It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: Ecologist advocates use of Ebola to exterminate 90% of Earth's Population

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 03:13 PM
Maybe he would like the grave detail of 90 percent of the earths population. Then ask if he still wants to do it. I doubt it would touch where I live right now, I'm pretty secluded. With a dense population in my town though you never know.

posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 05:23 PM
we may be overpopulated, but that doesn't mean we should give people ebola

also, didn't they make HIV to exterminate 90% of the population?

posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 08:55 PM

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Ebola isn't and never has been ariborne. Also, the Ebola vaccine has just passed its first human trials.

Actually, Ebola has been airborne among monkeys; I wouldn't put it below the abilities of a highly paid group of government scientists to find a way to make it effect humans. Also, I don't think the Ebola vaccine is at this point proven to be effective. On top of that, I believe that Ebola is one of the viruses that shows increased levels of evolution; and one resistant to these new 'vaccines' wouldn't be that hard to conjure. BTW, do you have any link to evidence of the fact that the Ebola vaccine has passed its first human trials? I'd like to read about it.

More information about the airborne transmission of Ebola. In Reston, Virginia, there was an airborne outbreak of the disease in a laboratory filled with imported African monkeys. One monkey harbored the virus, and it soon spread to all the monkeys at the room. This was at first believed to be an isolated incident and caused by the throwing of feces at each other. This however, was disproved, when the virus spread through the ventilation system to all of the monkeys in the laboratory. At this point, the United States military was called in and individually 'destroyed' and disposed of all of the monkeys. There is also a controversial human airborne ebola transmission; that of Nurse Mayinga in Africa. She was treating patients that were afflicted with the Ebola virus and was in full body protective gear and still managed to contract the virus; this is believed to be the only possible airborne transmission of Ebola at this point among humans.

As for vaccines, there is a vaccine for monkeys that has so far had a 100% effectiveness rate at preventing the spread of disease to monkeys. As for humans, there was what was thought to be a "treatment" for disease. In Africa, during an outbreak, blood was taken from 'survivors' of the disease and given to those currently afflicted in order to give them the antibodies they needed to fight the disease. At first, this was believed to be effective because 8 out of the 9 people that had contracted the disease lived. This was, however, later deemed ineffective when it failed to yield anywhere near the same results in future outbreaks. There have also been other attempts at a vaccine, but from everything I have read, none of them have been even remotely proven to have a success rate among humans.

You can read a bit about the airborne transmissions:

[edit on 10-4-2006 by Omniscient]

posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 03:10 AM
Omniscient, this is exactly what I said in my previous thread.

There is no human vaccine. Ebola attacks human RNA. We do not yet fully understand DNA and are a long way from developing serums for preventing many deseases which attack our DNA. I know of some RNA research which is ongoing but, from my observations, we are a couple of years away from any meaningful breakthroughs.

posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 08:37 AM
I just found this op-ed piece re: whether or not Mims exaggerated Pianka's statements or not. I don't know who this James Redford fellow is though.

posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 11:23 PM
This reminds me of those 'feed the children' commercials perpetually on television. Yes, feeding hungry masses is a good idea and commendable; no one should go to bed hungry.

However, the more you feed these masses, the more they populate - hungry people have other things to do than forage for food, if you catch my drift

So we wind up with more starving people.

What's the solution to continue in a sustainable planet? ..To not feed the starving. It is callous and morally questionable, but totally utilitarian in scope - it does the 'greatest good' for the 'greatest number' by not feeding them .. and ensures a much more ecologically stable planet.

Human beings have, by their very intelligence and scientific prowess, eliminated nearly all natural checks on their populations. This is very well and good because there's not as many people dying all over, but it is also very 'bad' in terms of ecological stability (and long term human population needs).

This gentleman seems to be perpetrating a much more extreme version of this notion.

posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 11:45 PM

Originally posted by mauskov

... it does the 'greatest good' for the 'greatest number' by not feeding them .. and ensures a much more ecologically stable planet.

No - it creates a compromised population and breeding ground for infectious disease - which is then free to spread round the planet.

Human beings have, by their very intelligence and scientific prowess, eliminated nearly all natural checks on their populations.

Ever heard of bird flu? How about airborne rabies? Airborne E. coli? West nile virus? MRSA? Necrotizing fasciitis? All the new hemorraghic fevers? How about run-of-the-mill murderers?

What you consider "intelligence and scientific prowess" is IMO hubris.


posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 03:30 AM
Yet another sick freak at large. I'd like to know if this heinous excuse-of-a-carbon-based-life form(along with those nuts that support him) would be volunteering to be among the nine out of ten lucky people who'd sacrifice themselves for our beloved planet. All of us got ourselves and this world into this mess together. Now who's to decide which of us takes responsibility for it.

posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 12:40 PM
download the Georgia Guidestones vid.
See also:

Globalists/NWO elite are closet satanists
with disdain for all human life not their
own. The call the preponderance of
humanity "useless eaters." They're
blithe to the fact that God put us here to
learn our karmic lessons.

When humans get wicked, nature cataclysmically
bombs us back to the stone age soon enough,
which is the cosmic cycle of things on this planet,
apart from Ascension. We don't need so-called
experts abetting the destructive process.

posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 06:24 PM

Originally posted by soficrow

Ever heard of bird flu? How about airborne rabies? Airborne E. coli? West nile virus? MRSA? Necrotizing fasciitis? All the new hemorraghic fevers? How about run-of-the-mill murderers?

What you consider "intelligence and scientific prowess" is IMO hubris.


Maybe I haven't heard of them because they don't exist? Rabies and e.coli are not transmissable via respiration. Bird flu isn't epidemic yet, it has infected less than 100 individuals ... I'd be more concerned about riding in a car than catching it. There aren't 'new' hemorraghic fevers; that just seems to be a bombastic comment thrown in for dramatic effect. Run of the mill murderers pick off, at most, a dozen victims before being finished.

Do your homework before you start squawking.

Seriously infectious diseases tend to burn out very, very rapidly -- ie, marburg and ebola. Evolution and disease spread favours the illnesses with a relatively long incubation period (~2 weeks), to allow the illness to be spread to other hosts.

Feeding populations when said populations cannot provide for themselves does, frankly, no good for anyone. It increases world hunger and stretches thin resources even thinner. Our planet is approaching carrying capacity (or, it is 'going critical' if you prefer) for human population. Much more growth, and instead of a small percentage being totally screwed, it'll be all of us.

If you'd like to bark up some public health, infectious disease tree, how about talking about the Islamic populations in India and Pakistan? WHO and America have spent billions in an attempt to eradicate Polio there, for instance, yet are summarily turned away ... rejecting vacciation is far more dangerous to public health. How about hundreds of African villages that are afflicted with the guinea worm, yet refuse to utilise simple, effective, cheap preventions? (Filtered drinking straws, iodine tablets, etcetera).

[edit on 15-4-2006 by mauskov]

posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 09:38 PM
Ok Guys and Gals
There are those in Power who would dearly love to reduce the population of the Planet so that there would be all the more for them. The advocates of such action are always those who would not be affected by such action and would be protected. Very similar to the Generals in a War, far too valuable to ever be in harms way. It is the little guy who gets shot and maimed or killed in wars to satisfy the motives of those in Power.
However, there is a point coming out of all of this, which simply put is that we cannot carry on the way we are. Even major wars barely made a dent in world population growth. Take a look at a world population growth chart sometime, it will surprise you!
Sooner or later human population will dramatically reduce, whether by the hand of Man or natural events.
For anyone to deliberately undertake to reduce the population by releasing Ebola Reston (airborne) deliberately or a modified Bird Flu would be a crime far in excess of what Hitler ultimate crime against humanity.
But, at the rate we are going something dramatic will occur.
Does anyone remember Project Earth, a human population study in the 1970s?
They loaded a computer with known facts about resources and population growth etc. The end result showed a huge fall in human population in 2025.
So they ran the project again with more detailed information....same end result. Does anyone remember this?
Anyway, truth is we will probably do it to ourselves once the Nukes start to fly. Nobody wins a Nuclear War.
As a final note, there is one thing those in Power who have the ability to be safe in a Nuclear War or are vaccinated from World Plagues tend to forget is the little guy who keeps the whole infrastructure going and enables the Fat Cats to live their life of luxury.
Have a nice day!

[edit on 15-4-2006 by Pleiadian Recon]

posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 04:20 AM
Which is all the more reason for them NOT to involve themselves in the use of Nuclear Weapons. I doubt we'll see a nuclear exchange anytime soon. Hopefully never, but you know how saying never goes... Anyway, I think it pertinent to understand that the powers that be understand as much as we do the importance in keeping the health of their own up and spending money. Because like has been said, without us, they're nothing. Fat and lazy has become the new status quo/symbol, and they like it that way. In some ways, so should we. Because without that, we'd be living in squallor, working for nothing.


posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 05:35 AM

Originally posted by Odium

If human being can't work as one unit, to do what is best for the World what right do we have to destroy it for every other creature on Earth? For a long time, I was against people like this Dr but now with the way the World is maybe we no longer have these rights?

All we seem to do is fight, argue, make war and destroy and as time goes on I agree more with the statement in the Matrix, where we are compaired to a virus. What happens once we've used up most of the land on food? Dryed it out - allow even more poor people to starve like we do already?

And what do you think ? That this Pianka is going to ask first American people to take a shot of Ebola and sacrifice themselves, when they are THE people that consume ten times more of what is possible to be consumed (and European five times more) ?
Certainly not

No of course, the poorest of us are certainly the first in his mind. African people or Asian people must be in his mind for they are the ones who have the more children, per family

posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 07:21 PM
Here is a simple thought

Man has few natural predators to limit our numbers.


Have a nice Day !!

posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 10:22 PM
It's a shame that overpopulation leads to people like this trying to influence diseases to destroy so many people on the planet. What makes him invulnerable to the Ebola Virus? What makes him so openly take sides with AIDS in killing humans? This further makes me believe in the Government creating AIDS (the most incredibly powerful super disease seen on the planet). How about we just stop making so many babies?!

posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 10:40 PM
Aids was not very successful.

The perfect Pandemic works like this:

1) It must be airborne (pass readily from Human to Human)
2) Those infected must not show symptoms during the contageous incubation period (to enable many more to become infected by the carrier)
3) The period from contracting the disease to death must be fairly rapid for maximum effect (14 days would be ideal)
4) The kill ratio must be in the realms of 90% of those infected

Enjoy today!

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 01:27 AM
AIDS was much more effective than you might think.. It just effects a community that your eyes have never touched. The 3rd world countries whom are being completely wiped out by AIDS and IS at LEAST a 90% fatal disease. You might wanna do some research because AIDS is very fatal if not treated.

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 02:55 AM
(sarcasm) Why not just hire a bunch of people to drive tractor trailor rigs through crowded plazas to kill masses of people? I mean it's more practical then engineering a plague that could harm the ones that made it, and it's uncontrollabel once let loose. (end sarcasm)

I think the thought of such a stupid thing has been driven into the mud now. I wanna know when this "doctor" is charged with attempted genocide.


posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 03:14 AM
Naaaaa won't work!

Semi Trucks are too slow and people run away.

What they need is something you can't escape.....something you can't even see.

Enjoy today as if it were your last!

posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 03:40 PM
I just wanted to redirect those interested in the topic of disease to the ATSNN report of the Avian Bird Flu. The strain is shown to have a 91% mortality rate amoung humans!

new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in