LoveLock Predicts Planetary Wipeout

Gaia Scientist Lovelock
Predicts Planetary Wipeout



Jeremy Lovell, Reuters
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/november2006/281106_b_Gaia.htm


The earth has a fever that could boost temperatures by 8 degrees Celsius making large parts of the surface uninhabitable and threatening billions of peoples' lives, a controversial climate scientist said on Tuesday.

James Lovelock, who angered climate scientists with his Gaia theory of a living planet and then alienated environmentalists by backing nuclear power, said a traumatized earth might only be able to support less than a tenth of it's 6 billion people.

"We are not all doomed. An awful lot of people will die, but I don't see the species dying out," he told a news conference. "A hot earth couldn't support much over 500 million."

"Almost all of the systems that have been looked at are in positive feedback ... and soon those effects will be larger than any of the effects of carbon dioxide emissions from industry and so on around the world," he added.

Gaia is Hurting


So,not only do we have to worry about carbon dioxide, but we also have to worry about the earth's ability to sustain life in its present numbers. What I would like to know is whether his assumptions are actually his or that of the powers that be.

Most of us are quite aware of some of the elites plans to decrease the number of individuals on earth. I just wonder if ths whole idea of the earth being overloaded is not somehow connected to the elite's excuse for wanting to decrease the population.

[edit on 29-11-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

[edit on 29-11-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

Most of us are quite aware of some of the elites plans to decrease the number of individuals on earth. I just wonder if ths whole idea of the earth being overloaded is not somehow connected to the elite's excuse for wanting to decrease the population.

Ive seen the 500-600 million number from several different sources. I does make one wonder if there is some orchestrated effort going on to make sure thats where the earth population ends up.

It does beg the question on how does it get there....war, famine, natural disaters or a combination of them all.

Originally posted by etshrtslr
It does beg the question on how does it get there....war, famine, natural disaters or a combination of them all.

etshrtslr,it seems to me that it will probably be a combination of all of those things. I think that my main problem with what LoveLock is predicting though is that it seems to imply,albeit implicitly, that the problems the earth is having will somehow disappear if the earth's population is reduced. I think that is a very dangerous line of reasoning.

I myself have problems with humanity's polluting of the atmosphere,but I am not under the assumption that we are the sole cause of the earth's troubles.

For those who don't believe that the elite would like to depopulate the eart, have a look see:

"If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels!" WHO DO YOU THINK SAID THAT? HITLER? STALIN? NO, it was the Queen's HUBBY! Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh !

Depopulating

Plans are underway now, implemented by the New World Order Elite, to depopulate the planet's 6-7 billion people to a manageable level of between 500 million- 2 billion.

There are many means and methods of depopulation that are being employed today, the 3 primary of which include; unsustainable/exploitative international development, which leads to massive hunger, starvation and famine worldwide (at least 40 million deaths annually), the fomentation of war, hatred and military procurements throughout the nations leading to millions of deaths worldwide, and finally, the creation and spread of infectious diseases leading to global pandemic, plague and pestilence on an unprecedented scale.

Other methods used include; the build-up and use of nuclear, chemical and biological agents, weapons and warfare, the poisoning and contamination of the planet's food and water supplies, the introduction and use of deadly pharmaceutical drugs in society, weather modification and the triggering of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and tsunamis through electromagnetic psychotropic weapons both on Earth and in space, the promotion of homosexuality to limit population growth and spread the deadly AIDS virus, forced sterilization in countries such as China, forced vaccinations, abortion, euthanasia etc...

More Depopulating

[edit on 29-11-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

This is quite interesting. However I wonder how rapidly he thinks this will happen, given the fact that he is saying that

A hot earth couldn't support much over 500 million.

So that must mean fairly soon?

And if the earth is going to be hotter, I don't want to be one of trhe 500 million.

And if this is going to happen, lets make a volcanic/nuclear winter. That ought to slow it down some.

Well, apex, if the earth is to be reduced to 500 million or less any time soon, that would take one hell of a war and quite dramatic natural disasters. I am not predispositioned to rule any of that out, but, wow, from almost 7 billion to 500 million or less?

While I certainly can conceive of a coming shift where only about 1.5 to 2 billion are left on earth, 500 million seems a bit of a stretch to me.

I dont think man alone is responsible for global warming....there is plenty of evidence to suggest its all part of the natural cycle. There is even evidence that the whole solar system is heating up.

What really concerns me about this guys theory is that 500 million number....there was another professor at the university of texas saying the samething. Why do they keep coming up with that same number? As someone who does not think there are coincidences there has got to be more to it.

Well,like I said, I can conceive of maybe 500 million people dying in a nuclear holocaust, or even a couple billion people dying, but for nearly 6 million people to just get killed off.. I don't see it. Like I sai, that is not to say it can't happen,but it would take some pretty horrible things to occur for it to ever happen.


Like apex said, who would want to live on an overheated earth anyway? However, I have to question this whole assumption because of how it, at least seemingly so, falls in line with the whole "need for depopulation" argument that the elitist put up.

[edit on 29-11-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

I read a quick snippet today regarding the Gaia effect and how Southern Europeans would have to move North, and the UK because of been an island and naturally surrounded by water would be one of the prime places to live as it's climate would not change as rapidly or as bad as Southern Europe.

Hmmmmm anyone want a timeshare in Blackpool just let me know, come 2020 they will be going on the market

Wolfie

Originally posted by etshrtslr

Most of us are quite aware of some of the elites plans to decrease the number of individuals on earth. I just wonder if ths whole idea of the earth being overloaded is not somehow connected to the elite's excuse for wanting to decrease the population.

Ive seen the 500-600 million number from several different sources. I does make one wonder if there is some orchestrated effort going on to make sure thats where the earth population ends up.

It does beg the question on how does it get there....war, famine, natural disaters or a combination of them all.

Interesting topic. My personal opinion is LoveLock's a whacko but the idea that a certain population number keeps being mentioned is extremely interesting.

Here is a link to a page that has probably been referred to on many other threads, but I think it fits in with this discussion. Its about the NWO and poulation control plans.

100777.com...

I take alot of criticism when it comes to Fragile Earth topics due to my views on GW, but I firmly believe that resource consumption and overpopulation are the real problems we face and must address. We must find a way to reduce the birth rate or accept our ultimate fate (starvation, pollution, war over resources, disease) .....take your pick.

Originally posted by darkbluesky


Interesting topic. My personal opinion is LoveLock's a whacko but the idea that a certain population number keeps being mentioned is extremely interesting.

What makes you think LoveLock is a "whacko?" He actually revolutionized environmental science from the deadpan science it once was.

[edit on 29-11-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth


What makes you think LoveLock is a "whacko?" He actually revolutionized environmental science from the deadpan science it once was.

[edit on 29-11-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

I'm sure I'll regret this......

IMO, anyone who thinks they can acurately predict future parameters of a physical, chemical, biological system as large and as complex as the earth-sun system is a bit of a loon. When meteorologist/climateologist can begin making accurate 10-day weather forecasts and hurricane season forecasts, maybe I'll have a little less skepticism.

spelling

[edit on 11/29/2006 by darkbluesky]

Darkbluesky,LoveLock didn't give us any timescale for this event. He just stated that it could and probably would happen. A meteorologist gives us an actual timescale for an event. You see the difference?

Sure. Maybe I used a bad example. Time frames aren't really relevent. My position is that as of today, there is not enough data, or understanding of the inter-relations of the many separate systems involved, to accurately model and/or predict future changes in the global climate.

What sort of natural disaster could kill 6,500,000,000 people anyway? Even Yellowstone or Toba is minuscule in comparison. Perhaps a volcanic eruption like the Deccan Traps (512,000 cubic kilometres, or 190 times bigger than Toba, perhaps VEI 10) could do it, other than that it would need to be an asteroid to do it quickly.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by darkbluesky
Sure. Maybe I used a bad example. Time frames aren't really relevent. My position is that as of today, there is not enough data, or understanding of the inter-relations of the many separate systems involved, to accurately model and/or predict future changes in the global climate.

That is probably true... The data that they do have is rather questionable as well,which is why I question the cyclic theory on global warming. Some say, "Well, all of this is just cyclical and has occurred several times over millions of years." Really? We know this how? By taking ice samples from the Anartic? We can't even get carbon dating down with any accuracy, yet they expect us to believe something has occurred for millions of years,not continuously, but in cycles?

Originally posted by apex
What sort of natural disaster could kill 6,500,000,000 people anyway? Even Yellowstone or Toba is minuscule in comparison. Perhaps a volcanic eruption like the Deccan Traps (512,000 cubic kilometres, or 190 times bigger than Toba, perhaps VEI 10) could do it, other than that it would need to be an asteroid to do it quickly.

en.wikipedia.org...

If anything like that were to occur, it wouldn't be due solely to environmetal disasters. It would be a culmination of things,I would suspect.

Interesting thread.

If you planned to reduce the global human population to say, 500,000,000 - it would make sense to target those nations with the highest populations, take a look at which countries contain the most humans...

geography.about.com...

...and the 3 most heavily populated nations all have nuclear arsenals.

[edit on 29-11-2006 by TypeSH2001]

Interesting topic!
Just for the sake of playing with some wild ideas...did anyone of you read "Love is the ticket" in the UFO/alien forum?

I´m no scientist but it is my impression that too many in "the know" research these topics with a rather narrow scope. I mean, like GW, there seems to be at least two distinct fractions. Those who lean to natural cycle and those who claim the industrial age is to blame. How about both + unknown factors?! Probably a poor example and i am only using it as an illustration.

I remember reading some material a while back putting down theoretical numbers concerning natural resources vs. number of humans. If my memory serves me right there should be plenty for everybody which would indicated that the current population is not to big in itself. Anyone heard of such a study?

I don't know if anyone thought about this yet...

If close to 6 billion people will die soon the rest of the population is going to have to ither incenerate or burry the dead. That is not going to be a plesent job. You would have to do this quickly. Cause that many decomposing corpses are going to start a wealth of disease and plagues. Nice thought I know but the realist in me just wanted to point out that little thought. That would mean that each survivor would be responsible for incinerating or burrying 12,000 dead people. I don't know about all of you but I hope that some backhoes are left over so that I can use one for my share of the dead.

Then there are the nuclear plants, those things require 24/7 supervision and maintenance. Without it you cannot controll the rate of fusion and BOOM chernobyl all over again times how many plants are left unatended.

Communications will eventualy fail, if not immediatly due to those needing about the same kind of supervision. Given the perameters of the mass global dieoff would strand much of the survivors across the globe.

no more gas being refined unless it so happened that a select few knew the process and could generate some fuel for a limited area of people. Of course then theres the lack of getting crude oil. After a while your not going to have the manpower to drill and transport the crude to the refineries that still operate.

No boats, no lights, no motorcars, not a single luxury like Robinson Caruso as primitive as can be. As primitive as can be.

Originally posted by whatukno

No boats, no lights, no motorcars, not a single luxury like Robinson Caruso as primitive as can be. As primitive as can be.

So we'll see you here next week my friend. Be sure to wear a smile. And join the other castaways.... Heeere onnnn Gilligans Isle.

Sorry... couldn't resist.