Title: Peter Ward on the Gulf Disaster on Coast to Coast in May Source:
[None] URL Source:[None] Published:Jun 20, 2010 Author:. Post Date:2010-06-20 15:01:40 by christine Keywords:None Views:431 Comments:26
Ward was on CtoC last night, but the youtubes have not yet been posted. I'll post them when they are. In the meantime, here's Part 1 of his last interview from May. You can access Parts 2-8 on YT.
How come EVERY Tom, Dick and harry comes out now? Where is 4um's O_I to help us other than is mere "prayer" or "look up into the sky for guidance" mantra method?
I see you are becoming prejudiced on this issue. Are you sucking up to the Bilderberg mantra or the CFR based upon the "talent" of O_I to string to polysyabylls together in a complete sentence even if the crap is meaningless?
Look back on 4um, I was the FIRST to discuss this BP issue. Why? Because BIG_PIE_HOLE_GLUTTONOUS_GAS_BAGS, such as O_I don't understand that the population levels of our planet are killing it. He denies it. He blames the tragedy not on the core issues but on marketing skills and government.
Sorry you feel that way. But I am correct in perspective. Your pal (O_I) sucks in his attempt to understand the physics and trauma of over population concerning human growth.
#6. To: wudidiz, christine, Nostradumbass, all (#4)
Nostradumbass is again predicting the end of the world from his ill conceived and uncritically interiorized misinformation on population? Sigh! It is like listening to a stuck groove on a bad Children's Record.
He does have a grasp on the central premise of the problem. Without overpopulation we never would have the market size to justify drilling in the Gulf.
I sure ain't for voluntary extinction to save the Earth as some of the more extremist green anarchists are; but I see the extinction danger in ignoring a problem like overpopulation.
And often overpopulation is attacked because the powers that be want the capital resource of laborers. And they don't just want enough to do the work, they want enough so people have to fight one another for inadequate jobs.
That keeps wages down, and people become so intent on fighting and scapegoating one another, they ignore the rich and powerful who engineer things in such a way they get most of the pie to the slivers workers get.
Our leaders deserve scorn and the boot, and in some cases the rope for ignoring the sacred responsibility every single species on this planet has to respect, which is to maintain their size that has them living within their means.
Unbridled growth is the way of cancer cells. And like cancer, we as a species are so big a hog on worldly resources we endanger the life of the larger body that is planet Earth.
He does have a grasp on the central premise of the problem. Without overpopulation we never would have the market size to justify drilling in the Gulf.
Nonsense. This oil spill or leak or whatever you want to call it has nothing to do with how many people live in the world. The blame is entirely the fault of those that drilled the well and those that allowed them to.
I must beg to differ. The justification for drilling in the Gulf, particularly at this depth, has nothing whatsoever to do with population. It has everything to do with money and control.
We have large oil deposits, in easily accessible areas, that have been sealed off and exploration/production prevented. It is even possible that the Gulf oil field is so vast that it extends inland and would allow for easier and more cost effective access. As well there is Gull Island in Alaska which has been capped and kept out of production - with deposits reputed to be on par with Saudi Arabia.
We do not have an oil shortage we have an oil oligopoly that sees its maximum profit in controlling the flow of oil just as deBeers controls the plentiful supply of diamonds.
However, I think it a virtual certainty that technology already exists, and is kept suppressed, that would obviate the need for 90%+ of the Petroleum we now use.
You are right that a particular small group of hyper-wealthy individuals (centered in the Banking District of the City of London) now effectively control the planet, but that IS the problem not overpopulation. While my personal preference would be for a stable or somewhat smaller world population that is not currently in the cards short of the massive extermination programs that our hyper-wealthy ruling psychotics wish to implement. In any event we have sufficient resources to sustain a population double what we have now - easily. I don't want that, but we do have the ability to do that and sustain humanity in a decent standard of living. It is an interesting statistic that in developed countries with high living standards that population is decreasing naturally, and over time the population of the planet would decline to a reasonable level by raising everyone's living standards thus reducing the manic drive to produce progeny to propagate the species. Population continues to increase only in the Third World and that is a reaction to the low life expectancy and high infant mortality rate. Reduce that pressure and you reduce the drive to proliferate like Rabbits.
Equating humanity to cancer cells is an apples versus aardvarks argument. The two are not an identity and it is a stretch to create a simile. Cancer cells are non-sentient and do not create their own environment. To attempt to equate them with humanity simply expresses a viewpoint which discounts all of the good humanity has done and has the capacity to do.