CultureWatch

Bill Muehlenberg's commentary on issues of the day...

A Tale of Three Greenies

Jan 23, 2013

We all should be concerned about taking care of planet earth. After all, this is our only home, and we owe it to our children to leave them a habitable planet. But we should also be concerned about radical greenies who are human-haters and coercive utopians.

Sadly we have had too many of these radical environmentalists who have pushed their destructive agendas on the rest of us. And some of them, even having been proven to be false prophets in the past, are still carrying on. The classic example of this is Paul Ehrlich. I have written about him often before, including here: www.billmuehlenberg.com/2008/01/08/demography-and-the-people-haters/

Even though he has been shown to be a fraud and a Chicken Little panic merchant, that has not deterred him from still making outrageous statements. He is at it again, declaring his draconian proposals to save the planet. Consider what one news report says:

“Paul Ehrlich, the doomsday biologist who coined the term ‘The Population Bomb’ more than 40 years ago with a book of the same name, says the world now faces ‘dangerous trends’ of global climate change and overpopulation, which threaten our extinction.

“Reducing the number of people is still the answer to civilization’s woes, Ehrlich and his wife Anne wrote in an article published Jan. 9 by London’s Royal Society. ‘To our minds, the fundamental cure, reducing the scale of the human enterprise (including the size of the population) to keep its aggregate consumption within the carrying capacity of Earth is obvious but too much neglected or denied,’ Ehrlich wrote.

“Ehrlich spelled out exactly what he meant in an interview with a liberal blog/news site called Raw Story. ‘Giving people the right to have as many people, as many children that they want is, I think, a bad idea,’ the Web site quoted Ehrlich as saying. ‘Nobody, in my view, has the right to have 12 children or even three unless the second pregnancy is twins,’ Ehrlich added.”

There you have it: don’t you dare even consider having three children. And the really scary thing is, if this guy had his way, he would ensure that this nonsense is enforced with the heavy hand of the law. No wonder these folks are known as coercive utopians.

But he is not alone in his anti-people agenda. Fellow environmentalist David Attenborough has also come out recently arguing for the very same thing. Indeed, he calls human beings a “plague”. Here is how one news report covers this:

“Humans are a plague on the Earth that need to be controlled by limiting population growth, according to Sir David Attenborough. The television presenter said that humans are threatening their own existence and that of other species by using up the world’s resources.

“He said the only way to save the planet from famine and species extinction is to limit human population growth. ‘We are a plague on the Earth. It’s coming home to roost over the next 50 years or so. It’s not just climate change; it’s sheer space, places to grow food for this enormous horde. Either we limit our population growth or the natural world will do it for us, and the natural world is doing it for us right now,’ he told the Radio Times.

“Sir David, who is a patron of the Optimum Population Trust, has spoken out before about the ‘frightening explosion in human numbers’ and the need for investment in sex education and other voluntary means of limiting population in developing countries.”

As bad as all this human-hating rhetoric is, these folks in fact happen to be quite wrong. The real problem facing planet earth is not a population explosion but a population implosion – a birth dearth in other words. But I have spoken to that elsewhere, eg: www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/10/29/seven-billion-is-good-news-not-bad-news/

But another very famous environmentalist has emerged as a breath of fresh air. He is as well known as the other two, but because he has not jumped on the radical climate change bandwagon and bought the PC agenda, he has turned from being hero to villain.

The story goes this way: “He turned 80 last week but he is just as he always was — a joy and a treat. Until, that is, we touch on climate change and the vicious backlash he suffered when, in 2004, and in the face of scientific convention and public opinion, he dismissed man-made global warming as ‘poppycock!.’‘From that moment, I really wasn’t welcome at the BBC. They froze me out, because I don’t believe in global warming. My career dried up. I was thrown out of my own conservation groups and I got spat at in London.

“‘And the worst thing that ever happened — I got a letter that said, “David Bellamy is the worst . . .” Oh, what was it? Damn, I’m always forgetting things. Rosemary?!’ ‘Are you on about the paedophile thing?’ she says, emerging with tea. ‘Yes! It said: “David Bellamy is a paedophile because he doesn’t believe in global warming and is killing our children”. And it’s just nonsense. For the last 16 years, temperatures have been going down and the carbon dioxide has been going up and the crops have got greener and grow quicker. We’ve done plenty to smash up the planet, but there’s been no global warming caused by man.’

“During his heyday as a conservationist and TV personality in the Eighties and Nineties, David was everywhere — peering through palm trees, wading through marshlands and delivering wonderful rambling monologues illustrated with madly windmilling hands. ‘I never used a script. I didn’t have people sitting in branches for six months to get a shot. I just talked and talked. It was wonderful.’ He made all those TV programmes, wrote more than 45 books, inspired comedian Lenny Henry’s ‘grapple me grapenuts’ catchphrase and starred in a Ribena commercial.”

Amazing how our elites and the MSM will turn on you if you do not toe the line and regurgitate the official PC nostrums. For those sins Bellamy has become a persona non grata. And here is an interesting part of the story. In a different article Bellamy says that Attenborough used to feel the same way about climate change:

“Mr Bellamy, 80, who used to present wildlife shows for the BBC and ITV, claims he has been ‘shunned’ for his views on climate change. In an interview with the Independent on Sunday, he said that ‘all the work dried up’ after he questioned whether the world was warming. ‘I was shunned. They did not want to hear the other side,’ he said. In contrast, Sir David, 86, who continues to broadcast, has gradually come to be a proponent of global warming after initial skepticism. ‘He (Sir David) was on our side at first but then he had a change of heart,’ said Mr Bellamy.”

So there you go: either hold the ideological party line, or face the consequences. No wonder so many do, with careers and money and endorsements and income all on the line, it is much easier to be a true believer and go with the crowd, than risk taking a challenging opinion.

This of course is not science in action, but scientism. They may not burn renegades at the stake any more, but the ‘heretics’ will still be ostracised, penalised and persecuted for daring to hold differing views. Fortunately some have enough honesty and courage to stand against the tide.

But most keep shouting the party line. And in doing so they betray what real human-haters and pseudo-scientists they really are. And as I keep saying, I will wait till these humanity cullers start leading by example here.

cnsnews.com/news/article/ehrlich-nobody-has-right-have-12-children-or-even-three
www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9815862/Humans-are-plague-on-Earth-Attenborough.html
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266188/David-Bellamy-The-BBC-froze-I-dont-believe-global-warming.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9798713/David-Attenborough-was-sceptical-about-global-warming-claims-David-Bellamy.html

[1269 words]

11 Responses to A Tale of Three Greenies

  • Well, I’m having as many as I can humanely have. So there.

    Jenna Priest

  • No surprises that their solution to the “human problem” never involves getting rid of themselves but rather someone else or their children. They love euthanasia so much, why don’t they lead the way and apply it to themselves. Or perhaps they could be extremely late term aborted? It all rolls quite well with their agendas, really.

    It could almost be summarised as other people paying the price for them to live happily and healthily. Sounds like a really selfless utopia that we can all get behind.

    Simon Fox

  • Attenborough’s an atheist and a queer too. No wander he wants to see the end of humanity.
    Len Goodman

  • British TV comedy team, The Goodies once did a show which satirised the Animal Liberation movement. In the show, the animals had had a successful revolution against their human oppressors: Wildlife documentaries were presented by a long-eared, furry David Rabbit-Burrow, who declared gleefully at one point during his commentary on the human “wildlife”, “Oh, look! There goes a Bellamy!”.

    Denial of the divine mandate of Genesis 1:26,28 for mankind to rule over earth’s fauna opens for us the inglorious prospect of our sinking as a species to something ethically inferior to animals.

    That said, the biblical command to rule surely implies a just rule which refuses to equate rule with rapacity towards other life forms who share this planet with us.

    Is global warming a subconscious expression of that dreadfully unfashionable biblical prediction in 2 Peter 3 of a fiery end for our present world and those who reject divine mercy – a kind of prophetic “Freudian slip” on the part of those who not inclined to believe in the Last Judgement?

    John Wigg

  • I recently watched a documentary on the ‘reintroduction’ of the wolf into Yellowstone National Park called ‘Crying Wolf’. Not brilliant from a production point of view, but the straightforward testimony by those directly affected in surrounding areas and the connection towards the end to the overall nefarious agenda of anti-human extremists made me sit up and take notice. Basically, the idea behind it is to drive people away and turn otherwise economically useful country into something people have no reason to go into.

    The key was towards the end where the film connected the dots – ‘reintroducing’ (being a false word to use anyway, but it is handily emotional to persuade outsiders) – from why the government would override local people’s wishes to exposing a mindset that truly believes humans are a pest, and on multiple levels why that is truly evil.

    Ranchers who have lived in the areas for generations, as well as hunting people are finding their livelihoods going under because stock are being harassed and killed painfully. In many cases, wolves just make animals lame so they cannot walk and just lay there for days before they die. Wolves do not kill only for food, they kill because they can, constantly.

    What the film does is show the merit of human intervention, and how that is actually itself an environmental sustainable decision to let people have private property in those areas as part of the web of life to make land liveable. The simple fact is that if your property and life’s investment is in your land, you are personally motivated to manage it well. Someone from outside does not have to live with their decisions, but you do.

    Letting people manage country areas because they own them is the best way to make the future work. It is also quite biblical.
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=X52Vbn024Ig

    Mark Rabich

  • Ehrlich has only one daughter, which is OK as a personal decision by him and his wife, but I wonder how many siblings he has and where he is in that group?
    John Angelico

  • On the subject of Green policies, Germany has some of the highest electricity costs in the world. Bjorn Lomborg writes: “Real German electricity prices for households have increased 61% since 2000. One quarter of household costs now stems directly from renewable energy. Also, the increase is *not* because of increasing production costs (which have actually slightly declined since 1978). The increase is due to dramatically increasing taxes, most noticeably from the Renewable Energy Act (EEG). In 2013 the EEG will increase 50% to 6.28 euro-cent (5.28 cents plus 19% VAT). In June 2011, Chancellor Angela Merkel famously promised to keep EEG prices stable, but this promise has now clearly been broken. The German household will pay 24% of its electricity bill to renewables.”

    So its ironic that Germans are now cutting down trees to keep warm to save on electricity prices: “With energy costs escalating, more Germans are turning to wood burning stoves for heat. That, though, has also led to a rise in tree theft in the country’s forests. Woodsmen have become more watchful.”

    www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/tree-theft-on-the-rise-in-germany-as-heating-costs-increase-a-878013.html

    Damien Spillane

  • Children are the future of any country. Without children countries are doomed and some have now recognised this and are trying to correct it but it would seem to be too late.

    One only has to look at the mess America is in today with a President who not only supports the killing of babies in the womb but promotes it at every opportunity especially through funding.

    It was not all that long ago that America supported the Nuremberg Trials? Surely the experiments and killings of our future generations today are no different.

    Madge Fahy

  • The reason why the Greenies have so much power is because it has been handed to them by the MSM who always defer to them for their opinion on almost every subject.

    Gary Baxter

  • Yes quite right Gary

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • I’m not sure about the notion that Attenborough is a queer. Len, can you show us any evidence of this as any scouring I’ve done on the web has revealed nothing. (Please note, I don’t mean to challenge you but I really can find no evidence to support this.)

    Mick Koster.

Leave a Reply