish in standing water ponds or streams.)
  24. Larvae molt four times and pupate on the fourth molt.
  25. Pupae lie on the surface, don’t eat but respond to light, move, and can sink to the bottom to avoid predators.
  26. In two to four days, a new adult emerges from the surface of the water. *(Kill mosquitos.) Cycle repeats. See number 1 above.
  27. Life cycle of an adult mosquito is typically seven to ten days but may be as much as thirty days.

 

The Bad News
  1. Malaria infection does not result in complete immunity to malaria, so reinfection is possible.
  2. Malaria parasite is a protozoan called a Plasmodium, not a bacterium or virus so developing a vaccine, if possible, has been an elusive goal.
  3. Relapse of malaria from dormant Plasmodia within a victim can occur over months or years.
  4. Each bout destroys red blood cells equivalent to a pint of blood, resulting in severe anemia.
  5. Malaria can travel to many areas of the body and cause kidney or liver damage, heart attacks, or strokes from clots.
  6. Cerebral malaria can cause death in a matter of hours.

 

The Good News
  1. Mosquitos are born clean – they don’t pass on the disease through their eggs to offspring.
  2. Mosquito eggs, larvae, and pupae must breathe air at the water surface and live in the water for five to fourteen days to adulthood. They may be eaten by fish, birds, amphibians, insect larvae, among other things. Water may drain or dry up. Cover water containers to prevent egg laying. Drain standing water every four days.
  3. Malaria is species specific. Human malaria is only acquired from other humans, not animals. Animal malaria species aren’t transferable to humans. One exception is human cases of Plasmodium knowlesi, which is a monkey malaria found in Southeast Asia.
  4. Adult mosquitos, on average, live only one to two weeks, but sometimes up to four weeks.
  5. Mosquitos acquire gametophyte stage from infected humans, which converts into sporozoite stage in five to ten days before infection of other humans is possible.
  6. Person-to-person transmission is not possible, but one sporozoite infected mosquito may infect more than one human at the same time.
  7. Mosquitos bite humans and pass sporozoites, which go to the liver to convert to merozoites in ten days.
  8. Merozoites infect red blood cells and produce multiple gametophytes in ten to thirty days.
  9. A second clean mosquito bites and picks up gametophytes. The cycle repeats.

 

Malaria Eradication and Prevention Plan

    • Spray interior walls of homes with DDT. This not only kills mosquitos but is a deterrent to mosquitos entering the area.
    • Close houses with screens over windows, doors, roof vents, floor gaps to prevent insect entry (preferably wire screens, but netting similar to bed nets can be used on windows, doors and roof vents, etc., but must be checked regularly for holes.)
    • Metal or tile roofs with covered roof vents are preferable to thatch, in which mosquitos can hide.
    • Use bed nets treated with insecticides.
    • Use DEET insect repellant when outdoors.
    • Cover or drain standing water at least every four days.
    • Protect infected people from mosquito bites.
  • Mass administration of anti-malaria drugs for an entire village at once with insect control can end the cycle. (No infected humans means no infected mosquitos.)
  • The aim is to eliminate infected human hosts, not the entire mosquito population, which is much more difficult or impossible.

[1] Vector means the disease/parasite must spend part of its life cycle developing inside the insect before being passed on to complete its lifecycle inside a human or animal.

[2] Larvae of dragonflies, Dobson flies and elephant mosquitoes (mosquito eaters), diving beetles (water tigers), and the water scavenger beetles are among insect predators that eat mosquito larvae. Dragonflies are predatory as both larvae in water and as adults. Dobson fly larvae in water are often called hellgrammites and are predatory. Mosquito eaters look like mosquitoes but are much larger than those that attack humans and animals. Most of them are harmless because the adults only feed on other insects, as well as plant nectar and similar materials.

References:

[1] Robert S. Desowitz, 1991, Malaria Capers, More Tales of Parasites and People, Research and Reality,

[2] E. J. L. Soulsby and William R. Harvey, “Disease Transmission by Arthropods,” Science 176, no. 4039 (1972): 1153–1155.

[3] See earlier blog DDT Needed Now in Underdeveloped Countries

*************************************************************

If you like this post share it with your friends, and sign up to follow this blog by email. Thank you.

The book: Saving Africa from Lies that Kill: How Myths about the Environment and Overpopulation are Destroying Third World Countries will be published in October, 2018. Print and e-book will be available online and in bookstores.

My first book, Perverted Truth Exposed: How Progressive Philosophy has Corrupted Science was published in 2016. It is available in print and e-book, on line only, through World Net Daily store, Amazon, Books-A-Million and Barnes & Noble.  See the companion blog at www.realscienceblog.com  for related posts and pages.

 

Overpopulation Myth: Control Quotas for Foreign Aid

Population Control Quotas and Aid Denial

Recent Statistics and Mass Sterilization Clinic in India (most are not this nice)

The overpopulation myth that was started by Thomas Malthus in the eighteenth century was and is still promoted by powerful advocates and organizations to the present day. Although overpopulation was not true then and is not true today, it has been used to justify inhumane treatment of people in poor nations in the form of quotas on forced sterilizations and other involuntary population control measures as a condition for receiving foreign aid, including needed food aid during famines. In reality, it should be called elimination of the poor, since only the poor are targeted. Poverty, not overpopulation, is the problem, and that can be remedied by education, investment and job opportunities along with disease control, proper medical care, electricity and roads.

Here are a few important quotes from some of the promoters of this anti-human population control ideology.

In The Population Bomb, Paul Ehrlich said,

“A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people … we must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions.”[1]

In a New York Times article, Ehrlich is quoted as saying “. . . A possibility that the government might have to put sterility drugs in reservoirs and in food shipped to foreign countries to limit human multiplication.” was envisioned today by a leading crusader on the population problem.[2]

Maurice Strong, founder and first director of UN Environment Programme (UNEP), co-founder of WWF, Secretary-General of the UN Conference on Human Environment in Stockholm (1972), the Rio Sustainable Development Summit (1992) and ex World Bank advisor, is quoted as saying, “Licenses to have babies incidentally is something that got in trouble some years ago for suggesting even in Canada that this might be necessary at some point, at least some restriction on the right to have a child.”[3]

He also said “Frankly, we may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse. Isn’t it our responsibility to bring it about?”[4]

Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, is quoted as saying “In the event that I am reborn, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.“[5]

Jacques Cousteau is quoted as saying, “World population must be stabilized and to do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day.”[6]

POPULATION CONTROL IN INDIA

Total fertility Rate:1970 5.5
Total fertilityRate:2015 2.5
Population growth rate 1.2%
Women sterilized: total 30%
Women sterilized: married 37%
Women sterilized: unmarried, sexually active 48%
Women sterilized: informed about other contraceptive methods 28%
Women sterilized: informed procedure was permanent 66%
Men sterilized 1%
Sex-ratio at birth (males: females) 112:100

Source: Data compiled from the UN Population Division and the Demographic and Health Survey. Population Research Institute at www.pop.org 

Sterilization Camp in India

 

 

 

 

[1] Paul Ehrlich, 1968

[2] Gladwin Hillspecial, “A Sterility Drug In Food Is Hinted; Biologist Stresses Need To Curb Population Growth,” New York Times, November 24, 1969, https://www.nytimes.com/1969/11/25/archives/a-sterility-drug-in-food-is-hinted-biologist-stresses-need-to-curb.html. See also Paul Ehrlich and John Holdren, Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment (New York: W.H. Freeman & Co, 1977).

[3] Maurice Strong, occasion uncertain, but widely quoted.

[4] Maurice Strong, in opening remarks, UN Sustainable Development Summit, Rio de Janeiro, 1992.

[5] Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh of England, 1988, from Cawthorne, Nigel, 2015, I know I am rude, but it’s Fun: The Royal Family and the World at Large – as Seen by Prince Philip

[6] Cousteau, Jacques, “Interview with Jacques-Yves Cousteau,” The UNESCO Courier, November 1991, 13.

Draconian Climate Change Policies Making World Hunger Worse

DRACONIAN Climate Change Policies Making World Hunger Worse

Climatism

World Hunger UN Climate policyClimate policies are diverting resources from measures that directly reduce hunger, which according to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation is on the rise. | The Australian

ANTHROPOGENIC “climate change” and the control of carbon dioxide, via the supply of energy, has deep roots in a radical yet gravely misguided campaign to reduce the world’s population.

A misanthropic agenda engineered by the environmental movement in the mid 1970’s, who realised that doing something about “global warming” would play to quite a number of its social agendas.

THE goal was advanced, most notably, by The Club Of Rome (Environmental think-tank and consultants to the UN) – a group of mainly European scientists and academics, who used computer modelling to warn that the world would run out of finite resources if population growth were left unchecked.

The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, 

View original post 1,207 more words