Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Depopulation Agenda debunked!

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   
If there is this mass depopulation agenda being carried out, then why has the world population been going up instead of down? This is proof enough to prove there is no nefarious agenda going on.

1950 2.55 billion
1955 2.8 billion
1960 3 billion
1965 3.3 billion
1970 3.7 billion
1975 4 billion
1980 4.5 billion
1985 4.85 billion
1990 5.3 billion
1995 5.7 billion
1999 6 billion
2006 6.5 billion
2009 6.8 billion
2011 7 billion

source




posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by PharohGnosis
 


lets see
did you not notice the slow down trend in the population increases in the later consequtive 5 year periods?



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:51 AM
link   
This guy is putting his mulah where his mouth is


In the first clip you will hear him state in plain language that he considers VACCINES to be desirable to bring down the future population number P and so reduce Co2. You will also casually hear him promoting HEALTH CARE and REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES, to accomplish that same C02 reducing goal.

Here are Bill Gates' verbatim words [square parentheses additions for clarification purposes are mine though]:
"The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that [number of 9 billion] by perhaps 10 or 15 percent. But there we see an increase of about 1.3 [billion]."

Let's focus on the vaccines. Gates is stating that he considers vaccines to be useful in contributing to bring the projected population growth of 2.2 billion down to 1.3 billion, roughly one billion. What kind of properties can thus reasonably be deduced that vaccines are to have according to Gates? Well, basically all the properties that impede people to either have children, or successfully rear them. In other words, Gates implicitly advocates the definition of his favorite kind of vaccine to be one that fosters infertility, sterility and (early onset) senility (autism) alike. Note that Gates does not mention a word on the much touted purported intention of vaccines: to offer protection against relevant diseases

www.youtube.com...



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by PharohGnosis
If there is this mass depopulation agenda being carried out, then why has the world population been going up instead of down? This is proof enough to prove there is no nefarious agenda going on.

1950 2.55 billion
1955 2.8 billion
1960 3 billion
1965 3.3 billion
1970 3.7 billion
1975 4 billion
1980 4.5 billion
1985 4.85 billion
1990 5.3 billion
1995 5.7 billion
1999 6 billion
2006 6.5 billion
2009 6.8 billion
2011 7 billion

source



Because out-right killing people off has no profit...

But now say, a slow death from cancer? Cha-Ching!

Just look at the cancer rates from 1920 and then from 2010...

Or look at the infertility rates...

Or them giving kids birth control before the age of fourteen these days...

Or the very avoidable situation of world hunger...

Face it, whether they are trying to kill off 1 million Africans or 1 billion people from around the globe, there IS a depopulation occurring.


By the way, of America's 300 million people... 80 million are from the aging baby boomer generation. In the next ten years America's population will actually shrink according to many people.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Answering the question of whether or not depopulation is real, I always let the "elites" speak for themselves.




In a recent speech at TED, Bill Gates, stating that the global population was heading towards 9 billion, said, “If we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services (abortion & sterilization), we could lower that by perhaps 10-15%.”





“Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries”. -Dr. Henry Kissinger





“World population needs to be decreased by 50-70%” -Dr. Henry Kissinger





“The present vast overpopulation, now far beyond the world carrying capacity, cannot be answered by future reductions in the birth rate due to contraception, sterilization and abortion, but must be met in the present by the reduction of numbers presently existing. This must be done by whatever means necessary.” Initiative for the United Nations ECO-92 EARTH CHARTER





“War and famine would not do. Instead, disease offered the most efficient and fastest way to kill the billions that must soon die if the population crisis is to be solved. AIDS is not an efficient killer because it is too slow. My favorite candidate for eliminating 90 percent of the world’s population is airborne Ebola (Ebola Reston), because it is both highly lethal and it kills in days, instead of years. We’ve got airborne diseases with 90 percent mortality in humans. Killing humans. Think about that. You know, the bird flu’s good, too. For everyone who survives, he will have to bury nine” - Dr. Eric Pianka University of Texas (Pianka is an evolutionary ecologist and lizard expert, who revealed solutions for reducing the world’s population to an audience on population control. He received a standing ovation.)





“The illegal, we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.” -Dr. Henry Kissinger New York Times, Oct. 28, 1973




posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   
And of course, all of those population figures are correct. They would never fudge the numbers.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:19 AM
link   
That Bill Gates being a eugenist/depopulationist has been debunked before www.splcenter.org...



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Another point to consider is the age of the current population.
Consider these figures.

Ageing population

That is a massive section of the population receiving long term medical services.

This is possibly one of the reasons for the recent publicising of Dignitas services.

The treatment of the elderly, particularly in Britain is likely to push many older people to consider ending their lives rather than being cared for by our current facilities.

People have been living for longer and longer due to medical intervention and 'better' living standards. The quality of life is better for some than others. Once the taboo of suicide is removed, as it is being in some circumstances, the option to choose when and how we die may indeed reduce the population to some extent.

Sad but certainly conceivable.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:58 AM
link   
We breed like bacteria. I doubt there is any method that could stop us without completely wiping us out, our at least decimate us to unsustainable numbers on a ruined planet.

Either way it's going to be messy.It's down to ourselves to regulate our reproduction, but many people don't get it. Some just cant see the problem with having 5,6,7 + children, several of whom will likely go on to have large families. If you want 10 kids, try conceiving 2 and adopt 8.

I don't know whether there is a credible depopulation agenda in effect or not, but I do know this, if there is , it ain't working and the human race will sometime in the next 1000 years or so, drown in it's own excrement



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by blah yada
We breed like bacteria. I doubt there is any method that could stop us without completely wiping us out, our at least decimate us to unsustainable numbers on a ruined planet.

Either way it's going to be messy.It's down to ourselves to regulate our reproduction, but many people don't get it. Some just cant see the problem with having 5,6,7 + children, several of whom will likely go on to have large families. If you want 10 kids, try conceiving 2 and adopt 8.

I don't know whether there is a credible depopulation agenda in effect or not, but I do know this, if there is , it ain't working and the human race will sometime in the next 1000 years or so, drown in it's own excrement


There are 3.79 million square miles of land in the US alone.

There are 640 acres in a square mile.

There are 2,425,600,000 acres of land in the US.

There are 7 billion people on the planet.

You could give everyone on the planet a quarter-acre of land and not even fill the US.

Over-population is a myth.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by YouAreLiedTo

There are 3.79 million square miles of land in the US alone.

There are 640 acres in a square mile.

There are 2,425,600,000 acres of land in the US.

There are 7 billion people on the planet.

You could give everyone on the planet a quarter-acre of land and not even fill the US.

Over-population is a myth.


Over population is not classified by the amount of land available, but by the amount of resources available. It certainly isn't a myth.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by paradox

Over population is not classified by the amount of land available, but by the amount of resources available. It certainly isn't a myth.


That is called conservation. It is completely separate from the population debate.

Just because DeBeers is busy strip-mining half of Africa doesn't mean it's a population problem... It's a social problem.

Again, we can fit the entire planet's population in the US alone... comfortably.

If we used some common sense with the rest of the land left on the planet, those precious resources wouldn't be so scarce.

Over-population is when a place cannot support the number of inhabitants. And that is simply not true pertaining to humans and Earth...

There could be 1,000,000 people on the planet... And there would still be one group of jackasses to mess it up for everyone else.

That isn't over-population, it's being a bad human, in my opinion.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by YouAreLiedTo

Originally posted by blah yada
We breed like bacteria. I doubt there is any method that could stop us without completely wiping us out, our at least decimate us to unsustainable numbers on a ruined planet.

Either way it's going to be messy.It's down to ourselves to regulate our reproduction, but many people don't get it. Some just cant see the problem with having 5,6,7 + children, several of whom will likely go on to have large families. If you want 10 kids, try conceiving 2 and adopt 8.

I don't know whether there is a credible depopulation agenda in effect or not, but I do know this, if there is , it ain't working and the human race will sometime in the next 1000 years or so, drown in it's own excrement


There are 3.79 million square miles of land in the US alone.

There are 640 acres in a square mile.

There are 2,425,600,000 acres of land in the US.

There are 7 billion people on the planet.

You could give everyone on the planet a quarter-acre of land and not even fill the US.

Over-population is a myth.



7 billion people.

10,000,000,000,000,000,000 Insects at any giving time





8.7 million species of Biological Life on Earth








Yes we can Co habitat on Earth,

but HUMANS DONT SHARE




If things dont stay in balance, Mother nature will Kill what ever is out of Balance



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
your never more than 6 foot from a rat



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo


Just look at the cancer rates from 1920 and then from 2010...

 


Hard for people to get cancer when dying of TB and Influenza*



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo


There are 3.79 million square miles of land in the US alone.

There are 640 acres in a square mile.

There are 2,425,600,000 acres of land in the US.

There are 7 billion people on the planet.

You could give everyone on the planet a quarter-acre of land and not even fill the US.

Over-population is a myth.


Who has to live in the Grand Canyon, the desert and in the swamps?
 



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Check out the Georgia Guide Stones(google it). The population, at some point, will be reduced to 500.000.000, just a little bit more than US population today.



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by PharohGnosis
 

Gates debunked?
dunno
thats why I quoted him
funny the jones "debunkers" did not.
edit on 5-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
There could certainly be an agenda going on to encourage a slowing of the population growth or even a slight decline. However at the same time there is a strong interest to maintain enough working hands and plenty of unemployed hands to replace the working hans, if they think they can demand better working conditions or more money.


Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo


There are 3.79 million square miles of land in the US alone.

There are 640 acres in a square mile.

There are 2,425,600,000 acres of land in the US.

There are 7 billion people on the planet.

You could give everyone on the planet a quarter-acre of land and not even fill the US.

Over-population is a myth.


Who has to live in the Grand Canyon, the desert and in the swamps?
 



Yeah with such a vast country why did Americans populate the tornado zone the earthquakes zone and the swamps?
edit on 5-3-2012 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by YouAreLiedTo

But now say, a slow death from cancer? Cha-Ching!

Just look at the cancer rates from 1920 and then from 2010...



The population keeps going up, so of course there will be more people with cancer and diseases are there are more people to get them.






top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join