"we still know beyond any shadow of a doubt that there's too gottdayyum many of you humans swarming over the face of earth - proliferating like an insatiable plague of roaches in a lower east-side tenement apartment.....," CNu
Saturday, August 08, 2009
[Malthusian Conspiracy Theory Fundamentalism]
"we still know beyond any shadow of a doubt that there's too gottdayyum many of you humans swarming over the face of earth - proliferating like an insatiable plague of roaches in a lower east-side tenement apartment.....," CNu
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Americans waste more natural resources than any other people in the history of the world. Although we are the same animal that evolved to need three or four thousand calories a day, the average American uses over 200,000 calories of total energy a day!!!
Limits to Growth.
Last year the skyrocketing cost of food was a wake-up call for the planet. Between 2005 and the summer of 2008, the price of wheat and corn tripled, and the price of rice climbed fivefold, spurring food riots in nearly two dozen countries and pushing 75 million more people into poverty. But unlike previous shocks driven by short-term food shortages, this price spike came in a year when the world's farmers reaped a record grain crop. This time, the high prices were a symptom of a larger problem tugging at the strands of our worldwide food web, one that's not going away anytime soon. Simply put: For most of the past decade, the world has been consuming more food than it has been producing. After years of drawing down stockpiles, in 2007 the world saw global carryover stocks fall to 61 days of global consumption, the second lowest on record.
"Agricultural productivity growth is only one to two percent a year," warned Joachim von Braun, director general of the International Food Policy Research Institute in Washington, D.C., at the height of the crisis. "This is too low to meet population growth and increased demand."
High prices are the ultimate signal that demand is outstripping supply, that there is simply not enough food to go around. Such agflation hits the poorest billion people on the planet the hardest, since they typically spend 50 to 70 percent of their income on food. Even though prices have fallen with the imploding world economy, they are still near record highs, and the underlying problems of low stockpiles, rising population, and flattening yield growth remain. Climate change—with its hotter growing seasons and increasing water scarcity—is projected to reduce future harvests in much of the world, raising the specter of what some scientists are now calling a perpetual food crisis.
So what is a hot, crowded, and hungry world to do?
Craig, your comments are always written from the standpoint of someone who is utterly divorced from humanity and reality for that matter. I love the way the libnazis tell people to do things that they don't even do.
You've sired children yet rail on others for doing so. You liken humanity to roaches in a nasty tenement. Has not your brood added to the problem of excess consumption of resources and overpopulation?
Why didn't you have your wife terminate your so called blobs of cells before they were born to cut back on carbon emissions? Why didn't you terminate them before the age of seven since, after all they have no soul until then, according to you?
From your ramblings, it is apparent that you are completely devoted to an elitist, untenable and destructive school of thought whose architects could give a good damn about you and your family.
When things get worse and the elites decide to do a massive population culling, what makes you think you'd be immune?
You hold allegiance to oppressors and laugh at those who question your tired paradigms but it is clear that the joke is actually on you.
'Sup
The relationship between population, resources and environment is extremely complex and political. From a Marxist perspective its more a question of the distribution of resources and use of resources than it being a question of population. The disproportionate carbon footprint between the lesser populated areas more technologically advanced areas of the world versus the more populated, less technologically developed regions of the world is what neo-Malthusian enthusiasts should be focussing on rather than advancing population culling methods and disseminating kooky research like the NY Times article in DV's previous post.
In places like Europe where an ageing population and negative growth rates have not inhibited rates of consumption. China at 1.3 billion plus, presents a different scenario but still raises questions of how resources are consumed. In the link CNu posted, the grain and soya beans imported from the US and Brazil by China is used to fatten up pigs. The world needs a paradigm shift in agrarian production and consumption: cut out the pig, its unsustainable.
Given the incredible technological advances the world has made in just the last 50 or even 25 years, it seems ridiculous to assume that carbon production/wasteful consumption is so intractable that the best way to address it is for people to limit their reproduction; when the real culprit is depletion and wasteful of consumption of resources by the few.
peace
Craig, your comments are always written from the standpoint of someone who is utterly divorced from humanity and reality for that matter. I love the way the libnazis tell people to do things that they don't even do.
Mahndisa, you're hearing little voices in your head once again.
Those voices are telling you things that you couldn't pinpoint in my comments if your life depended on it.
You've sired children yet rail on others for doing so.
Only on Nadia Suleman and only because she's demonstrably nuttier than you and fully expected other people to shoulder responsibilty for her contranatural brood.
You liken humanity to roaches in a nasty tenement.
Not humanity. I very plainly wrote "you" humans.
Has not your brood added to the problem of excess consumption of resources and overpopulation?
No.
My little fremen warriors are as efficient as they are intelligent, attractive and productive.
Why didn't you have your wife terminate your so called blobs of cells before they were born to cut back on carbon emissions? Why didn't you terminate them before the age of seven since, after all they have no soul until then, according to you?
Because we both wanted them.
We've paid for them.
We make exceptionally high investment in them.
They will thrive.
From your ramblings, it is apparent that you are completely devoted to an elitist, untenable and destructive school of thought whose architects could give a good damn about you and your family.
Laissez le bon temps roulez....,
When things get worse and the elites decide to do a massive population culling, what makes you think you'd be immune?
Years of careful planning and preparation.
You hold allegiance to oppressors and laugh at those who question your tired paradigms but it is clear that the joke is actually on you.
I laugh at you because you've demonstrated an exceptional committment to clowning and little else of value.
Has your functioning always been this impaired, or, is the deplorable state of your judgement an artifact of the haloperidol?
Plain and simple--the world's greedy people have to be brought under control.
Given the incredible technological advances the world has made in just the last 50 or even 25 years, it seems ridiculous to assume that carbon production/wasteful consumption is so intractable
This is classic Friedmanism. (spoofing NYTimes blowhard Thomas Friedman who prolifically churns out optimistic verbiage signifying absolutely nothing)
All of the advances of western industrial civilization have depended on the singular energy densities available first from coal and then oil.
The so-called "green revolution" in agriculture is nothing so much as the use of massive petroleum-based inputs to artificially drive up food production at catastrophic cost to soil, and to the environment.
The inescapable bottom-line here KW, is that the evident signs of economic collapse and all that will follow, are the highly predictable results of our technologically inescapable dependency on fossil fuels.
The massive social and political reeingeering process you've pointed toward as necessary to extract swine and cattle out of the human food cycle is not going to happen.
Rather, a massive world war involving nearly every kind of weapon that humans have thus far devised will almost certainly happen and the result of that massive world war will be a greatly reduced human population and a further devastated ecology.
However, judging from the way in which Chernobyl bounced back, optimism should be high because nature is miraculously resilient and the ravaging effects of the human swarm (once removed) are not very long-lasting after all.
Plain and simple--the world's greedy people have to be brought under control.
rotflmbao....,
like in Zimbabwe right?
No! Like in the need for a global revolution which overturns these corrupt systems.
the proprietors of these corrupt systems control a vast arsenal of hydrogen bombs - the ultimate instrumentality of tyranny and trump card as against any such revolution, either global or local....,
You are a liar and a hypocrite Craig. You are blatantly justifying your Malthusian bullshit and trying to make a joke at my expense. This infantile behavior should not surprise me. No, I don't hear voices in my head. YOU write shit that is so far off base and foul that you cannot even defend it when asked to do so.
Again, if Americans are such consumers of resources and humans breed like roaches, why did you allow your wife to have your globs of cells? You are a sicko and a sociopath and the inconsistent voices in your head have caused you to split your brain in twain over the ridiculousness of your assertions.
Mahndisa, from the very moment you elected to support Nadia Suleman, throw in your lot with bibtard anti-abortionists, and falsely accuse me of Malthusian motives - you've been a worthless joke in my book.
Since it's you who've actively made claims with regard to my world view - it should be a fairly trivial exercise for you to prove yourself correct and show me a liar and hypocrite.
The fact that you haven't managed to do so in the course of the past several months - seriously calls into question the factual accuracy of your claims and your ability to support any of what you write.
Either put up, shut up, or simply admit that you're a reactionary lunatic prone to extremes of perception and judgement brought on by exposure to injurious anti-psychotic "medication".
Hey CNu
Yes I'm a card-carrying global optimist; but your drastic measures to solve the world population problems make you sound like the Grinch who killed humanity to save the planet.
Chernobyl had disastrous consequences for its residents and the neighbouring Ukraine and Belarus; its not a test model. The costs of saving the planet far outweighs the skewed benefit you forsee. Just outta interest if you cld choose places to target where wld your nuclear missiles be aimed and why?
I'm all for saving the planet, but I don't agree with your methods - which apart from their controversial nature, are measures that can and will be done by those who are in posession of weapons of mass destruction. These are the same people/institutions who consume the most of the world's resources. Its simply killing off of millions so the greedy minority can continue to freely consume without their eco-conscience angel gnawing at their ear.
The alternative is to aggressively curb consumption; because culling is not an option. Abortion, AIDS, contraception and civil wars and migration as radical decreasers in population bec replacement rates have been higher, much to the dissappointment of radical neo-Malthusianites & Paul Ehlrich followers.
I don't co-sign on all of Friedman's quasi-religious belief in energy technology and I'm cautious of his uncritical praise of globalization, but he makes a fair point. And there's no reason not to believe more sustainable survival methods cannot be found.
My perspective is more on looking at how new farming technologies have improved output in communities in Zambia and Ethiopia; and the fact that 60% of sub Saharan Africa depends on agriculture for their livelihood and income; a Continental green revolution is essential.
"The inescapable bottom-line here KW, is that the evident signs of economic collapse and all that will follow, are the highly predictable results of our technologically inescapable dependency on fossil fuels."...Agreed but reduction of dependency is imperative.
one
Gee Craig, your comments themselves show you to be a sociopath that advocates legalized murder to accomplish your malthusian goals. If any reasonable person cannot see that from reading your garbage laden comments, then they are blind. Even Konwomyn says that your methods are extreme and ill advised. Sicko.
Your favorite critical thinking error is something called shifting the burden of proof. You make an assenine comment, are called on it, and then tell the person criticizing you that they haven't provided proof that you are a nutjob.
Well, your comment above is sufficient to show that you are an elitist who feels that it is okay for him to breed and have children, but that it is not okay for others to do so. Likening humans to roaches in a tenament due to their breeding practices is what you did above.
Secondly, you have claimed to be an anarcho libertarian yet advocate that Nadya Suleman be sterilized by the government. You talk about your wife and kids, yet say that a human doesn't have a soul until they are seven. You have called babies in utero blobs of cells yet never answered the question about why you allowed your wife to bring these ultra consuming blobs of cells into the world.
Your worldview is dangerous and basically reeks of a zealot for a pernicious religion called human hating nihilism.
I am not a lunatic at all. But you clearly are imbalanced. Perhaps you ought to get a refill on your antipsychotics asshole.
Gee Craig, your comments themselves show you to be a sociopath that advocates legalized murder to accomplish your malthusian goals.
Malthusianism has no goals, it's simple observation of fact. Human population, he observed, increases at a geometric rate, doubling about every 25 years if unchecked, while agricultural production increases arithmetically—much more slowly. Therein lay a biological trap that humanity could never escape.
"The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man," he wrote in his Essay on the Principle of Population in 1798. "This implies a strong and constantly operating check on population from the difficulty of subsistence."
If any reasonable person cannot see that from reading your garbage laden comments, then they are blind. Even Konwomyn says that your methods are extreme and ill advised. Sicko.
To which "methods" do you refer?
Your favorite critical thinking error is something called shifting the burden of proof. You make an assenine comment, are called on it, and then tell the person criticizing you that they haven't provided proof that you are a nutjob.
Well, your comment above is sufficient to show that you are an elitist who feels that it is okay for him to breed and have children, but that it is not okay for others to do so. Likening humans to roaches in a tenament due to their breeding practices is what you did above.
I don't make thinking errors.
I did make a simple statement of fact; "we still know beyond any shadow of a doubt that there's too gottdayyum many of you humans swarming over the face of earth - proliferating like an insatiable plague of roaches in a lower east-side tenement apartment.....,"
which you are more than welcome to disprove - if you're able.
Secondly, you have claimed to be an anarcho libertarian yet advocate that Nadya Suleman be sterilized by the government.
anarcho-capitalist.
Nadya Suleman is a moral atrocity who certainly should have been sterilized rather than aided and abetted in her narcissistic madness.
You talk about your wife and kids, yet say that a human doesn't have a soul until they are seven.
How is the former inconsistent with the latter?
You have called babies in utero blobs of cells yet never answered the question about why you allowed your wife to bring these ultra consuming blobs of cells into the world.
Allowed?
Nah.
Aided and abetted.
Your worldview is dangerous and basically reeks of a zealot for a pernicious religion called human hating nihilism.
Nah.
You haven't the slightest clue.
Beyond the fact that you know I'm pro-abortion, find Nadya Suleman abominable, and consider you damaged goods - you know nothing about my world view.
I am not a lunatic at all.
You did however name your child after an anti-psychotic.
It.just.doesn't.get.any.loonier.than.that!!
But you clearly are imbalanced.
No Mahndisa.
I.just.don't.like.you.
Big difference.
Craig, I don't like you either. I think you are an atrocity who takes up too much space. But you are the inconsistent one. Talking about humans like roaches, then telling me to disprove it... If that ain't the stupidest shit I've ever heard! Next you talking anarcho libertarianism and haven't the slightest clue as to what that means, asshole, talking about the octomom should have been sterilized goes against the principles of libertarianism in entirety, asshole.
I didn't name my child after an antipsychotic retard. I've never heard of an antipsychotic with my son's name. But notice how this is the only thing you have left to grab. You talk about humans reproducing but have contributed multiple resource depleting humans to the planet simply because you believe in do as you say and not as you do. You are a liar and a hypocrite.
I don't have to prove anything to you. Your loony notions of what constitutes life have showed the blog world this already.
All you have left is big words, straw mans and shifting burdens of proof because your lack of analysis is obvious.
But what really reeks of your insanity is your behavior after that abortion doctor was killed. You advocated that me and those like me get killed simply because we are anti elective abortion.
leave you with a couple of your assinine quotes.
Blogger CNu said...
About three hours ago, one of your knuckledragging domestic-terrorist co-religionists shot my parent's close friend Dr. George Tiller to death in the church that I grew up in.
That perfectly exemplifies why you irrational throwbacks need to be rounded up and dealt with in the harshest possible manner.
5/31/2009 11:12 AM
Blogger CNu said...
blah, blah, blah...,
I just want you throwbacks dealt with, period.
ASAP and as harshly as possible.
5/31/2009 1:33 PM
Blogger CNu said...
long overdue time for the DOJ to make some more Waco style examples.....,
5/31/2009 1:48 PM
CNu said...
ban me.
until then, I'll ridicule you and your retarded domestic terrorist confederates to my hearts content.
5/31/2009 3:23 PM
Now who looks imbalanced and in need of psych meds asshole?
I didn't name my child after an antipsychotic retard. I've never heard of an antipsychotic with my son's name
Really?
Really?
But what really reeks of your insanity is your behavior after that abortion doctor was killed. You advocated that me and those like me get killed simply because we are anti elective abortion.
Really?
Because what you quoted me as writing advocates that doctor murdering retards and those who advocate on their behalf be dealt with legally in the harshest possible manner.
It's on record in this thread that you're virtually incapable of faithfully distinguishing between the clearly written "anarcho-capitalist" which I claim and the "anarcho-libertarian" chindribble which you projectively asserted for me.
If you think otherwise, I strongly encourage you to report it to the authorities.
For my part, I certainly don't plan to rest until as many of you as possible are brought to your just deserts....,
Post a Comment