Yes, but a crackpot with a receptive audience.
It presents an interesting situation. What would a nation do if many thousands (tens of thousands?) of its people are billions-genocidal?
The US military uses “surety” programs to insure that personnel who are involved with nuclear weapons are not “differently-mentally-abled”. As little as using cough syrup or any kind of psycho-reactive drug is enough for them to be suspended for a period of from days to for life.
But there is no surety program for civilians in lines of work that are equally hazardous. Should any person who applauded Dr. Pianka be allowed to work with dangerous pathogens? Certainly not. Nor should they be permitted to have involvement with anything else that could be used as a genocidal tool.
Yes, but a crackpot with a receptive audience.
I underlined the telling part of the main body of your original post. He may well *have* a 'receptive' audience, but keeping the speech 'off the record' and cameras were 'required' to be turned off so as to maintain an air of deniability about what he was saying shows that what he was espousing was not the norm, and in fact, were it to become public knowledge, would be considered evil, or at best certifiably insane.
He is a crackpot, and a cockroach who could not withstand exposure to the light of day...
the infowarrior