LESS POPULATION=LESS MEAT=LESS METHANE GAS

Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together. Burning fuel to produce fertiliser to grow feed, to produce meat and to transport it -and the deforestation and land clearing for grazing – produces 9 per cent of all emissions of carbon dioxide, the most common greenhouse gas. And their wind and manure emit more than one third of emissions of another, methane, which warms the world 20 times faster than carbon dioxide. What makes animal agriculture so inefficient? In short, animals consume more food than they produce. Or put another way,

 

syphoning plant protein through the bodies of animals in order to produce animal protein is like filling your car’s tank by throwing a bucket of fuel at it: you’ll lose more than you gain and create a right mess in the process.

Lab Cultured Meat

David Branson ….Meat Without Livestock

Faifax media reported that the world’s richest man, Bill Gates and fellow billionaire Richard Branson have joined other business giants investing in a nascent technology to make meat from self-producing animal cells.

Cattle and Automobiles Comparison

The Silicon Valley start-up they back hopes to tap rising consumer demand for protein that’s less reliant on feed, land and water. Memphis Meats produces beef, chicken and duck directly from animal cells in the lab, without raising and slaughtering livestock or poultry. The company has just raised $US17 million ($21.5 million) from investors including Gates, Branson and Cargill, one of the world’s largest agricultural companies, according to a statement this week on the San Francisco-based start-up’s website. “I’m thrilled to have invested in Memphis Meats,” Virgin Group boss Branson said in an email in response to questions from Bloomberg News.

The IPCC did mention “population growth”, (not overpopulation), among the causes of climate change in its report but it was “the elephant in the room” as far as the delegates of the Paris Climate Conference  were concerned.  “Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have increased since the pre-industrial era, driven largely by economic and population growth, and are now higher than ever. This has led to atmo­spheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide that are unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years. Their effects, together with those of other anthropogenic driv­ers, have been detected throughout the climate system and are extremely likely to have been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century”.

Many population experts believe the answer lies in improving the health of women and children in developing nations. By reducing poverty and infant mortality, increasing women’s and girls’ access to basic human rights (health care, education, economic opportunity), educating women about birth control options and ensuring access to voluntary family planning services, women will choose to limit family size. Even as the population passes 7.2 billion and is projected by the United Nations to reach 10.9 billion by the end of the century, policymakers have been unable—or unwilling—to discuss population in tandem with climate change.

Obama’s Science Czar Considered Forced Abortions, Sterilization as …

John Holdren

President Obama’s “science czar,”John Holdren, who with his side kick Paul Ehrlich, warned of the impending ice age during the 70s, once floated the idea of forced abortions, “compulsory sterilization,” and the creation of a “Planetary Regime” that would oversee human population levels and control all natural resources as a means of protecting the planet — controversial ideas his critics say should have been brought up in his Senate confirmation hearings.

“Such laws constitutionally could be very broad. Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society. Few today consider the situation in the United States serious enough to justify compulsion, however”.

Holdren, who has degrees from MIT and Stanford and headed a science policy program at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government for the past 13 years, won the unanimous approval of the Senate as the president’s chief science adviser.

He was confirmed with little fanfare on March 19 as director of the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy, a 50-person directorate that advises the president on scientific affairs, focusing on energy independence and global warming.

But many of Holdren’s radical ideas on population control were not brought up at his confirmation hearings; it appears that the senators who scrutinized him had no knowledge of the contents of a textbook he co-authored in 1977, “Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,” a copy of which was obtained by FOXNews.com.

Holdren claimed linked alleged man-made global warming to record cold temperatures and massive snowfalls in his widely ridiculed 2014 “Polar Vortex” video. “A growing body of evidence suggests that the kind of extreme cold being experienced by much of the United States as we speak is a pattern we can expect to see with increasing frequency, as global warming continues,” he claimed.

That assertion, of course, is exactly the opposite of what the “settled science” from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC) predicted in its 2001 global-warming report. That document claimed that the planet would see “warmer winters and fewer cold spells, because of climate change.” Ironically, perhaps, Holdren previously warned that man-made global cooling caused by human emissions of carbon dioxide would produce a new ice age by 2020 that would produce a billion deaths. By 2014, though, Holdren had abandoned cooling alarmism and was claiming that “global warming” was producing record-cold temperatures and massive snowfall across the United States. Seriously.

15 Responses to “LESS POPULATION=LESS MEAT=LESS METHANE GAS”

  1. Val Adami says:

    We must limit population growth otherwise it is pointless talking about reducing the burning of fossil fuels, which they say is causing the planet to heat up, and replacing it with renewable energy if it can be made viable.
    We should get behind Melinda and Bill Gates who have established a family planning program to bring access to high-quality contraceptive information, services, and supplies to an additional 120 million women and girls in the poorest countries by 2020 without coercion or discrimination, with the longer-term goal of universal access to voluntary family planning.

    • Kevin Smale says:

      It is really a no brainer, the more the world’s population increases, the greater the strain on dwindling resources and the greater the impact on the environment and the warming of the planet. We are “putting the cart before the horse” if we continue to finance the application of emission controls without first providing the funds necessary to get the world’s population under control. We should be diverting the funds from these conference junkets to third world family planning.

  2. Mandy says:

    Reforestation, zero population growth and a reduced reliance on livestock for protein should be our future strategy. Forget all the BS and redirect the money away from the gravy train of the scientific elite and hangers on and follow the example being set by Gates and Branson.

  3. Murrel says:

    It might be that methane is causing our planet to heat up over and above the rate of world warming that has been occurring naturally in fits and starts. If so the slight increase in temperatures does seems to correlate with the increase in world’s population, the number of cattle and the deforestation for their grazing. It makes more sense than blaming carbon dioxide a trace gas essential to the world’s ecosystem.

  4. B J says:

    There is a lot of work to be done if we are to reduce the population growth of 1.6% in India. It has almost one fifth of the world’s population and its people do not have access to or cannot afford contraception. Instead of spending billions of dollars per year promoting the global warming hysteria we should be directing the money to where it is so desperately needed.

  5. shannon says:

    If they don’t address population growth now while it is possible there will will be little left of the world’s resources by the end of this century.

  6. Hypocricy says:

    A high proportion of Australia’s economy depends on the exportation of coal. We are closing down our own coal fired plants, in the interests of climate change and clean air enthusiasts, but are providing the fuel for overseas plants, mainly in China, how can this be justified?
    Over all, 1,600 new coal plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries, according to Urgewald’s tally, which uses data from the Global Coal Plant Tracker portal. The new plants would expand the world’s coal-fired power capacity by 43 percent.

  7. Anonyme says:

    The UN Food and Agricultural Organisation say that grazing areas account for more than a third of the earth’s total land mass that is given over to the animal we either eat or milk…that is 70% more of land than a century ago. You don’t have to be a Rhode scholar to to calculate that it is not sustainable and the only way to save the planet is to curtail our population growth immediately.
    While John Holdren may seem to be another alarmist after his ice age and various doomsday predictions he is spot on with his over population paper.

    • Walter says:

      How can you take emission control agreements seriously without a plan to limit the world’s population. The fact that it was not even discussed at the Paris conference seems incredible. The Bill Gates (he is no fool) initiative to provide contraception to developing countries is what we should all be doing.

  8. Basile says:

    Here are some of the statistics supplied by Guttmacher Institute help make a case for family planning:
    214 million women of reproductive age in developing regions who want to avoid pregnancy are not using a modern contraceptive method.

    Of the estimated 206 million pregnancies in 2017 in developing regions, 43% are unintended (they occur too soon or are not wanted at all).

    The proportion of women who have?an unmet need for modern contraception is highest in Sub-Saharan Africa (21%)
    The IPCC did acknowledge that population growth should be addressed but it was not on the agenda at the Paris Climate Conference…….The real Inconvenient Truth?

    • Reg says:

      You are so right….. not a word about it in Paris as they tucked into copious amounts of food and wine during the week, at the conference and at private parties in the evenings.
      These junketeers, these fools, are travelling the world promoting the global warming doomsday hoax and receiving the huge grants for any “study” that would support the swindle while, according to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, 795 million people of the 7.3 billion people in the world, or one in nine, are suffering from chronic undernourishment in the period 2014-2016. (Almost all the hungry people, 780 million, live in developing countries.)

  9. Brooker says:

    United Nations on Education:
    Promise and Paradox
    Two of the major issues in the international dialog on sustainability are population and resource consumption. Increases in population and resource use are thought to jeopardize a sustainable future, and education is linked both to fertility rate and resource consumption. Educating females reduces fertility rates and therefore population growth. By reducing fertility rates and the threat of overpopulation a country also facilitates progress toward sustainability. The opposite is true for the relationship between education and resource use. Generally, more highly educated people, who have higher incomes, consume more resources than poorly educated people, who tend to have lower incomes. In this case, more education increases the threat to sustainability.

  10. Donpaul says:

    Access to the wealth of information on the internet will eventually bring down the global warming fraudsters. The climate hoax began in the late 80’s well before before the digital revolution really got going which has now resulted in these global warming con artists being exposed. Go to stevegoddard blog for past history.

  11. Andrew Gray says:

    In his most recent comments, Paul Ehrlich, world renowned scientist, talks more about the problems of overpopulation rather than his previous world ending scenarios such as global cooling and later global warming.

    “I believe and all of my colleagues believe that we are on a straightforward course to a collapse of our civilization.” He cited signs, such as diminishing returns from natural resources, that he said were recognizable from studying the collapse of other civilizations throughout history.

    The problem can be traced to our evolution, said Ehrlich. “We’re a small-group animal, both genetically and culturally. We have evolved to relate to groups of somewhere between 50 and 150 people,” he said. “And now suddenly we’re trying to live in a group not of 150 or 100 people, but of seven billion people, somewhat over seven billion people at the moment, and that is presenting us with a whole array of problems.”
    Andrew Gray

  12. Jardine says:

    Scientists believe they can stop global warming by relocating thermometers away from heat islands to rural areas and might even be able to create a little cooling in the process.

Leave a Response

Currently you have JavaScript disabled. In order to post comments, please make sure JavaScript and Cookies are enabled, and reload the page. Click here for instructions on how to enable JavaScript in your browser.