“The “Population Bomb” Echoes

madhedgefundtrader's picture

Pack your portfolios with agricultural plays like Potash (POT), Mosaic (MOS), and Agrium (AGU) if Dr. Paul Ehrlich is just partially right about the impending collapse in the world’s food supply. You might even throw in long positions in wheat, corn, soybeans, and rice.

The never dull, and often controversial Stanford biology professor told me he expects that global warming is leading to significant changes in world weather patterns that will cause droughts in some of the largest food producing areas, causing massive famines. 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).

Other big risks to the economy are the threat of a third world nuclear war caused by population pressures, and global plagues facilitated by a widespread growth of intercontinental transportation and globalization. And I won’t get into the threat of a giant solar flare frying our electrical grid.

“Super consumption” in the US needs to be reined in where the population is growing the fastest.  If the world adopts an American standard of living, we need four more Earths to supply the needed natural resources. We must to raise the price of all forms of carbon, preferably through taxes, but cap and trade will work too. Population control is the answer to all of these problems, which is best achieved by giving women an education, jobs, and rights, and has already worked well in Europe and Japan.

All sobering food for thought.

To see the data, charts, and graphs that support this research piece, as well as more iconoclastic and out-of-consensus analysis, please visit me at www.madhedgefundtrader.com . There, you will find the conventional wisdom mercilessly flailed and tortured daily, and my last two years of research reports available for free. You can also listen to me on Hedge Fund Radio by clicking on “This Week on Hedge Fund Radio” in the upper right corner of my home page.

Comment viewing options

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

Are you just a dittohead making sure you get your talking points in? Who said anything about taxes? Listen, there is lot of bullshit out there, but not everything is a conspiracy to tax you. Can you fathom that? 

Flakmeister's picture

To a fool as yourself, any sufficiently advanced techology is indistiguishable from magic.

There is a reason for acronyms, it allows people to convey complex ideas with a minimum of effort. Sort of like Tensor notation for bilinear forms... go look it up.

Harr Tuttle's picture

And place like Newfoundland and Scotland used to be able to grow grapes, but thanks to a cooling trend after the renaissance, they no longer grow there.

Climate change, 4 times a year where I live.

the mad hatter's picture

Go back to your bridge. I'll hold onto my Ag futures and we'll see who's right.

fredquimby's picture

It was a step backwards to call POLLUTION anything other than just that. It lost the focus and allowed us to ignore "climate change" as it is something we can dispute or disagree with.

You cannot however ignore smog in LA and oil in the GOM.

STOP POLLUTION AND SAVE THE PLANET :)

 

MrBoompi's picture

I prefer the hash pipe AND common knowledge.

pointer's picture

AND - remember Climate Gate - that scam that showed bogus emails between the "scientists" that manipulated the data?

TDoS's picture

Sigh... There will be famine, fuel rationing and shortages, mass unemployment and unrest, and STILL there will be capitalist hard liners who think it's all a scam being perpetrated by shadowy overlords instead of finally coming to grasp the fact that THERE ARE TOO MANY MONKEYS TRYING TO CONSUME TOO LITTLE AN AMOUNT OF SHIT!

 

centerline's picture

There has to be a maximum ideal sustainable figure.  Depending on the social structures, political structures, etc. - that number would be modified lower from ideal (nothing is ideal of course - and some things are really not ideal!).  Seems to me we surpased that modified figure some time ago.  And, with the situation getting more dire each day, that figure is ticking downwards somewhat quickly.

Forget peak oil.  We are talking about peak population I am afraid.

Flakmeister's picture

  The funny thing is that the asshats that cannot even write a paragraph describing what peak oil actually is, have complete confidence in spewing garbage about climate change and agricultural cycles, topics that are infinitely more complex.

Citxmech's picture

I fear that you are all too correct. 

Flakmeister's picture

Ummm... note that the followup investigations did not get the press of the original claims:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=noaa-scientists-cleared-in-climate

Follow the money and those with a real agenda...

spiceguy's picture

exactly. manufactured doubt at its finest

Bob's picture

Yeah, but this is the frickin internet, dude--you get to believe in whatever "facts" you like!  Then you hang out with people who believe the same things and, when you run across infidels, you can either ignore or condemn them with righteous impunity. 

Now that's real progress. 

Calmyourself's picture

Bob, we are supposed to be economically literate on this site.  The legitimate market will step up to provide a profitable service if legal.  Please explain the closure of the Chicago Carbon credit trading bourse?  Show us some progressive thought as directly applied to market theory.

nmewn's picture

"...we are supposed to be economically literate on this site.  The legitimate market will step up to provide a profitable service if legal.  Please explain the closure of the Chicago Carbon credit trading bourse?"

+ a million suspicious, fictitious new fiats.

The attempt at alchemy...of making something of value out of thin air (literally)...Gore & Goldman LLC, there was never any doubt where that swindle was headed...ROTFL.

BobPaulson's picture

YES. There is a systemic attack on the more proven objective ways of determining "the truth". I'm afraid poor education is a platform upon which all forms of demagoguery and pre-rational thought can be constructed.

Flakmeister's picture

  The Downing Effect is a bitch, ain't it?

MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

You provide a handful of sentences from a 'respected' magazine that amount to: "Nothing to see here, move along."

Did you read ANY of the CRU emails? 

Are you capable of understanding the many well-reasoned arguments put forth that demonstrate the unscientific nature of the activities of the CRU?

Just asking...

Flakmeister's picture

 Did you read them? Better yet, did you understand them? Or are you just parroting what someone else said?

terryg999's picture

Follow the money. 

I have read the emails from the CRU.  They indicate collusion in the supression of data and in the supression of the work that challenges East Anglia.

If I had to put money down I would bet that 'Global Warming'  was more about covering up the incompetence Phil Jones and Michael Mann then CO2.

There is just too much at stake ( Grants, Publishing, reputations...whole bobus industries! ) for them to be wrong.

As far as Jones being cleared....Yeah, whatever. 

Cleared by people who benefit from GW as much as Jones means nothing.

 

( Let's see the raw data!  Opps!  Its lost! )

Flakmeister's picture

Believe what you want to believe...You obviously have never done science beyond college level.

There so much other evidence coming out that independent of the East Anglia flap, the scales are tipping..

Regarding the Hockey stick and Michael Mann, you may want to familiarize yourself with this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy

Follow the references, you know, research, like how science is done....

KevinB's picture

You obviously have never done science beyond college level.

Oh, and you have?

I'm just a freakin' engineer, but we had a fairly accurate method of determining whether a theory worked or not: if its predictions completely fail to match the real world observations, then the theory is pretty much junk.

On that basis, all the global warming crud doesn't deserve a moment's attention. Not one - NOT ONE - NOT ONE FREAKIN' ONE - of their predictions have come true. Global sea level rise? Not observed. Correlation of atmospheric CO2 and temperature? Not observed. Disappearance of Himalayan glaciers? Not only NOT observed, the Indian "scientist" who first reported the phenomenon has since admitted he FAKED all the data. Go back and check the predictions in the spring of each of the last three years: the global warming scam artists have predicted "the worst" year ever for hurricanes in the Caribbean - in the event, they have all been relatively mild. How many more examples would you like? I've got lots.

Mann's "hockey stick"? Canadian climatologist Steve McIntyre, after much effort in prying the computer code out of Mann, found that REGARDLESS of the data entered, the resultant graph was a "hockey stick".

Why do all the CRU et al charts conveniently start AFTER the "medieval warm period" ended? Why did the Vikings in 1000 AD call the ice-covered island northeast of Canada "Greenland" - some advanced sense of irony?

As for Ehrlich - he was discredited years ago. If you believed his hysterical neo-Malthusian "science", the world should have been starving two decades ago. The proximate cause of the food shortages/high prices today is the ridiculous ethanol scam, coupled with some once in generation COLD weather, not so-called "global warming", which the scam artists have renamed "climate change" to cover all their bases.

AmericaRacket's picture

Holy crap!  WIKIFUCKINGPEDIA!!  That settles all doubt.

Wiki has been in the tank for the global warming propagandists from the outset.  Look at their article on climategate.  Damage control.

Flakmeister's picture

I said follow the links to the journals where things were hashed out. You know, primary sources.

terryg999's picture

Other data based on East Anglia / Michael Mann faulty data.  Is that the data you are talking about?

How is that Science?  That is faith.  And faith only belongs in church, which is all popular GW is - a religion based on lies and followed by mindless zelots.

I have also gone through the code for the modeling

- and I have been a software engineer since the 80's -

Its obvious to me, and everone else who knows how to read code that it is written to acheive a fore-gone conclusion.

Let's not even mention the factors omitted in the models.  Things like the sun!  How do you even do that and call it science?

The solution to problems is never wealth re-distribution or bigger government.  Ever.

In the end who is going to benefit from bigger government?  Government itself.  Who pays for the GW studies?  Who gets the results it is looking for?

GW is a scam and everyone knows it.  AL Gore is no different then Bernie Madoff.  I can only hope Gore joins him in prison for the rest of his miserable life.  Along with Jones and Mann and everyone else involved in this scheme.

Go back to the DU.  That's where you belong.

Flakmeister's picture

  Science is not faith. When facts change, science changes. Not too many religions I am aware can make that claim.

Compare the amount of money spent on climate research with the amount spent by Exxon and their ilk...

Here is a gedanken:

Have corporations and vested interests ever told the truth about anything when their profit margins or positions were threatened? Examples: The Fed, Tobacco, patent medicines, dioxins, CFCs, child labor.... the list goes on and on and on...

BTW, you do not have a clue as what my background is and my range of experience.

 

Hexus's picture

Modern science is worse then faith, it's controlled by one thing

*rubs thumb and forefinger together*

Flakmeister's picture

One of the first rules:

"Of where one cannot speak, one should be silent"

Yep, gonna get me Ph.D. and maybe when I am 28, get a post-doc that pays $40,000 a year and after going through the grind get me a Asst. Prof. position that pays ~$56,000 a year when I am 35. Hell ya, thats the ticket to riches!

Shell Game's picture

The type of science you are talking about is akin to the American small business - skrewed and fucked.  What you are not talking about is corporate science - a very different beast.  In your journey you will find you must chase the corporate money for your grants, there is very little out there that is real 'basic science'.  But, best of luck to you, I've been at it since 1988.  Many, many changes in the field since then, most quite unfavorable for the independent thinker..

Meridian's picture

"Of where one cannot speak, one should be silent"

Yet you are still talking. Peddle your nonsense somewhere else. Science can't accurately predict weather a week in advance and they sure as hell can't predict climate.

Flakmeister's picture

 There is a difference between climate and weather. Your ignorance is on display.

Ratscam's picture

congratulations, another sucker who gets a PHD in worthlessness

Flakmeister's picture

Pray tell, what do you do? Or what have you done?

I'm semi-retired at 48, managing 8 figures for private clients on the side for pocket money. I've made a lot of money on the oil and Ag trade, not to mention Ag, Au, REE.... 

tarsubil's picture

Oh yeah, and then I'm going to stop worrying about getting my next grant that will pay my salary and keep my lab open. Yeah, no scientist cares about money? I mean, most don't get paid that much.