Thread: Gulf Oil Slick
View Single Post
Old 06-17-2010, 05:40 PM   #152
dreadgeek
Power Femme

How Do You Identify?:
Cinnamon spiced, caramel colored, power-femme
Preferred Pronoun?:
She
Relationship Status:
Married to a wonderful horse girl
 
dreadgeek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lat: 45.60 Lon: -122.60
Posts: 1,733
Thanks: 1,132
Thanked 6,844 Times in 1,493 Posts
Rep Power: 21474852
dreadgeek Has the BEST Reputationdreadgeek Has the BEST Reputationdreadgeek Has the BEST Reputationdreadgeek Has the BEST Reputationdreadgeek Has the BEST Reputationdreadgeek Has the BEST Reputationdreadgeek Has the BEST Reputationdreadgeek Has the BEST Reputationdreadgeek Has the BEST Reputationdreadgeek Has the BEST Reputationdreadgeek Has the BEST Reputation
Member Photo Albums
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kam View Post
Ummm....I don't even know where to begin. I think I'll start here:

"During a recent TED conference, an organization which is sponsored by one of the largest toxic waste polluters on the planet, Gates told the audience that vaccines need to be used to reduce world population figures in order to solve global warming and lower CO2 emissions to almost zero."

This is NOT what Bill Gates said. What's more, the author, Watson, is wrong when he states that vaccines, reproductive health services and improved health care wouldn't have a *downward* pressure on population growth. In fact, it would have a downward pressure for a very straightforward reason--the fewer babies that die in infancy or early childhood, the fewer children women tend to have. Unless you are from a Mormon or conservative Catholic family, chances are your number of siblings is some number under 6. However, go back to generations born in the late 19th or early 20th century and that number will jump to 10 or more. My mother came from a family of 13! siblings. No member of her family had more than four kids. What was different? The 20th century improvement in medicine and public health.

The fact that both the main Prison Planet web site and the article (which is the ONLY reference to Bill Gate's statement about using vaccines to reduce population) use a howler of a statement and fail to link to the *full text* of Bill Gate's TED talk makes them suspect.

There is a great deal of non-trivial difference between trying to get to zero (or better yet, negative) population growth and an 80 to 90% die off.

Cheers
Aj
__________________
Proud member of the reality-based community.

"People on the side of The People always ended up disappointed, in any case. They found that The People tended not to be grateful or appreciative or forward-thinking or obedient. The People tended to be small-minded and conservative and not very clever and were even distrustful of cleverness. And so, the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn’t that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people. As soon as you saw people as things to be measured, they didn’t measure up." (Terry Pratchett)
dreadgeek is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to dreadgeek For This Useful Post: