Humint Events Online: Is Global Warming the Mechanism for Culling Humanity?

Thursday, March 01, 2012

Is Global Warming the Mechanism for Culling Humanity?

It's been clear for some time that the elites want to kill off a large portion of humanity.

Despite whether you believe in catastrophic man-made global warming or not (I tend to think it is real), it will certainly NOT affect the "elites"-- who can insulate themselves from its effects most-- which is one reason American leaders have mostly ignored it.

Man-made GW is predicted, however, to lead to the deaths of billions of poor people around the globe, due to food shortages and massive disruption of habitats, in the next hundred years. There's also a worry that the oceans will become extremely acidic, killing off much of marine life and depriving the planet of an important oxygen source.

We are very, very close to the great culling of humanity, and it is sickening how people downplay this.

A 2009 article goes into how the UN is actually using the threat of GW to limit the human population. Note, this piece deals with mainly population control through family planning and birth control. I have no problem with that, as long is it is not forced on anyone. But certainly, it is the agenda of the elite to reduce the population, it seems.

Most recently, this guy-- Colorado State University professor Philip Cafaro-- puts it fairly explicitly. “Ending human population growth is almost certainly a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for preventing catastrophic global climate change. Indeed, significantly reducing current human numbers (emphasis added) may be necessary in order to do so.” All under the rationale of reducing the threat of GW.

So this is disturbing, and consistent with my original post. Any sort of human population culling is simply reprehensible. At the same time-- I do think GW is a threat, and that the human population can't grow forever, on this planet, without destroying the environment. The solution ultimately is more equal wealth distribution and better education among all of humanity. Improved technology should help too.

There is always a problem with these sorts of global issues, in not recognizing the problem of human pollution seriously, and taking a knee-jerk anti-progress stance, such as taken by the The Alex Jones-type people. It's obviously so easy to distrust government, but at the same time government can be absolutely critical for controlling destructive human activities such as pollution and rapacious, abusive capitalism.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

so-called man-made global warming is supposedly caused by increasing carbon dioxide which actually would have the effect of promoting plant growth (food). and in the middle ages when everyone had almost no "carbon footprint" whatsoever, it was much warmer than it is now.

11:39 AM  
Blogger spooked said...

unfortunately, it's much more complicated than that-- check out the link in the post

2:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

all the info in that link is derived from NASA - remember how trustworthy they are.
i remember back in the '70s when the media was claiming that we were headed for an ice-age and here is a real scientist who says we are headed for a new ice-age:

i don't doubt that we are "very close to the great culling of humanity", even bill gates has suggested that a good way to eliminate people is thru vaccinations and he has since embarked on a project to fund forced vaccinations in third world countries.
i think there are better ways to cull humanity than waiting around for global warming - namely, a massive pandemic that only elites would have cure for. j

5:17 PM  
Blogger spooked said...

Hmm, there didn't seem to be much hard evidence at that link for a coming ice-age. The evidence for GW isn't all from NASA, and even NASA can give truthful info sometimes. I know it's easy to be skeptical about CO2 induced GW, but I find the predictions scientifically plausible and rather dire.

10:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The scientific plausibility of dire consequences resulting from even a 35% increase (over the last 300 years) in a gas that now occupies 0.039% by volume of the atmosphere(Wikipedia has increased from 0.035%) still escapes me.

There are far bigger "issues" coming down the pipe in the next year or so and it's going to be fun watching the scientists scrabble to explain things that are beyond their current level of comprehension.

1:24 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger