Coronainsanity

[byco42]

Sure, but he'll never have the impact of Bezos or Gates or Zuckerberg. The academic system does a fair job of minimizing the impact of loonies. Not perfect, but relatively speaking, not the place to place my concerns.

He’s trained 21 professors, by his count. And were the guy a loonie who advocated only the limiting the population of “poor” nations, would you then be concerned?

What about someone with his CV that wants to loose airborne Ebola on the word to kill 90 percent of the world’s population? link

“Meanwhile, I still can’t get out of my mind the pleasant spring day in Texas when a few hundred scientists of the Texas Academy of Science gave a standing ovation for a speaker who they heard advocate for the slow and torturous death of over five billion human beings. …”

 

[Gulo Blue]

He?s trained 21 professors, by his count. And were the guy a loonie who advocated only the limiting the population of ?poor? nations, would you then be concerned?

What about someone with his CV that wants to loose airborne Ebola on the word to kill 90 percent of the world?s population? link

?Meanwhile, I still can?t get out of my mind the pleasant spring day in Texas when a few hundred scientists of the Texas Academy of Science gave a standing ovation for a speaker who they heard advocate for the slow and torturous death of over five billion human beings. ??

That's not the danger we face. We are in no danger of population control methods proposed by researchers wiping out large parts of the human race. We are in very real danger of climate change driven shifts or possibly reductions in the global food and water supplies driving mass migration of desperate suffering people.

 

[byco42]

That's not the danger we face. We are in no danger of population control methods proposed by researchers wiping out large parts of the human race. We are in very real danger of climate change driven shifts or possibly reductions in the global food and water supplies driving mass migration of desperate suffering people.

Guys like this UT prof insist that overpopulation is the cause of the concerns you say we should be concerned about.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Guys like this UT prof insist that overpopulation is the cause of the concerns you say we should be concerned about.

That's why I brought it up. It's like the house is on fire and we're not sure how much of it can be saved. Some people might suggest getting all of the oxygen out of the house to stop the fire. We probably shouldn't waste too much time worrying about those plans and we definitely shouldn't point to them as a reason to ignore talk of putting the fire out.

 

[byco42]

That's why I brought it up. It's like the house is on fire and we're not sure how much of it can be saved. Some people might suggest getting all of the oxygen out of the house to stop the fire. We probably shouldn't waste too much time worrying about those plans and we definitely shouldn't point to them as a reason to ignore talk of putting the fire out.

My point (and his) is that he believes that the only, effective,?natural? solution to saving the ecosystem is to virtually eliminate the human population as quickly as possible.

And this guy is revered at UT.

 

[mhughes0021]

That's not the danger we face. We are in no danger of population control methods proposed by researchers wiping out large parts of the human race. We are in very real danger of climate change driven shifts or possibly reductions in the global food and water supplies driving mass migration of desperate suffering people.

Maybe im pulling a trump here and trying to over simplify things....but if the climate change is driven by too much C02 in the atmosphere why dont they just create something to get rid of it? I literally just saw a report this week that they are taking a machine to fucking Mars to have the rover convert C02 into oxygen. For fucks sake why are we doing this to a different planet if we need to do it here on a massive scale? I admit, im ignorant to this kind of science and im fully expecting a similar response Trump got when he asked "why dont you just spray lysol into people lungs"...but if were doing it on other planets im not understanding why its not being done here.

 

[tinselwolverine]

My point (and his) is that he believes that the only, effective,?natural? solution to saving the ecosystem is to virtually eliminate the human population as quickly as possible.

I?m not sure what effect that would have on my golf game.

 

[Spartanmack]

Sure, but he'll never have the impact of Bezos or Gates or Zuckerberg. The academic system does a fair job of minimizing the impact of loonies. Not perfect, but relatively speaking, not the place to place my concerns.

which is why we don't have any crackpot theories coming out of academia - because they do a fair job of minimizing the impact of loonies which is why we don't have academics saying gender is social construct, not biological and that there are unlimited genders, man is causing catastrophic climate change, America is built on and exists because of white supremacy, we should be able to kill children up to 2 years old, etc, etc. All the loonies that would push stuff like that are weeded out. It's all Bezos, Gates and Zuckerberg's fault.

 

[mhughes0021]

My point (and his) is that he believes that the only, effective,?natural? solution to saving the ecosystem is to virtually eliminate the human population as quickly as possible.

And this guy is revered at UT.

The Thanos solution. Works everytime. Until 5 years later when an Ant-man comes out of the quantum world and helps everyone go back in time to make everyone reappear. Super heroes...fucking up the planet since 1940.

 

[byco42]

I?m not sure what effect that would have on my golf game.

You would make the PGA Tour with ease.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Maybe im pulling a trump here and trying to over simplify things....but if the climate change is driven by too much C02 in the atmosphere why dont they just create something to get rid of it? I literally just saw a report this week that they are taking a machine to fucking Mars to have the rover convert C02 into oxygen. For fucks sake why are we doing this to a different planet if we need to do it here on a massive scale? I admit, im ignorant to this kind of science and im fully expecting a similar response Trump got when he asked "why dont you just spray lysol into people lungs"...but if were doing it on other planets im not understanding why its not being done here.

The problem is how massive that scale would be. Taking it out takes something on the order of the same amount of energy as it took to put it into the air (I would think, I'm guessing. We don't have to return the CO2 to a high energy state, but we do have to sort it out of the atmosphere). All the fossil fuel we've burned over the past 50-100 years...if we could just double the size of all industry on earth with half of it pulling CO2 from the air, something on that scale should get us to even (the new CO2 capture half = to the existing industry.) So then from there we could start making progress, like if our CO2 capture industry is twice as big as all existing industry, then we'll turn things back in a couple decades.


I hope there's some technological leap that would improve things by a factor of ten or 100, but even then you are talking about a massive, massive undertaking. Bigger than anything ever done before.

 

[tinselwolverine]

You would make the PGA Tour with ease.

Well, I guess every cloud really does have a silver lining, as they say.

 

[Spartanmack]

Well, I guess every cloud really does have a silver lining, as they say.

I can only imagine how depressed Michelle Obama would be over this.

 

[Gulo Blue]

My point (and his) is that he believes that the only, effective,?natural? solution to saving the ecosystem is to virtually eliminate the human population as quickly as possible.

And this guy is revered at UT.

My point is he isn't going to have the power to do that. Ever. But we do have real problems where people at universities offer out best shot at dealing with them. So focusing on this, drawing more attention to him, putting more links to him on the internet for google to use in their ranking algorithms, isn't just a waste, it's counterproductive.

 

[Gulo Blue]

In case it needs to be said, I'm not agreeing with the stuff I haven't fact checked about how murderous all these researchers are. I am skeptical that there was a standing ovation for the tortuous murder of 5 billion.

 

[byco42]

My point is he isn't going to have the power to do that. Ever. But we do have real problems where people at universities offer out best shot at dealing with them. So focusing on this, drawing more attention to him, putting more links to him on the internet for google to use in their ranking algorithms, isn't just a waste, it's counterproductive.

I don?t believe that my three links is going to move the needle much.

So, we?ll just stick to the tried-and-true methods of forced sterilization and abortion. Fail Safe. Most of the time.

 

[byco42]

In case it needs to be said, I'm not agreeing with the stuff I haven't fact checked about how murderous all these researchers are. I am skeptical that there was a standing ovation for the tortuous murder of 5 billion.

Hey, I?d be glad to look into it further, but I don?t want Google to have to move this professor up in its search rankings.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Hey, I?d be glad to look into it further, but I don?t want Google to have to move this professor up in its search rankings.

If you insist that's a no-spin fair read on what happened, I'll look into it, but I'm just not cynical enough (or too naive) to believe that's how that went down.


"standing ovation for a speaker who they heard advocate for the slow and torturous death of over five billion human beings"

 

[byco42]

If you insist that's a no-spin fair read on what happened, I'll look into it, but I'm just not cynical enough (or too naive) to believe that's how that went down.


"standing ovation for a speaker who they heard advocate for the slow and torturous death of over five billion human beings"

The journalist/scientist mentions this three times in his review, so it must have made an impression.

 

[Gulo Blue]

The journalist/scientist mentions this three times in his review, so it must have made an impression.

I googled. That's one guy's side of the story. Here's a defense from the speaker:

I have never advocated genocide or mass death. I did not suggest deliberately spreading Ebola or any killings, I simply said that there are more people on Earth than our planet can support in the style to which we'd all like to live.

http://www.bio.utexas.edu/faculty/pianka/Controversy.html


Shout out for an Alex Jones reference. As I see it, this guy is wildly disappointed in humanity for the degree to which we've already destroyed species and polluted and consumed at an unsustainable rate and as he sees it doomed our children. I think he goes so far as to think things will be better later, when there are fewer people, but the present sucks and the near future will suck. He is in favor of controlling the population, which isn't the same as pushing to kill people.


But bottom line, it's a lot easier for me to believe in someone in the audience misreading a dark and nuanced and pessimistic view of what we've done and where we are (even easier if that person has an agenda) than an entire room of people applauding the slow tortuous death of 5 billion. That just doesn't pass the sniff test with me.