“The “Population Bomb” Echoes

madhedgefundtrader's picture

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
metaforge's picture

Enough AGW back & forth crap... let's get back to the economy going into the shitter.  That's far more entertaining.

Flakmeister's picture

This is almost a real discussion... the economic stuff is back and forth crap.

ATG's picture

MHFT at it yet again:

Food prices will skyrocket, and billions could die...

At greatest risk are the big rice producing areas in South Asia, which depend on glacial run off from the Himalayas. If the glaciers melt, this crucial supply of fresh water will disappear. California faces a similar problem if the Sierra snowpack fails to show up in sufficient quantities, as it has in recent years.

Rising sea levels displacing 500 million people in low lying coastal areas is another big problem. One of the 79 year old professor’s early books The Population Bomb was required reading for me in college in 1970, and I used to drive up from Los Angeles to hear his lectures (followed by the obligatory side trip to the Haight-Ashbury).

“Super consumption” in the US needs to be reined in where the population is growing the fastest.

Scratch a do-gooder and find an elitist hypocrite totalitarian.

China, Japan and Russia are in demographic trouble thanks to their oligarchs. America is in political trouble after one-worlders exported our economy and imported illegal labour to lower their costs and our standard of living to global levels, while carefully protecting their own pensions, perks and planes.

Anyone who quotes Stanford butterfly entomologist Paul Erhlich or his Obama adviser sidekick John Holdren as authoritative, probably did spend too much time in Haight-Ashbury.


For starters, consider the Simon-Ehrlich wager Ehrlich lost and tried to re-bet, throwing good money after bad in gambler's ruin.


Then consider Ehrlich or Holdgren, CFR, the Limits to Growth Club of Rome, the Bilderberger Trilateralist conspiratorial one-world central-planning fixers spewing their dire social toxic fascism since World War II, with some of the world still thriving despite fractional banking and the IRS.

Consider not only was Obama, Gore's and Goldman's Chicago Climate Exchange sold off as a loser, it was closed down and shipped to socialist Europe, while Obama let BP foul the air, land and water with deadly Corexit.


Consider the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC UN Climate Change panel admitted their mistake about Himalayan Glaciers disappearing by 2035:


Consider the Sierra Snow Pack is 128% above normal, CA statewide water 124% above normal and dustbowls in the San Joaquin Valley bread, fruit and nut basket will go away if Judges siding with land-grabbers stop protecting Sacramento Delta Smelt bait fish at the expense of farmers and food consumers for a few fishermen and environmentalists telling whale's tales.



Consider Nobel Prize and Oscar Winner AlGore warning of rising sea levels while Gulfstreaming and carbon emitting around the globe on Apple and Google options while buying two luxury seaside properties in Montecito and San Francisco, the former with six fireplaces, 9 bathrooms, a heated pool and spa, and the latter which used to be underwater at high tide.



Are they really worried about rising sea levels and global warming or is one of them moving to the Maldives after the divorce?

Consider Antarctica, where 70% of the world's freshwater is, added steadily to its interior ice pack, and the Arctic ice, when wind ice movements are measured, is cooler and thicker while the polar bear population increases.



Never mind scientists receiving grant money for global warming in the Naughties were warning about global cooling in the Seventies and some are now warning about another climactic Little Ice Age because of historically low sunspots correlated with the coldest winters and summers in 99 years:


Consider many people that fund global warming are elititists that want to not only tell their supposed inferiors what to do, but take their income and property away in the event.

As ZH posted today, Americans saw a real decline in their standard of living since 1973, thanks to cockeyed expensive politics like global warming, with crooked science like East Anglia University and monopoly media mesmerism just before the Danish Global Warming Conference Obama was scheduled to address after his Nobel Peace Prize despite refusing to close Gitmo or fix healthcare and jobs while expanding the Afghanistan Iraq War destabilization drones and body bags into Pakistan and the Middle East.


Consider not only is most global warming and cooling caused by solar cycles, but volcanos and methane gas release. Did anyone else notice global warming on Mars?

As in most things, follow the money to decode the BS.

Speaking of that, MHFT and I appear in rare agreement on POT, up 307% since December 2008, based in Saskatchewan, where the wheat is grown.

Our Big4 held DYY is up +165% since March 2009, despite cotango.




Which do you choose MHFT?

http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php?extend.138 5:13


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSTLDel-G9k 3:59

locinvestor's picture

A few years ago I saw Frank Luntz leading a "survey group". The subject was global warming. His comments and most of the audience said that it's all a hoax. It was basically a neocon commercial.

Then, he was on a CBC documentary in Toronto about global warming. He actually looked at the reporter and said, yeah, I know it's real. But if I said shit like that in the States my career's over.

First, the hypocracy is no surprise. Second, why do people ignore the obvious? One reason unfortunately is mass denial. Call it prioritizing, call it I-can't-deal-with-this right now, whatever. If that's not true, then why do people continue to support Obama, despite everything that he's done?

To a certain extent, many love to armchair quarteback on things like this. Bitching about it in the privacy of their own home (or on some site) makes them feel like they're sticking it to the Powers that Be. Others feel like Wikileaks will save them from the evil neocons that are running the world.

First, no they won't. The lastest on Assange says that he's trying to trademark his name.This means he wants a licensing fee every time someone uses it. Yes, he does have legal bills to pay. But aside from that, does it bother anybody than he's getting rich while Bradley Manning's being tortured in solitary confinement? If so many really support Manning, how come there's no national progressive fund raising movement to help him?

1) People feel like they don't have the money

2) People are terrified that they'll be arrested for "aiding a terrorist"

3) Maybe these same people are afraid of retaliation in some way if they do.

I kow many think that Assange is the Perfect Guy to save us all. But this double standard bothers me.


Hexus's picture

Assange is working for the CIA whether he knows it or not, the only people damaged by those leaks were enemies of the Anglo-American Empire, Italy, Libya, Russia, Pakistan, Egypt. He might be a product of MK Ultra, his upbringing certainly supports this. They call it a limited hangout operation, you reveal the secrets that you want people to see, but not the ones you don't, this method avoids political reprisals from the countries you've damaged and strengthens trust in your patsy who can go on to print lies once they have the trust of the people.

dizzyfingers's picture

And eventually the sun will burn itself out. What are we supposed to do about that?

Does anyone think that stocks are going to keep them fed if there's famine? 

metaforge's picture

Tru dat.  Garden, bitchez!!!!!

Hexus's picture

In all seriousness, never in my life have I witnessed such a disgusting weasly fucking cunt as zerohedge has put on display for us today. It's amazing.

First you bring out the thoroughly discredited idea of catastrophic man-made global warming, then you wave your genocidal anti-human credentials in our face by praising Paul Ehrlich, Obama's eugenicist in chief.

ALL THE WHILE YOU'RE TELLING US TO GO LONG ANYTHING RELATED TO FOOD PRODUCTION AND AGRICULTURE. Such speculation will drive up the price of food and kill hundeds of millions of people over the next decade.

Now if you just left it at that it wouldn't be so bad, I'd just think "hey there's another selfish anti-human scumbag babbling about useless eaters." but no. You try to cover up your sick agenda by talking about US over consumption and a lack of education and poor economies in the third world being to blame for rising rates of poverty and population growth. Despite the fact that your two solutions are a carbon tax (destroys economies) and speculation (rich westerners making money off driving up food prices, effectively stealing from the poor, adding to US over consumption).

Flakmeister's picture

Speaking of cunts... Someone should slip one over your head and fuck some sense into you..

Hexus's picture

And I bet you think you're left wing, next time you call a redneck incompassionate look at yourself.

Flakmeister's picture

 My politics doesn't matter, and the plight of the people you seem to worry about is due to incompetence on the left and right... It's mainly due to greed, a universal sin.

FWIW, instead of getting all weepy for the masses, figure out how to even educate people as to the problem, and once there is concensus on the problem, we might be able to work out a solution. Our track record is pretty shitty in this regard, and I fear that the free market Gaia-style is going to rule...

Hexus's picture

Your politics doesn't matter but the fact that you're hiding your agenda under left cover makes you a hypocrite. Greed may be a universal sin but at least MY greed has limits, I'm not willing to steal from starving people through food price speculation in order to make some money.

First we have to figure out what the problem is, I think the problem is poverty, you think the problem is over population. I'm trying to educate YOU about how you are either wrong or twisted.

Flakmeister's picture

 No the problem is we can't get the food to those that need it because of greed.

I hardly call buying calls on POT, investing in TNH stealing from the poor. As to my own greed, I live extremely modestly. My indulgence is wine and good food. I drive a car that is worth less than my trading profits from last friday. I despise conspicuous consumption.

Hexus's picture

They can't afford food, because it costs too much idiot.

Why does it cost too much? Because people like you speculate with it, where do your profits come from, ever thought about that? There has to be a winner and a loser in a trade so who loses out? The losers are the people who have to buy the food at inflated prices. So effectively you're stealing from the poor.

I don't care how "modestly" you live, whatever you DO buy is paid for with blood money in my opinion. Stick a tiny windmill on your house, buy a goat for the garden, I don't give a shit.

Flakmeister's picture

  Ah so you do not invest in anything? That is pretty twisted logic you just used.

BTW, your thesis that global growth is the solution is flawed. You are aware of a little thing called peak oil? Show me real growth in the face of declining net energy supplies. And you are aware that oil production per capita peaked way back in 1979?

Chew on this for a while:


And, yeah, you caught me a foul mood from dealing with the complete idiots above. I will say that you more rational than most here...


getplaning's picture

Historically, all the great civilizations that rose and fell around the globe disppeared very suddenly. This one will be no different.

Climate change deniers can stamp their feet and plug their ears while they shout, "Lalalalala, I can't hear you! Al Gore! Climategate! Look, it's snowing!" all they want. The fact that their arguments are largely political shows they know they are on the wrong side of the discussion, but ideology trumps rationale for these people.

The momentum of global warming is now too great to stop, and human nature being what it is, nothing will be done to stop it anyway. So what's the point of arguing about it?

Gee, I sound like a real ZeroHedger, don't I?


brandy night rocks's picture

Gee, I sound like a real ZeroHedger, don't I?


Actually, you sound less like a real ZeroHedger and more like one of those fucking Administration-contracted sock puppets that pop up and parrot the same progressive bullshit every time one of these topics comes up on this site.

Calmyourself's picture

You sound like a fool who makes points by inference and retracts said points when someone jams them up your ass sideways..  Yahoo finance awaits your return...

gabeh73's picture

"Historically, all the great civilizations that rose and fell around the globe disppeared very suddenly. This one will be no different."


so your point is that we need more CO2 taxes why?!


"Climate change deniers can stamp their feet and plug their ears while they shout, "Lalalalala, I can't hear you! Al Gore! Climategate! Look, it's snowing!" all they want. The fact that their arguments are largely political shows they know they are on the wrong side of the discussion, but ideology trumps rationale for these people."


so how again are CO2 taxes going to save the lives of so many?


"The momentum of global warming is now too great to stop, and human nature being what it is, nothing will be done to stop it anyway. So what's the point of arguing about it?"


So you advocate taxes to raise energy costs because you care so much for the poor people in the world....and these taxes are going to save the poor people who we need to reduce in number by 2-4 billion people?

and yes we need less people but we need to keep the smart people like you right?

and the taxes will first go to central bankers who will make sure it is used to most benefit the poor people?

and now the momentum of global warming is so great that it doesn't matter what we do...but we should still pay as many taxes to the elite as possible anyway or else it is just because we are senseless footstampers?

ok I'm sold...lets tax carbon dioxide...I am opening my ears. You have convinced me that I should pay more taxes instead of sending my kids to private school to learn silly things like logic.



Gee, I sound like a real ZeroHedger, don't I?

getplaning's picture

No, you sound like another typical idiot.

"so your point is that we need more CO2 taxes why?!"

--Uh, no, I never said that, did I? Read my post a few more times.

"so how again are CO2 taxes going to save the lives of so many?"

--Uh, no, again, I never said anything about taxes. But you seem to be hung up on this one political point. 

"So you advocate taxes to raise energy costs because you care so much for the poor people in the world....and these taxes are going to save the poor people who we need to reduce in number by 2-4 billion people?"

--Uh, no, again, I never said anything about taxes or energy costs...If you read my post a few more times it might start to sink in...

"and yes we need less people but we need to keep the smart people like you right?"

--Uh, no, I didn't say that either. You know, you're exactly the kind of person I was referring to when I said that deniers make largely political arguments against global warming. Taxes, central bankers, elites, private schools, you hit almost all the buttons. Thanks for proving my point again and again.


And you don't sound like a typical ZeroHedger, who are for the most part, rational people.

gabeh73's picture

Agreed with some of your points Tommy. I also worry about mercury pollution, Nox, Sox, lead, fluoride, drugs/chemicals in the water supply.

Things like that are not good of course. Odd how the biggest polluters tend to underemphasize the importance of real pollutants while advocating that we pay taxes(to them of course) for emitting plant food CO2.

Calmyourself's picture

Frankly, I am more much more interested in conserving and then disseminating my precious bodily fluids, ohhh Marla darlin...

gabeh73's picture

google "first global revolution pdf"

pg 71

"The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor. Some states have striven to overcome domestic failure and internal contradictions by blaming external enemies. The ploy of finding a scapegoat is as old as mankind itself - when things become too difficult at home, divert attention to adventure abroad. Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one, or else one invented for the purpose."


"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill...All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."

- Club of Rome,
The First Global Revolution, consultants to the UN.

minus dog's picture

AGW is a crock.   This will become abundantly clear in the next decade or so.

Why are we even talking about Ehrlich?  He completely blew it in the 70's, and the accuracy of his observations now doesn't really matter when his entire outlook is irrational in the first place.

The population does not "need" to drop.  It doesn't "need" to do anything... some people would like for it to do something.  

The funny thing, though, is that most of the people who are freaking about about population are demanding some form of mandatory population control.  It won't work.  It never works, for 2 simple reasons:

1.  There is no mechanism for telling 7 billion people what to do, let alone trying to make it stick.

2.  Even if there was, the first group to cheat and cheat the most, wins.  Only a foolish culture would agree to restrict their own population while others do not.  Even if you recognize the need for a lower (or more stable) population, it is simply long-term suicide to make voluntary, unilateral restrictions.  If "someone" has to go, most people are going to choose "someone else".

This is well out into the realm of who is left, not who is right or wrong.  There is no inherent need for conflicts like that to happen, but once they do you can't avoid them.


Flakmeister's picture

 Pray tell, how did he blow it...

BTW, I do not disagree with your 2 items, but nature can be a bitch and I assure you that she will be merciless in her judgement.

Like I said above, AGW may be right and it may be wrong. Most of the evidence is lining up on the AGW side from this impartial observer. But that is beside the point, no credible scientist that questions AGW denies GW...

jmc8888's picture

ROFL 'The population bomb' is a FASICST book. No sane person (or non-dumbass) would EVER gleam ANYTHING useful from it.

Good to know fascism was a must read in your college.

Paul Ehrlich a fascist son of a bitch, and a certifiable dumbass lunatic. Here's some of Paul Ehrlich's greatest moments on his 'going to hell' world tour.  Talk about beinig a progenitor of CRAP!


Prince Philip's Nazis At Copenhagen



Exclusive Interview: "The Greens Are a Very Sinister Movement"


LaRouche: Holdren's Proposal for a 'Planetary Regime' is Worse than Hitler


Congressional Candidate Summer Shields Issues Statement On Copenhagen Summit


Coldest Winter in 1,000 Years?


The British Genocidal Food Policy



......So is there any wonder this has happened?


World Food Aid Tonnage Drops Drastically Under Obama/London Regime



If ANY dumbass wants to use this 'ideology' actually 'nothing-ology' as a basis (whole or part) of a strategy we should use going forward....not only are you barking up the wrong tree, but pissing into a gale force wind....not to mention a fucking FASCIST. 


Wake up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  (and funny how it's BANKSTERS backed ideology...don't you think?)

Keep Sucking the banksters herpetic cock.  Az Eazy-E once said...

Gimmee that, that, that nutt

Gimmee that, that, that nutt

Gimmee that, that, that nutt

Gimmee that, Gimmee that, Gimmee that nutt

Hexus's picture

Yo! You're spot on! But I noticed you're using a lot of info from LaRouche, I don't want to force my opinion on you but I'd advise you to take him with a pinch of salt if you're a member of LaRouchePac. Even though he's right on a lot of things he's not a very nice guy and he's been co-opted by intelligence agencies since the whole tax evasion thing.

I get most of my info from Webster Tarpley, he used to be a LaRouchite but left under unknown circumstances. If you don't know about him he has a weekly radio show called World Crisis Radio and a website www.tarpley.net . He's a clever guy.

t0mmyBerg's picture

I am not sure why this person is allowed to post anything on ZH.  Everything I have seen posted by this person is garbage of the most dangerous sort.  Paul Erlich is a champion of de-development.  While he and his pals sit sipping their Napa Valley wines at night in their comfortable Santa Cruz homes, they discuss how wouldnt it be great if the government could put something in the water to render women infertile against their will, you know, we need population control after all. 

Ags may be a good play.  It might even be the case that climate is destabilizing to the point that crops will be variable and prices will fluctuate.  After all, it has happened on a massive scale many times in the earths history, well before man had any impact.  There have been periods when there was no ice at the poles and periods when the entire planet was frozen solid all the way round.  Tectonics will do that, as will variability in things like earths orbit (just several tenths of a degree in the change of the earths wobble causes periodic change of sahara between lush green savanna and arid desert), and the output of our variable star.  Earth's climate changes.  Get over it.  Does that mean we should not be concerned with pollution?  No.  We should.  The earths tiny envelope of atmosphere is something we should be concerned with.  But there are ways to mitigate the impact of man's impact that fall short of destroying the economy to the point that half our population does dies of starvation at the hands of progfressive do-gooders.

MHFT, crawl back into whatever hole you climbed out of in your left coast hell while the rest of the world gets on with doing what it can to survive and prosper.  Take Erlich with you.

mdwagner's picture

Whether or not global warming is real isn't the issue.  There is a finite amount of resources on this planet and at some point, we will need more than is available.  The only solution is population control.  Every other suggested solution is a scam for a few people to get billions and trillions of dollars and infinite power.

barkster's picture

'global warming' is also "a scam for a few people to get billions and trillions of dollars and infinite power."  it is an attempt to use rigged numbers and studies to convince the world to pay a carbon tax which will be, in effect, the first worldwide UN-based tax, the proceeds of which will go to fund the new global government and further line the pockets of the elite. furthermore, the weather is being manipulated at the same time by these same elite - if you are interested in the truth read this document that everyone should read to know what is really happening with the weather:


gabeh73's picture

I have been put in charge of controlling the population. I know that you will cooperate given your in-depth understanding of our dire situation.


Please kill yourself for the good of the human species.


This is an official order...wait!!(i hope you are still there) before you do anything make sure you paypal all your money to me to reimburse us for the CO2 you have emitted.

mdwagner's picture

Regardless of your animosity, how can a world with finite resources and an economy based on perpetual population growth continue forever?

gabeh73's picture

Sorry to break it to you. It can't continue forever.

Carbon taxes will not stop the sun from dying either. Just because you are unsure of how the world will be in 10 or 20 years does not mean it is a good idea to put CO2 taxes in place to be paid to people who have proven they will use the money to fuck over the masses.


read much history?

I actually agree that literate populations tend not to reproduce as quickly and there is a good chance that the population will stabilize if we have well defined systems of property rights so that people can make their own family planning decisions based off of various factors.


Excessive taxes tend to reduce literacy and poverty and are a direct contradiction to well defined property rights. That is one reason I am against carbon taxes.


Make sense?

Hexus's picture

Resources aren't finite, and the economy can be altered very easily, that's how. First we need to house, feed and provide leisure time to everyone on the planet, then we can worry about what to do next, maybe get together and explore the universe? Sounds good to me.

topcallingtroll's picture

The world population needs to drop.

It will drop.

Parabolic blow off tops never end well in speculative invesments or populations. There is not a case out there of a population of an organism experiencing parabolic growth that didnt have a crash later.

We need a few billion gone from the planet anyway. Too bad it cant be thru aggressive birth control but has to be thru massive die offs in the third world.

Flakmeister's picture

 Read up on St. Matthew Island.... nature tends to self regulate


luk427's picture

I listenned to AL Gore's side of the story. But I like george Carlin's alot better.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjmtSkl53h4

Calmyourself's picture

You GW proponents, take some time to explain why since you yearn to purchase carbon credits and save the world, why you have no exchange to do so?  The Chicago Carbon Credit exchange was closed down, please tell me using your progressive market efficiency theories how this can be so?  There is a market for it, you are prima facie evidence, so where is the exchange?

Oil companies shut it down, coal bigwigs threaten the goracle or??

gabeh73's picture

There is still a CO2 market.


I sell CO2 pollution rights. $1/ ton.


Contact me if you wish to purchase some. I accept paypal or cash.

You will receive a royal certification to authenticate your purchase.

Calmyourself's picture

Thanks, royal certification, well as long is it is 18 karat, no tungsten please ..:)

m43cap's picture

Dr. Paul Ehrlich? Ya, if he's so clever why aint he rich?

Flakmeister's picture

Believe it or not, there are some people that value things above money.

Calmyourself's picture

Your premise is bullshit; thats all.

anony's picture

"Truth does not exist.  Only opinion, however reasoned or well-informed".     (Dr. Barclay, Oil guru dude).

anony's picture

Nothing would be better than for a couple billion human animals to simply die off.

I can just see the MONSTER board for jobs, right now.

Invisible Hand's picture

Paul Ehrlich has been saying the same thing since the 70's.

I guess if he lives another 1000 years he probably will be right-for the wrong reasons.  Most likely a super volcano or maybe an asteroid are possible natural causes.  Green polices (which Ehrlich supports) are the likely man-made causes for mass starvation.

The current threats to food security are:

1) opposition to enhanced natural selection to improve food sources (i.e. GM foods)

2) opposition to developing adequate sources of electrical energy (i.e. nuclear) and liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons (NG, oil and coal-based liquids)

3) economic development of the third world which allows modern farming techniques to take hold

4) diversion of food crops to produce "renewable" ethanol

5) irresponsible (i.e. socialist) fiscal policies in developed nations that will lead to high inflation and economic collapse

And guess which of these stupid policies Ehrlich would support?  Why all of them, of course.

Ehrlich is working hard to bring about the starvation he supposedly is "warning" us about by diverting us from the real problems and their possible solutions by trying to get us focused on a problem that is not man-made (and therefore we can only adapt to, not prevent). This "made up" problem, of course, is anthropogenic global warming (or climate change, or climate disruption, or snow, or whatever name du jour suits the greenie alarmists).

Ehrlich's "warnings" are really his wishful thinking.  If we do have mass starvation, it will be on the heads of people like him.


Flakmeister's picture

  First of all you argue that Ehrlich would support your keys. That is disingenuous.

Corn to Ethanol has been called "green" by those people that benefit. Anyone remotely aware of its true cost and energy balance sees through the propaganda. I and a number or others called out Gore on Ethanol when "IC" came out, he has since realized and stated that it was a mistake. (And no I did not imply I personally called him out...)

You cannot prove AGW does not exist, likewise the AGW proponents cannot prove it does. Where it stands is that the preponderence of evidence is pointing to AGW. Each year more evidence is emerging.

Even those people who deny AGW in scientific circles, do not dispute GW.


Meridian's picture

It's amusing to be lectured by an unaccomplished twenty-something with no discernable acheivements. A lot of us went to graduate school to get our PhD's, but I forgot how utterly ignorant most are at your level of "education." I will say your self-esteem indoctrination has gone well though.

Spare us the condescension on the scientific method jr. it has really become tedious. Consider for a moment what it would take to disprove your global warming hypothesis. It's not possible is it? That by definition is not science, just in case they aren't teaching the scientific method anymore at the agenda laden liberal-progressive degree mills.

Flakmeister's picture

  You talking to me? I was in the academic rat race for 20 years, got 9 letter after my name and I worked on Wall Street.

By the time Global Warming is "proved" to level required to satisfy the naysayers, the world will be a different place. Care to comment OHC data, or the phytoplankton data?