Lunatic professor calls for reducing global population by 87.5% "in a civil way"

[westwall]

You Marvin, are a very dishonest fuckstain.
You can't have actual discourse, so you just make up LIES.

Squeals the lying fascist scumbag.

 

[marvin martian]

Eugenics and abortion on demand are not the same thing. I am not lying.

Eugenics:

1. the study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable. Developed largely by Sir Francis Galton as a method of improving the human race, eugenics was increasingly discredited as unscientific and racially biased during the 20th century, especially after the adoption of its doctrines by the Nazis in order to justify their treatment of Jews, disabled people, and other minority groups.
2. Eugenics is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population. Historically, eugenicists have attempted to alter human gene pools by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior or promoting those judged to be superior. Wikipedia
   
   A woman getting an elective abortion because her child will suffer some birth defect or simply because she feels she is not ready to raise a child is NOT an effort to improve the human race. Abortion on demand is not eugenics.
   

Barack Obama's and Hillary Clinton's idol, Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was a white supremacist eugenicist.

 

[TheParser]

(1) Many people agree with him that this world would be a better place if the population were smaller.

(2) Those people who use family planning or abortion are helping in this regard. Kudos to them.

(3) Many developed nations can help developing nations to work on lowering their birth rates.

(4) I understand China's one-child policy worked so well that the dictatorship is now asking for couples to have more than one child.

(5) I am 86. I can remember the days here in Los Angeles when finding a place to park was no big deal.

(6) The professor is right: it is vital to reduce the world's population. Of course, how to do so is the problem.

 

[luiza]

Would anyone really be unhappy to lose Gullibles and those with high Cognitive Rigidity .Probably two of the most negative groups of "contributors" to our species .

The opportunity to lose them or any other prescribed group will happen at some point soon when AI leads to 60% of jobs -- or more--- becoming redundant .
There is no sustainability problem in numbers for up to 15 billion ( estimate) but nothing for people to do except be a nuisance and be in need of strict control .

Until there is evidence that people with nothing to do can be useful and positive to the species , control them before they try to be what they can never be -- clever , imaginative , creative etc .

If you have any doubts use this chat site to see how many you might be better off without

 

[koshergrl]

Eugenics and abortion on demand are not the same thing. I am not lying.

Eugenics:

1. the study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable. Developed largely by Sir Francis Galton as a method of improving the human race, eugenics was increasingly discredited as unscientific and racially biased during the 20th century, especially after the adoption of its doctrines by the Nazis in order to justify their treatment of Jews, disabled people, and other minority groups.
2. Eugenics is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population. Historically, eugenicists have attempted to alter human gene pools by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior or promoting those judged to be superior. Wikipedia
   
   A woman getting an elective abortion because her child will suffer some birth defect or simply because she feels she is not ready to raise a child is NOT an effort to improve the human race. Abortion on demand is not eugenics.
   
   

Eugenics is abortion on demand. Because abortion on demand means women can kill their babies for any reason...including their sex, race, or potential ability.

 

[marvin martian]

Eugenics is abortion on demand. Because abortion on demand means women can kill their babies for any reason...including their sex, race, or potential ability.

Or, more dangerously, be pressured/coerced into killing their babies for the purpose of eugenics, like Planned Parenthood does to black women.

 

[Concerned American]

His 'plan' whatever it is, would take Centuries to accomplish.

For someone who doesn't know what "his plan" is, you sure have an opinion on it. That is why, IMHO, you are a lousy educator. You make judgements on things that you admit to knowing nothing about. SMH.

 

[Winco]

For someone who doesn't know what "his plan" is, you sure have an opinion on it. That is why, IMHO, you are a lousy educator. You make judgements on things that you admit to knowing nothing about. SMH.

Relax Gramps.
Your ad hominem's are weak.

You've tried the same sad schtick for years.

FYI, for someone that has NO IDEA about my professional abilities, you sure have an opinion on it.
You make judgements on things that you admit to knowing nothing about. SMH.
So, STFU Old Man.
Take your Nap.

 

[Concerned American]

FYI, for someone that has NO IDEA about my professional abilities

Au contraire, Winnie, you put your "abilities" on full display every time you post (boast).

 

[Crick]

Eugenics is abortion on demand. Because abortion on demand means women can kill their babies for any reason...including their sex, race, or potential ability.

Eugenics is a program with a goal. Abortion on demand serves no such goal.

 

[Crick]

Or, more dangerously, be pressured/coerced into killing their babies for the purpose of eugenics, like Planned Parenthood does to black women.

Liar.

 

[koshergrl]

Eugenics is a program with a goal. Abortion on demand serves no such goal.

Killing your baby so that you don't have to finance a female, or ethnic, or unplanned, or physically imperfect child is absolutely a goal.

 

[Crick]

It's a common sentiment on the left. Any type of genocide, actually, whether it's Trump voters, gun owners, unvaccinated people, whites, etc. They just want them all dead, and they're not afraid to say it.

Liar.

None of you have any reason whatsoever to think this fellow has the slightest malintent. None. You people have learned to waste your time, your resources, your emotions, your apparently very limited cognitive abilities on unreal shit that doesn't matter AT ALL. You seem to be a collection of the extraordinarily ignorant. There seems to be something about USMB that just draws you out of the woodwork. Perhaps someone who DOES have malintent is trying to get you all in one place... you know? Run away for god's sake, run away.

 

[koshergrl]

Liar.

None of you have any reason whatsoever to think this fellow has the slightest malintent. None. You people have learned to waste your time, your resources, your emotions, your apparently very limited cognitive abilities on unreal shit that doesn't matter AT ALL. You seem to be a collection of the extraordinarily ignorant. There seems to be something about USMB that just draws you out of the woodwork. Perhaps someone who DOES have malintent is trying to get you all in one place... you know? Run away for god's sake, run away.

Look at the negative eugenics acolyte gaslight. That's what they do...lie, gaslight, harass ppl into endorsing human rights violations and neg eugenics.

 

[Crick]

Killing your baby so that you don't have to finance a female, or ethnic, or unplanned, or physically imperfect child is absolutely a goal.

It's not my goal. Sorry to disappoint you. I still support abortion on demand in the first trimester and later for the safety of the mother. It is not eugenics, it is bodily autonomy. If you don't approve, vote Republican.

I am also beginning to wonder what ANY of the conversations taking place on this thread have to do with the forum topic. None that I can see.

 

[koshergrl]

It's not my goal. Sorry to disappoint you. I still support abortion on demand in the first trimester and later for the safety of the mother. It is not eugenics, it is bodily autonomy. If you don't approve, vote Republican.

I am also beginning to wonder what ANY of the conversations taking place on this thread have to do with the forum topic. None that I can see.

There is no right to kill dependent offspring. You said you supported abortion on demand. If you do, then you support negative eugenics.
PS abortion to save mom has always been legal. Elective abortion is something different.its negative eugenics.
Seeking population reduction is negative eugenics.
Negative eugenics advocates use lies, gaslighting and other techniques to spread false narrative and ultimately to coerce women into abortions.
They famously target vulnerable, victimized women...and have no interest in having a real discussion with those who know history, the science and human rights attendant to the topic.

 

[MisterBeale]

old, old news. This goes back to the end of last summer. To dig in beyond this sound bite go here, or read it all here.

1,600-plus Scientists Say Climate "Emergency" Is a Myth

Experts Debunk Viral Post Claiming 1,100 Scientists Say ‘There’s No Climate Emergency’ Our twice-a-week dive into the most pressing news related to our rapidly warming world. August 23, 2022 "...Rather, they said, the post seems to be the latest iteration of a broader disinformation campaign...

www.usmessageboard.com

"I wish I were as optimistic as you.

I don't see the power of the oligarchs waning.

For instance, the majority of the average citizens, don't want either Trump or Biden to be who represents them in either party, but we won't have an option. . . the parties represent the corporations and the .01%, you know, the Fortune 500 top billionaires.

I don't see the agenda of the UN, the WEF or the Club of Rome waning, they don't care what the people know, or what the facts actually are. . .

The Club of Rome and the Rise of the “Predictive Modelling” Mafia​

The Rise of the "Predictive Modelling" Mafia

While many are now familiar with the manipulation of predictive modelling during the COVID-19 crisis, a network of powerful Malthusians have used the same tactics for the better part of the last century in order to sell and impose their agenda.

unlimitedhangout.com

"While much propaganda has gone into convincing the world that eugenics disappeared with the defeat of Hitler in 1945, the reality, as I discussed in my previous article The Revenge of the Malthusians and the Science of Limits, is far removed from this popular fantasy.

In that piece, I reviewed the origins of cybernetics as a new “science of control” created during World War II by a nest of followers of Lord Bertrand Russell who had one mission in mind. This mission was to shape the thinking of both the public as well as a new managerial elite class who would serve as instruments for a power they were incapable of understanding. 1

We also explored the science of limits that was infused into the scientific community at the turn of the 20th century with the imposition of the assumption that humanity, the biosphere, and even the universe itself were closed systems, defined by the second law of thermodynamics (aka: entropy) and thus governed by the tendency towards decay, heat death and ever-decreasing potential for creative change. The field of cybernetics would also become the instrument used to advance a new global eugenics movement that later gave rise to transhumanism, an ideology which today sits at the heart of the 4thindustrial revolution as well as the “Great Reset.” .. . . ."

<snip>

Neil Ferguson’s Sleight of Hand​

". . . .The person assigned to impose cybernetics and its associated “systems” planning into political practice was Lord President of the British Empire’s Scientific Secretariat Alexander King- acting here as Director General of Scientific Affairs of the Organization for Economic Coordination and Development (OECD) and advisor to NATO. His post 1968 role as co-founder of the Club of Rome will be discussed shortly.

Whereas selling end-times scenarios to a gullible populace took the form of such Gates-funded stochastic models utilizing Monte Carlo techniques like those deployed by Neil Ferguson, the selling of end-times scenarios in the form of global warming have also used the exact same techniques, albeit for a slightly longer time frame. As Dr. Tim Ball proved in his successful lawsuits against the IPCC’s Michael Mann of “Hockey Stick” fame, those end-times global warming models have also used stochastic formulas (aka randomness functions) along with Monte Carlo techniques to consistently generate irrationally high heating curves in all climate models. . . . "

Michael Mann’s 1998 “hockey stick” temperature model, debunked several times over for using fraudulent techniques and selective data, but used by the IPCC to this very day. Source.
<sip>

<snip>

<sip>
On page 118 of an autobiographical account of the Club of Rome entitled ‘The First Global Revolution’ published in 1991, Sir Alexander King echoed this philosophy most candidly when he wrote:

<snip>



This piece goes on and on, it is a really great read, it includes that viral video from last year, from one of the authors of the Club of Rome's, Limits to Growth document;

Dennis Meadows - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

When I watch it? I think of Crick and abu. . .


"

 

[MisterBeale]

Dude is Cray-Cray.
Simple.

Why did you search this dude?
Why do you support Crazy?

You are so in the dark. You haven't a clue what is really going on.

Go back to your CNN and your MSNBC.

 

[Winco]

You are so in the dark. You haven't a clue what is really going on.

Go back to your CNN and your MSNBC.

Fuck off mod.

 

[bdtex]

You can't have actual discourse, so you just make up LIES.

And post memes that have nothing to do with anything.