It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Eco Group Calls For "Voluntary Human Extinction"

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2008 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Eco Group Calls For "Voluntary Human Extinction"


infowars.net

An environmental group says it's sole purpose is to recruit volunteers and educate enough people to eventually realize that the human race needs to completely die out in order that the planet can survive.

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT) says humans need to stop breeding and voluntarily progress our own slow demise in order that plants, animals and fragile ecosystems can survive.

The group's motto is "May we live long and die out". Their website explains their commitment to a long term goal of convincing the population of Earth that it has no future:
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on May, 13 2008 @ 05:45 AM
link   
Is this the end result of the "theory" that humans are parasites?

This group calls for the end of the human race, although they say they don't advocate murder or genocide - they simply want everyone to stop "breeding" voluntarily so that the earth, it's many species and ecosystems can survive.

Rubbish.

Man is an animal as well, and as such has as much right to live on the planet as any other animal.

This is the natural progression of the "theory" that man is responsible for everything bad that happens on earth - and whilst there's no denying that man is responsible for some pretty bad environmental and ecological problems, there's also other factors to consider.

ALL animals try to use every resource at their disposal, and to shape their environment for their own needs.

Man simply happens to be better at it than any other earth species.

infowars.net
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 



I can almost bet that none of that particular group of idiots is willing to be the first...the excuse? Something like this "Because I'm so enlightened I deserve to live on this planet, it's you, the unenlightened wasteful humans that don't...now excuse me whilst I jet off to some enviromental summit in my corporate jet." Or something like that...

How comical.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Well, why don't they start with themselves? Just mix a little koolaide and some cyanide and you will rid the world of a few idiots.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


Yep, they need to set an example for the rest of us. Of course, as you say, envirogroups rarely practice what they preach, always having some good excuse for why the rules only apply to everyone else and not them.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 09:01 AM
link   
I agree with the whole let them start first part...but lets be reasonable sterilization will take care of it just as easily as kool-aid, then they can be walking models for thier little orginization.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 09:05 AM
link   
Not too far off some NWO ideas about depopulation. Could this group be created for that purpose? The argument is so lopsided I don't see why anyone would endorse it. We are as much part of nature as anything else. Even though we seem to have gone a little crazy in our relationship to the environment, surely that is the problem rather than our extinction. It is like saying that a herd of animals stripping an area clean of vegetation should be terminated. Where then is the line to be drawn?



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 09:19 AM
link   
I’m not quite sure I understand the “logic” behind their beliefs. That is, if human beings are a product of evolution like any other organism. And we are alone in a cold, empty, meaningless universe (I’m assuming that they are primarily Atheistic in outlook). Then what difference does it make if the Earth is inhabited by people, tigers or mosquitoes – or populated at all for that matter. They state that “there is too much at stake”. What’s at stake? It’s a zero sum game. Everything is equal to everything else in the Godless hierarchy of a random universe. Furthermore, if we are products of evolution, then we are clearly superior and therefore have the evolutionary “right” to subdue inferior species.

They also claim that humans are “parasitic”. Tell me what species isn’t parasitic to some degree or another. Every living entity uses some other organism for its own advancement. Name one species that doesn’t either consume, push-out or deprive another species to control its own niche in the environment and propagate its own kind. This applies from Blue Whales down to the smallest micro-organisms. Why shouldn’t humans have the right to do this as well?



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 09:32 AM
link   
If we're not here, why should we even care? It's while we're on this big blue marble we call home that the work of enviromental care starts. These people are blinded by their idiocy, what harm man does, man can correct with the help of nature.

Let 'em drink their koolaid laced poison, they'll at least be out of the way of those of us who actually do what we can, where we can, when we can...that, in the end, is all that can be done.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 09:50 AM
link   
Erh? What is wrong with voluntarily not making children? As long as it is voluntary and nobody is tied up on a chair and forced to listen to them or whatever they can make any site they want. Alex Jones can get carried away if you ask me but that comes with the territory i think.

It's blown way out of proportion and i am not seeing a problem here.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Harman
 


I think it's harmfull because some people will actually listen to, and believe this drivel.

Yes, we need some kind of population control, but who decides who is fit to reproduce and who isn't?

Seems to me that the last person who advocated who was and who wasn't deserving of life killed himself in a bunker.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 09:57 AM
link   
uh, I think that the VHEMT is a "tongue in cheek" organization of a bunch of conceptual artists/computer geeks, looking to rankle the unhip.


Suck it up!!



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


It is VOLUNTARY and they want everybody that is alive today to life out their lives without any deathcamps, forced abortion or whatever.

And what better way of populationcontrol than a voluntary one? If 10% listens then it is a good thing. I really prefer this manner of population reduction above the ones i read about here and there with neutron bombs, race specific virusses and such like.

The whole almost compulsary breeding that almost everybody is doing on this planet is not holy so people with another outlook on the whole thing and not forcing anyone to get along have every right to set up a site. As long as they do not go around and sterilize people on the streets im fine with it.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Harman
 


In case you hadn't noticed, we already HAVE voluntary population control.

It's called contraception, or CHOICE - as in the choice whether or not to have kids.

These people are advocating a form of brainwashing where at some undefined point in the future after we have all been "re-educated" we will happily watch and help our own species die out.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


Erh? I really think you are being a bit paranoid in this one, sorry. The movement as it is does not look like a brainwashing campaign in my eyes. They have a website and that is it. If putting up a website with a controversial outlook on it counts as brainwashing then ATS can be counted as a brainwashing site.

These people put out their beliefs on a site and they hope that poeple will join them in the ( in their eyes ) noble cause of getting themselves out of the picture. No matter how you think about it yourself it is their standpoint and just because you have a different one is not a very good reason to demonize their way of life.


Accept it that their are 6.5 billion people on this earth and that almost everyone has different opinions on the way of life and how we are getting along with this planet. I'm not seeing commercials on TV, blimps in the air pamflets being handed out, people rounded up for a forced session of the good things of dying out or any of the other stuff that the capitalist brainwashers come up with to sell their stuff ( or in this case an ideology )



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:43 AM
link   
The message may be harsh, but they do have a point. The planet cannot survive with our population the way it is.

However, you don't need a voluntary extinction to set things right... a food shortage is in the cards for the future, so it certainly won't be voluntary.


I personally believe that in the long run, instead of simply eliminating ourselves, we should put all this technology to some good use. Go terraform another planet, leave this one behind, and on the way out, take our toxins with us.

They are right on one point, the earth is too small to house us.

But no, we don't need a full extinction.

The choices are clear though :

1. Die from war, famine, and disease.

2. Get off the rock.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Paranoid?

Or maybe I've seen this kind of tactic before, and understand how it escalates into a movement.

Al Gore is one who springs immediately to mind, then there's WMD's in Iraq, and Irans "nuclear ambitions" to name the more recent uses of lies and propaganda.

All it takes is for an official of a large government to decide that it's a good idea, and then it becomes a campaign of brainwashing and indoctrination into the "cause".



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:55 AM
link   
I agree with their premise in one aspect - any organism that is allowed to multiply unrestrained in an enclosed enviroment invaribly dies of it's own poisons.

The solution to saving this particular planet is simple; population control [either before or after birth depending on your religion]; or expansion of the environment to include an area off-planet.

These solutions are not new. I recall reading most of what I have just posted in the early 1960's.

Perhaps it would be something as simple as changing the IRS to the ERS [Eternal Review Service] and give them license to kill all can not pay up.


My preference however is off-planet migration. But if any feel compelled to voluntarily extinct themselves, I promise to send flowers.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 11:18 AM
link   
If we want to fix our problems maybe we should, you know, FIX our problems!

How is "oh all of you need to die in order to save the planet" a logical strategy? Its like suicide - its an easy way out.

Without speculating on theories about who controls this group, I'd say this group is made up of a bunch of lazy, unimaginative whiny PARENTS who set out to get their 15 seconds of fame with a controversial claim and no real solution or advice to help us truly move beyond our problems, that they claim are out of control, in a reasonable, realistic and better-for-everyone-involved fashion.

How about we sit down, focus on the problems at hand and think up solutions that don't involve mass extinction?

I wonder what these people's expertise in science is?

Do they know for a fact that the Earth will just go back to its wonderful time before humans existed?

Do they think the damage we've done to the air, land and water will just immediately heal itself and go away?

Do they think that the animal species we've affected will suddenly sense we're gone and return to their pre-human instincts and ways?

The damage is done. The only thing that will change once we're gone is that further damage won't be done. By the time the Earth and its animal and plant species recover from the mark we've left on the planet, who knows, maybe an Ice Age will come about, or an asteroid will hit.

Then what? At that point, what will we have accomplished?



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


If that is the case in the future and this movement is going radical on us then i stand corrected but i do not dismiss any idea that is out there on the what ifs of the world. The site and movement as it stands now is ok. If they change the rules on us it will be a different story all together.

And it is no joke that we are killing this planet so they have a point and no, in my opinion we do not have to get extinct to save this planet but a voluntary reduction of the population would be nice. and if it doesn't take hold, so be it.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join