Posted on 03/01/2010 12:43:15 PM PST by TaraP
Next are two short excerpts from a recently filmed TED presentation (Feb 2010) by none other than Bill "Microsoft" Gates.
At the heart of Gates' address lies the central Global Warming dogma, which dictates that Co2 emitted by human beings are the primary culprit for the unwanted heating of the globe.
Since this artificial alleged human-induced heating effect allegedly stands to devastate the planet if left unabated, Global Warming dogma proponents therefore argue that human Co2 emissions must be drastically reduced. As Gates casually addresses the issue, he goes on to state that one way to accomplish this goal is to reduce the global human population.
He postulates the central equation, giving an estimation of the humanly emitted C02 load per year, to be:
Co2 = P times S times E times C
Where P stands for the population number, S the average number of services per person, E the average amount of energy units per service, and C the average Co2 emitted load per unit of service, per year; Co2 stands for the projected total humanly emitted carbon-dioxide load by the entire population per year.
Gates knows less about global warming than he knew about computer operating systems. (And he was at the Obamaloon level about computers.....sleazy businessman, but totally stupid about technology.)
Another billion dollar marxist who wants to run the world.
Vaccinations decrease mortality and have, among other things, eliminated smallpox as a human disease.
Yep. Evil.
Gates did make a comment that there were 6.x billion people and that was going up to 9.x billion by year xxxx. And if we did a really good job with vaccines, health services and reproductive services that might be reduced by 10-15%.
It's not clear at all why he thinks vaccines would help reduce population growth, but it could be linked to his mentioned desire to lift people out of poverty rather than a sinister plan to kill people or render them infertile through vaccines.
Not that kind of vaccine.....more like the injections deer get to reduce population....inducing sterility.
Of course, there will be no serious side effects; meaning that anyone who can obtain a license to reproduce will be in no danger of having complications.... /s
Who of these enviro’s will be the first to sacrifice their first born to Gaia? Oh, it is to be me and mine to sacrifice as we are expendable. This goes over real well near the rice fields in Ban San Sai.
This was the plot of Rainbow Six by Tom Clancy. A billionaire environmental whacko developed a virus called Shiva and exposed people at the Olympics to it so they would spread it world wide. When panic sets in, his pharmaceutical company would announce the vaccine, which was in reality the disease itself. The chosen would live in a Biosphere until the virus ran its course.
vaccines are one of the greatest things EVER invented.
It was bizarre thing to say in context. A slip?
Reductions in child mortality rates can lead to parents having less children overall (as they know that the per-child odds of their children making it to adulthood have substantially increased).
That's not said to offer any endorsement of the anti-human mythology of the Warmists. Just a statistical observation.
Sometimes it gets difficult to separate the ‘loony’ from the ‘tune’ around here.
Gates confused me.In first clip he said the population will go up to 9billion
Then he says with great vaccines health care etc he could lower the population by 10% or 15%.
is he really advocating using vaccines to kill people?
See my #14. May help explain things.
I haven't watched the video yet, but the reason may be to convice third world parents that they don't need to have a dozen kids to almost guarantee that two or three will survive to adulthood. However the average family will have more than a couple surviving kids, thus increasing the population. Get good medical care including vaccinations and if you have three kids likely all three will grow to adults, so you no long need to have a dozen.
I don't think so. They are misreading it. His point was that population was going to rise and at best that growth could be reduced by 10-15%. He sounded like it was unavoidable.
It didn't sound like he was advocating vaccines for a nefarious purpose, because you could get a lot more than a 10-15% reduction in growth if that was your aim.
I'm sure if we watched the entire speech that his conclusion would be that the easiest part of the equation to change is the carbon footprint of the energy produced.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.