By Frosty Wooldridge | 27 February 2013
Church and State
Demographic expert Jason Brent from Las Vegas, Nevada, brings readers a realistic assessment to ponder and act upon. He understands the adverse consequences piling up in America and the world as to human overpopulation overload.
As the human race gallops toward adding 3 billion within the next 37 years, and the USA expects to add 138 million by mid century—no one will speak of the consequences. The eminent population scientist Dr. Paul Ehrlich said, “All causes are lost causes without limiting human population.”
Jason Brent brings that home in this latest interview with me.
“There are three, and only three, ways that human population growth can be reduced to zero or made negative, if that is necessary for our species to survive,” said Brent.
1. By war, with or without weapons of mass destruction, starvation, disease, rape, murder, ethnic cleansing, concentration camps, and other horrors beyond the imagination, when humanity has exceeded the carrying capacity of the Earth. At this point it is not necessary to define or explain what is meant by the ‘carrying capacity of the Earth’ as it is not essential to the analysis set forth in this essay.
2. By the voluntary action of all of humanity prior to the human population exceeding the carrying capacity of the Earth. If any group or even if a single-family failed to control its population the entire program would fail. For example, Mr. Justice Scalia had nine children and if each of those had nine and if in each generation each offspring had nine, then in just 11 generations about 31 billion Scalias would live on the planet. That is the power of compound growth.
3. By coercive population control prior to the human population exceeding the carrying capacity of the Earth.
I challenge anyone reading this essay to set forth another method by which the human population growth can be reduced to zero or made negative. Since no rational person would choose or desire alternative number one above, there are, in reality, only two choices—numbers two and three above.
Since the Earth is finite and since population grows in a compound manner, at some point in time population growth will cease. No power in the heavens or on Earth will permit infinite population growth on the finite Earth. In fact, some experts (whatever that word means) have set forth strong arguments, both factually and logically, that support the proposition that in order for humanity to survive on this planet for any reasonable period of time and at any reasonable standard of living population must be reduced to 1 billion or less. Among those experts are James Lovelock, of Gaia fame, and Prof. David Pimentel of Cornell University. Humanity ignores at its collective peril those experts (in addition to Lovelock and Pimental) who argue that it is necessary to substantially reduce population below the current 7.1 billion (2011) for humanity to survive. For those of you interested in learning about the number of human beings the planet can support I urge you to go to www.wakeupamerika.com (it is spelled with a ‘k’ and not a ‘c’) and read the brilliant analysis of Chris Clugston.
I challenge anyone to present a logical and factual case which supports the proposition that humanity will voluntarily reduce its population growth to zero prior to humanity exceeding the carrying capacity of the Earth.
I do not merely challenge, I defy any human being to present a logical and factual case which supports the proposition that humanity will not only voluntarily reduce its population growth to zero, but humanity also will voluntarily reduce its actual number to some amount substantially below the current 7.0 billion prior to the commencement of alternative number one above, assuming that such a reduction is necessary. And the previous statement applies with greater force when the estimated 9.2 billion of our species which will inhabit our planet by the year 2050, providing that no catastrophes prior to that year reduce the estimated population below 9.2 billion.
Every right that an individual has must be balanced against the possibility that upon exercising that right the individual will cause substantial harm to all of humanity. While every human being theoretically has the right to decide how many children he/she will have, that right cannot be exercised in a manner that will cause harm, death and destruction to all of humanity. Any intelligent analysis of all of the major problems presently facing humanity must come to the conclusion that by exercising his/her individual right to have more than one child the individual will cause very substantial harm to all of humanity.
There isn’t a major problem presently facing humanity which can or will be solved if population continues to grow above the current 7.1 billion. There isn’t a major problem presently facing humanity which will not be solved or ameliorated if the number of our species is substantially reduced below the current 7.0 billion. An individual does not have the right to have more than one child. An individual may not exercise a right if that act results in the deaths of billion, or even millions
I challenge any human being to present a logical and factual case for the proposition that protecting the ‘individual right of every human being to determine how many children he/she has’ will result in humanity achieving zero population growth prior to our species exceeding the carrying capacity the Earth. I do not merely challenge, I defy any human being to present a logical and factual case for the proposition that protecting the right of an individual to determine how many children he/she has will result in a reduction in the number of human beings, if such a reduction is necessary to prevent the deaths of large numbers of humans.
It is impossible for anyone to present a logical position for the failure of the leaders of humanity to at least consider and evaluate all of the factors in favor of or against coercive population control when that failure could/would lead to the near term horrific deaths of billions of living, breathing human beings.
Throughout all of human history no nation has been able to reduce population growth to zero without abortion and there isn’t any reason to believe that zero or negative growth can be achieved today without abortion. Since continued population growth will result in humanity exceeding the carrying capacity of the Earth and will result in the horrors set forth in alternative number one above, humanity has a choice—make abortion easily available to all of humanity or deny abortion and cause the deaths of billions.
The failure of the leaders of humanity to at least consider and evaluate all the alternatives to voluntary population control is an act of criminal stupidity which causes all such leaders to become criminals who will cause the horrific deaths of more people than all the tyrants and mass murders that have ever lived.
Al Bartlett – Democracy Cannot Survive Overpopulation
Be sure to ‘like’ us on Facebook