11 December 2011

The Coming Human Die-Off: A Little Goes a Long Way

The idea of a coming great human die-off is gaining popularity among those of the lefty-Luddite green enviro persuasion. Whether the die-off will be triggered by resource scarcity, by a voluntary reduction of human fertility, or by more aggressive means, such a great die-off is being seen as a positive event by the trendy and green forces which have taken over most media outlets, Green NGOs, funding agencies, and large segments of academic institutions.

The great human die-off is being backed by some famous names:
“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
- Ted Turner, CNN founder and UN supporter

“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 behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.” - Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution, pg.75

“We must speak more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there aren’t enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage.” - Mikhail Gorbachev

"I believe that human overpopulation is the fundamental problem on Earth Today” and, “We humans have become a disease, the Humanpox.” - Dave Foreman, Sierra Club and co founder of Earth First!

“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.” - Prince Phillip, Queen Elizabeth’s husband, Duke of Edinburgh, leader of the World Wildlife Fund

Advanced societies are considered "soft targets," because their populations have become so accustomed to things running relatively smoothly. Just a bit of disruption can go a long way toward upsetting such societies.

It is becoming easier for individuals and small groups to trigger events which can lead to momentous calamity in the advanced world. Increased networking of vital infrastructure is making it easier for hackers to commit cyber-terrorism:
Government pressure to create "smart power grids" to replace traditional grids, provides malicious hackers with a wide range of new targets to attack, at various scales.

The threat of an EMP attack -- capable of taking out continental scale power grids -- is likewise increased, as nuclear proliferation proceeds across the Pakistan-Iran-N.Korea axis (aided by China and Russia). As many as 90% of an advanced society can be expected to die within 1 year as a result of a large-scale EMP attack.

Chemical terrorism is another way in which advanced cultures could be targeted specifically. Coordinated chemical attacks using various vectors could decapitate leadership and expertise in several vital areas, leading to widespread paralysis of normal infrastructure. Such a paralysing strike might well be a set-up for a more devastating followup attack.

Increasing sophistication of inexpensive tools for "bio-hacking" are also making it more likely that individuals or small groups will create novel microbial agents of mass contagion.
Security futurist Marc Goodman says that synthetic biology will lead to new forms of bioterrorism — opportunities for the bad guys to create never-before-seen forms of bio-toxins. These bio-threats might be nearly impossible to detect because they can be customized to the genome of a certain person or groups of people. Goodman, who has long worked on cyber crime and terrorism with organizations such as Interpol and the United Nations, believes the potential bio-threat is greatly underestimated. “Bio-crime today is akin to computer crime in the early 1980s,” said Goodman at the Singularity University executive program this week. “Few initially recognized the problem, but one need only observe how the threat grew exponentially over time.” _WaPo
It is not necessary to target the third world, in order to achieve a high magnitude die-off such as is depicted in the chart above. The third world has become so dependent upon the technological infrastructures and products provided by more advanced societies, that if the advanced world goes, most of the third world will quickly follow.

The resulting world of much lower human population, will also be much less technologically capable than the world at present, in a quantitative sense. In a qualitative sense, however, most of human technology will be saved in digital and book form. This means that within 1 to 2 centuries after the great die-off, the higher intelligence populations of the presently advanced world would grow to a large enough size to begin implementing modern technologies on a global scale once again.

In other words, if lefty-Luddite greens are engineering the great human die-off to permanently eliminate high tech civilisations and infrastructures, their efforts will ultimately fail.

But that will be cold comfort for your children and grandchildren who will have to suffer through the bloody mess aftermath left to them by the possibly well-intentioned greens.

It is up to you to make sure that they survive that bloody mess. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

Some of the above is cross-published from abu al-fin

More: The conspiracy zone...

SOME of America’s leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world’s population....The philanthropists who attended a summit convened on the initiative of Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change.

Described as the Good Club by one insider it included David Rockefeller Jr, the patriarch of America’s wealthiest dynasty, Warren Buffett and George Soros, the financiers, Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York, and the media moguls Ted Turner and Oprah Winfrey.

...They gathered at the home of Sir Paul Nurse, a British Nobel prize biochemist and president of the private Rockefeller University, in Manhattan on May 5. The informal afternoon session was so discreet that some of the billionaires’ aides were told they were at “security briefings”.

Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, said the summit was unprecedented. “We only learnt about it afterwards, by accident. Normally these people are happy to talk good causes, but this is different – maybe because they don’t want to be seen as a global cabal,” he said. _Prison Planet

These are some of the people with the ability to sway media outlets -- which they largely own -- along with NGOs, academic research and pronouncements via funding, and a significant number of elected officials, via campaign support, job offers, board directorships, and the funneling of significant investments.

It is not surprising that the super-wealthy would be concerned about population overgrowth, if they truly believed that it would bring about the end of the world. But it is a bit troubling when they deliberately take a cause such as "the great carbon hysteria orthodoxy and climate change crusade," wrap it into a trans-global agenda, and push it into the heart of each new generation's training and education -- from K-12 through university and beyond.

Does this mean that these people are intentionally contaminating third world immunisation efforts, so as to help bring about the great human die-off -- using the UN and NGOs as intermediaries? Probably not. I am acquainted with a lot of the people involved in such international programs, and do not believe for one second that they would be a part of such a travesty.

But now that we know that the richest of the rich have taken an interest in limiting -- and even slashing -- the human population of the planet, we may want to watch what they do more carefully, through their almost countless intermediaries.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share


Blogger Ugh said...

To these population control types - what ever their reason - I'd like to say, "you and your family first". Then we'll reassess.

Sunday, 11 December, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Of course billions are going to die, thanks to your high-IQ heroes who have made 21st century techno-holocausts an inevitability. Humanity is staring into an abyss now, a Singularity which is in reality an Apocalypse, and our doom is all but certain. If your idea of peak humanity is the von Neumanns and Tellers of the world, do I need to point out that it is precisely such monstrous intellects who have made weapons of mass destruction possible and thereby destabilized human civilization for the remainder of its (very short) existence? What is the IQ of a shark or a crocodile? And have they not lived in relative equilibrium on this planet for a thousand times longer than we clever apes? Is the cosmos not totally devoid of evidence of any other clever species? What do you conclude?

Forget your fantasies of infinite progress pal, and while you’re at it fuck your obsolete left-right axis and your revenge of the nerds eugenics fantasies. The future I have foreseen is a holocaust of dark armies rolling, bombs dropping, genocidal bio-sorcery, billions dying, bodies burning and human extinction, and there’s nothing you, me, Bill Gates, Ray Kurzweil or Oprah Winfrey can do to stop it.

“In some remote corner of the universe, poured out and glittering in innumerable solar systems, there once was a star on which clever animals invented knowledge. That was the highest and most mendacious minute of “world history” — yet only a minute. After nature had drawn a few breaths the star grew cold, and the clever animals had to die. One might invent such a fable and still not have illustrated sufficiently how wretched, how shadowy and flighty, how aimless and arbitrary, the human intellect appears in nature. There have been eternities when it did not exist; and when it is done for again, nothing will have happened.” –Friedrich Nietzsche

Sunday, 11 December, 2011  
Blogger al fin said...

Sean: As a sorcerer you seem to have conjured up mostly dark and negative -- and rather hackneyed -- visions. When you have lived long and deeply enough to provide us with genuinely heart-rending visions and accounts, come back and spend a little more time.

Craig: Yes, that would seem to be the equitable thing.

Sunday, 11 December, 2011  
Blogger Tiffany the Dietitian said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

Sunday, 11 December, 2011  
Blogger Bearhawk said...

Has anyone studied the correlation (if there is one) between population growth and the advancements in science, technology, manufacturing, quality of living, etc? The last being a question mark as I look at China and India and don't see the same relationship as I believe we've seen here in the US and throughout the West.
I think that the bell shaped curve suggests there are simply more productive, creative and intelligent people the larger the population. Also, there is simply more human capital to build upon the larger the population. Can you do a lot with a small population? Yes, of course...but I think there is a cumulative affect too. There are so many aspects of science, technology and production that no one person can master...the greater the population the greater the chance that someone will pick up the torch for any given subject. Even so, there are never enough people studying or working on everything, right? I look at longevity research or even research on cancer or other diseases and I'd love to see twice as many people working on those subjects...and that leaves out the ones I haven't even thought about yet.
There may be a point of diminishing returns on any given research & development project, but I don't think that applies to multiple projects competing and cooperating with each other through the free market. And again...what about the things we haven't thought about yet...the future is an ever expanding world of complexity, opportunity and challenge. The more I learn, the less I know.

Monday, 12 December, 2011  
Blogger Loren said...

3D printing and related technologies are dropping the infrastructure curve needed to support modern technology. This is the reverse of the trend leading to and through the industrial revolution. Eventually, a resilient community will be able to produce everything it needs, even advanced machines like computers. If that point comes before a dark age, or even if it can be reached shortly afterwards, areas of the world can hold enlightenment and advancement even with the luddite's desire to destroy.

Monday, 12 December, 2011  
Blogger al fin said...

Bearhawk: Technology is giving intelligent individuals the power to achieve more on their own, as well as better tools for collaborating with others of like mind.

There are rules of thumb relating innovation with population -- tempered by average IQ and other inherited qualities, as well as the political and economic environments.

Loren: That is the goal. To be able to hunker down through a dark age, and have the ability to restart civilisation afterward. Or to be able to travel great distances and establish high-tech civilisations far from the nest.

Saturday, 17 December, 2011  

Post a Comment

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” _George Orwell

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts