I think Environmentalists have Self-Esteem Issues
Cathy Young at The Y Files discusses Eric Pianka, an ecologist who looks forward to the death of 90% of the world population.
According to Pianka, our biggest enemy is "anthropocentrism" - how's about that for self hating? I'd go as far as to say a little more anthropocentrism might go a long way.
While the rest of the world's talking about debt relief and clean water mechanisms and new ways of growing food to feed the starving, Pianka has found the one virus set to free us from our unfortunate existence.
Ebola. Oh yes, the joys of Ebola, the friendly, helpful virus.
Good terrorists would be taking [Ebola Roaston and Ebola Zaire] so that they had microbes they could let loose on the Earth that would kill 90 percent of people. AIDS is apparently not quick enough.
The Texas Academy of Science gave him their 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist award. Hello?
The man's nuts. He wants to kill 9 out 10 Irish bloggers (and equivalent ratios of everyone else, but look at what's important!)
A few weeks I posted about Jerry Vlasak, a surgeon with similar aspirations for the future of the human race.
What's with these scientists, these environmentalists that move so far away from common sense?
Do they really hate their lives that much, their family's lives, that our existence as humans is secondary to that of mice, trees, woodlice and nettles, so secondary that the vast majority of us should be killed off?
Have they no self-esteem?
Pro-Test have a new blog. Check it out. Return to rationality.
According to Pianka, our biggest enemy is "anthropocentrism" - how's about that for self hating? I'd go as far as to say a little more anthropocentrism might go a long way.
While the rest of the world's talking about debt relief and clean water mechanisms and new ways of growing food to feed the starving, Pianka has found the one virus set to free us from our unfortunate existence.
Ebola. Oh yes, the joys of Ebola, the friendly, helpful virus.
Good terrorists would be taking [Ebola Roaston and Ebola Zaire] so that they had microbes they could let loose on the Earth that would kill 90 percent of people. AIDS is apparently not quick enough.
The Texas Academy of Science gave him their 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist award. Hello?
The man's nuts. He wants to kill 9 out 10 Irish bloggers (and equivalent ratios of everyone else, but look at what's important!)
A few weeks I posted about Jerry Vlasak, a surgeon with similar aspirations for the future of the human race.
What's with these scientists, these environmentalists that move so far away from common sense?
Do they really hate their lives that much, their family's lives, that our existence as humans is secondary to that of mice, trees, woodlice and nettles, so secondary that the vast majority of us should be killed off?
Have they no self-esteem?
Pro-Test have a new blog. Check it out. Return to rationality.
posted by Auds | 12:49
3 Comments:
You might want to have a read of this:
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/04/forrest_mims_cr.html
Hadn't seen that, even though Young alludes to it in her post and states that other reports of the talk mention it the 90% human death as a environmentally friendly solution.
I think creationists are just as mad as enviornmentalists who want to kill off humans, but attacking Forest Mims for being one is beside the point.
If Pianka said this, or believes it, we've got to ask why, and what effect this nutty opinion has.
"I want to kill 9 out of 10 bloggers. That's not an irrational position to adopt."
Name names pototoes. You know you want to.
Post a Comment
<< Home