Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LouisvilleDem

(303 posts)
23. That's perfectly understandable
Fri Nov 15, 2013, 08:03 PM
Nov 2013

It has to be very hard to defend statements like these:

The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate. (Population Bomb 1968)

India couldn't possibly feed two hundred million more people by 1980 (Population Bomb 1968)

By 1973 smog disasters will kill up to 200,000 people in New York and Los Angeles. (Population Bomb 1968)

By 1985 enough millions will have died to reduce the earth's population to some acceptable level, like 1.5 billion people. (speech made in 1969)

By 1980 the United States will see its life expectancy drop to 42 because of pesticides, and by 1999 its population will drop to 22.6 million. (speech made in 1969)

In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish. (speech on the first Earth Day, 1970)

By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people ... If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000. (1971 speech)


Obviously the man is a genius

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Denial wears many faces. [View all] GliderGuider Nov 2013 OP
To quote my favorite Engineering Project Leader Xipe Totec Nov 2013 #1
Smart man! nt GliderGuider Nov 2013 #2
So unless we throw up our hands and admit defeat... LouisvilleDem Nov 2013 #3
If you think renewables are a good and interesting idea, you're not necessarily in denial. GliderGuider Nov 2013 #4
Wow LouisvilleDem Nov 2013 #5
Call it the anger of a trust betrayed. GliderGuider Nov 2013 #6
And you call us the deniers? LouisvilleDem Nov 2013 #19
I don't argue with people who dismiss Ehrlich. GliderGuider Nov 2013 #21
That's perfectly understandable LouisvilleDem Nov 2013 #23
You might have noticed the pronuclear/anti-environmentalist campaign that's underway? kristopher Nov 2013 #9
Rumbled! GliderGuider Nov 2013 #10
That's an odd question, coming from you. kristopher Nov 2013 #11
Nice dodge. GliderGuider Nov 2013 #12
Yes, your truthiness tactic was a nice try, but obvious as hell. kristopher Nov 2013 #13
I understand why you're a little sensitive on this one. GliderGuider Nov 2013 #15
I am the pro nuclear shill on this forum. Quit stepping on my brand, man phantom power Nov 2013 #16
You'll get your cut, dude. Don't get yer knickers in a twist... GliderGuider Nov 2013 #17
Not just the collapse of civ threatens to produce nuclear catastrophe - there's Stuxnet too GliderGuider Nov 2013 #14
Problem with you glider is you're a realist, and reality sucks, ... CRH Nov 2013 #7
Thanks. GliderGuider Nov 2013 #8
The full essay is now posted on my web site. GliderGuider Nov 2013 #18
Works for me, ... CRH Nov 2013 #20
Don't let it cloud your wah pscot Nov 2013 #22
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Denial wears many faces.»Reply #23