The Human-Hating Roots of the Green Movement

Denis HayesMonday was the 43rd celebration of Earth Day, an event hailed as an effort to promote responsible stewardship of the environment. Fittingly, it is also the birthdate of Communist Party creator Vladimir Lenin, a reality that the radical environmentalists responsible for the creation of Earth Day dismiss as a mere coincidence. Yet there is little question that under the guise of “saving the planet,” the earth-firster crowd would be more than willing to impose the same kind of totalitarian control over the masses envisioned by Lenin.

Like communism, the radical environmentalism that forms the heart of Earth Day celebrations is all about collectivism. In a 2007 column for the Cato Institute, former Czech Republic president Vaclav Klaus called environmentalism one of the main dangers to freedom in the 21st century. “Environmentalism only pretends to deal with environmental protection,” writes Klaus. “Behind their people- and nature-friendly terminology, the adherents of environmentalism make ambitious attempts to radically reorganize and change the world, human society, our behavior, and our values.”

The Earth Day concept was developed by then-Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D-WI), Congress’s foremost environmentalist. Nelson also helped to develop college “sit-ins,” where professors surreptitiously abandoned their curriculums to lecture students on the evils of imperialist America and the virtues of communism, a misunderstood system of governance that merely need better implementation to succeed.

Nelson’s efforts were facilitated by Denis Hayes. Hayes was a student at Stanford University, where he was elected student body president and became a high-profile anti-Vietnam War activist who once helped lead a student siege of a campus weapons-research laboratory.

Stanford professor Paul Ehrlich was the third man behind the Earth Day cult. Ehrlich’s claim to fame was The Population Bomb, a book that predicted societal disintegration, and hundreds of millions of deaths from famine–by the 1980s–due to the “cancer” of human population growth. In 1969 Nelson and Ehrlich decided that a nation enthralled by the ethos of Woodstock was ready for a nationwide teach-in on environmentalism. Hayes was brought in to coordinate and implement the operation. The trio decided that the first Earth Day would be held on April 22, 1970–the centennial celebration of Lenin’s birthday.

The philosophical alignment between Lenin, who issued a decree known as “On Land,” declaring all natural resources the exclusive property of the state, and environmentalists, who believe that private enterprise and private property are impediments to saving the planet, are unmistakeable. To a large extent, those radical impulses have been realized in the United States. The federal government owns nearly 30 percent of all the land in the country, including five states where it owns more than half. Much of it remains federalized via the Endangered Species Act, which allows government to cordon off property from development if an endangered species is living on it. Furthermore, until the Supreme Court stopped the EPA last year, that agency was using the Clean Water Act to mandate what private property owners could or could not do with their own property, while preventing those owners from seeking recourse in the courts. “In a nation that values due process, not to mention private property, such treatment is unthinkable,” said Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the court’s decision.

The EPA was created by Congress eight months after the first Earth Day celebration.

Another major player promoting Earth Day is the Earth Day Network (EDN), founded in 1994 by the organizers of the first Earth Day celebration. The most insidious plank of EDN’s “core programs” is its “Greening Schools and Promoting Environmental Education” agenda. EDN provides educators with a variety of games, interactive quizzes and other aids, that enable them to teach kids from kindergarten through twelfth grade how to be the best “green” citizens they can be. Much of EDN’s emphasis is centered on making kids feel guilty about the size of their “ecological footprint” in comparison to children from other nations. “If everyone lived like you,” EDN tells children, “we would need [X-number of] planets” to sustain the lives of all the earth’s people.” EDN’s message is subtle but clear: capitalism is unjust and, as a result, America is using more than its “fair share” of the world’s resources.

Hayes, who sits on EDN’s Board of Directors, makes this plain. “Under communism prices were not allowed to reflect economic reality,” Hayes contends. “Under capitalism, prices don’t reflect ecological reality. In the long run, the capitalist flaw–if uncorrected–may prove to be the more catastrophic. …” Moreover, Hayes makes no bones about the fact that he considers human population growth to be the “most worrisome” environmental problem. “If everyone currently in the world aspires to consume at the same level as, say, the average Swede does, the human population already exceeds the planet’s carrying capacity,” writes Hayes.

Ira Einhorn who hosted the first Earth Day event at the Fairmount Park in Philadelphia on April 22, 1970, made his own personal contribution to population reduction. Seven years after the event, police raided his apartment and found the remains of his girlfriend, after one of his neighbors complained about a reddish-brown, foul-smelling liquid leaking into the ceiling directly below Einhorn’s closet. After 23 years on the run, he was extradited from France, convicted of murder and is serving a life sentence.

Another major player in the radical environmentalist movement is a Canadian named Maurice Strong. After starting his career in the oil business in the 1950s, Strong cultivated contacts in the Canadian government. By 1966, he became head of the Canadian International Development Agency. His success there impressed UN Secretary General U Thant, who asked him to organize the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment in 1972, better known as the first “Earth Summit.” The “Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment” created there offered a number of socialist/Marxist ideas, including the transfer of wealth from developed countries to under-developed ones, the need for population control, and “extensive cooperation among nations and action by international organizations in the common interest,” aka world governance. It offered 26 principles to advance this agenda.

In 1992, another Earth Summit was held in Rio, out of which the “Rio Declaration on Environment and Development” emerged. Another 27 principles, similar to the pie-in-the-sky, wealth transferring eco-socialist/Marxist agenda that emerged 20 years earlier, was added to the mix. That summit was also led by Strong.

One world government is the primary impetus behind a UN project known as Agenda 21–originated by Maurice Strong. In 1993, the UN explained its mission. “Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by every person on earth…it calls for specific changes in the activities of all people…Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced.” 178 countries have currently adopted Agenda 21. Strong himself, who currently resides in the People’s Republic of China, expressed his personal view on what must happen for Agenda 21 to succeed. “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” he asked.

There is little question that such people will try. That is why the term “climate change,” which replaced “global warming” when a decade of steady temperatures threatened the credibility of the environmentalists’ “irrefutable data”–along with the movement itself–has itself been replaced by the newest catchword, “sustainability.” The United Nations Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development held in June 2012 issued a report that reiterated the totalitarian ambitions of both Earth Summits and the Agenda 21 project. “Working Towards a Balanced and Inclusive Green Economy: A United Nations System-wide Perspective,” detailed the trillions of dollars that must be spent moving the entire world towards a “green” economy, where every aspect of human behavior would be regulated by a top-down, command-and-control bureaucracy.

Havel foresaw exactly such a development. “There is no doubt that it is our duty to rationally protect nature for future generations,” he writes. “The followers of the environmentalist ideology, however, keep presenting us with various catastrophic scenarios with the intention of persuading us to implement their ideas. That is not only unfair but also extremely dangerous.”

That is a far more elegant way of describing how those who celebrate Earth Day envision implementing their agenda. Less elegant, but far more familiar, is the phrase that both communists and radical environmentalists thoroughly embrace, as in, “by any means necessary.”

Earth Day was the impetus behind this mushrooming desire for global power, hidden by an environmental facade. Villainous mankind, whose expressions of waywardness have changed over the decades–from the polluter, to the deforester, to the animal species eliminator, and finally to climate fouler of the entire planet–must be brought to heel. Toward that end there has been a remarkable consistency. Earth Day remains a celebration of anti-capitalism, anti-humanism, population control and ill-disguised totalitarianism.

Two of Earth Day’s founders make these assertions clear. Denis Hayes: “America has a mechanism to deal with things that are not well-served by the market. It’s called government. Government is the way that we assert the fundamental values of the majority, constrained by the rights of the minority. Government is the realm in which we decide what is dispensable and what is–literally–priceless.” Paul Ehrlich: “A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people…We must shift our efforts from treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer.  The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions.”

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • truebearing

    Environmentalism is a religion that sells itself as the champion of health and wellbeing for the inhabitants of earth, yet despises those it purports to save, and secretly plans to eliminate the majority of the human population. Funny how these collectives all turn out to be cults of death, relying exclusively on Procrustean Method to "solve" the problems of humanity. They all operate according to a simple formula: no humans equals no problems.

    If they were sincere in their beliefs, they'd set an example by killing themselves. That is the kind of leadership sorely missing on the Left.

    • Cindy Lou

      They are killing themselves……..refuse to bring children into the world.

      • Questions

        Oh? Most environmentalists I know have kids. What about you?

        • Mary Sue

          There are those who don't, because of the environmental impact. I know one such who is a reporter for a newspaper. In the 1980s they did an entire column full of nonsense about how bringing a child into this world was environmentally irresponsible. And closed it out with "By the way, I practice what I preach. I do not have any children."

    • Yusuf

      Lets compromise. Eliminate the 80% of Islam supporters who are most likely prone to cause air pollution by burning and blowing up things. Fewer people, fewer acts of terror. The eliminated Muslims get their 72 virgins in the afterlife. The rest of us get to run without fear of getting our feet blown off. Or getting groped by the fat TSA swine who we pay for to grope us and probe us.

      If the UN supporting Earth First people feel human overpopulation is a problem why does the UN run a World Food Programme to feed hunderds of thousands of Muslims in Asia and Africa who have to flee because other Muslims are killing them?

  • Mary Sue

    The illogic of the New Age Green Gaia myth is summed up in that it's the ONLY religion where the worshippers save the Deity, rather than the other way around.

    Since when is a Creature more powerful than its supposed Creator?

    • Parenthetical Phrase

      VERY well put, Mary Sue. I would add that those past societies which sacrificed themselves and their children to appease their god, no longer exist. They are considered primitive, violent, and completely self-destructive. We do not mourn their disappearance — we are grateful for it.

      • Mary Sue

        oh there is a society that does it. It's called Radical Feminism, and instead of sacrificing born children to Molech/Chemosh, they sacrifice the Unborn in their sacrament of Abortion. Those who surround the practitioners are self-destructive and some are even violent. The more things change, the more they stay the same…

    • truebearing

      "Since when is a Creature more powerful than its supposed Creator?"

      How about the internet and Al Gore? :)

  • EthanP

    Ironic that environmentalism is equated with communism. I still remember when the 'Greens' were nothing more than Soviet dupes. It was facinating to watch the protests against deployment of US Pershing 2 missles and nuclear cruise missile in westen Europe. These same 'idealists' never once protested the Soviet SS-20s they were meant to counter. Would we could take these 'environmentalists' back in time to live in the so called pristine world they dream of. No anti-biotics, vaccines, food surplus'. Or any of the other modern conveniences they seem to so despise.

    • Mary Sue

      they still are nothing more than soviet dupes. They're watermelons: Green on the outside, red on the inside. They know full well that we can't feed the world on Organic Farming alone.

  • AlgerHiss

    Every one of them a watermelon: Green on the outside….red on the inside.

    • Andreas

      … and the seeds are brown ….

  • KPatton

    Its amusing that the polices of the enviromentalist movement it fully implemented, would have been the cause of tens of millions of additional deaths due to famine and disease around the world. The advances of Norman Borlaug in intensive agriculture and seed banks would never have been realized and millions more would have starved in India, China and Africa, than have over the years. I'm old enough to remember the predictable famines in India before Norm saved their asses. Now India is a food exporter.
    Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring, the half baked indictment of the used of pesticides and herbicides led to the banning of DDT, the one chemical pesticide that has saved more people than arguably any other in world history. In WWII it saved millions from certain death due to Scrub Typhus. One only has to compare the numbers of deaths in Western Occupied Europe where it was profusely used, to the high numbers of deaths in the Soviet Occupied East, where it was not used. Since its banning who knows how many deaths can be laid at Carson's feet in the Malaria ravaged parts of the world.

    • Mary Sue

      but they caused those famines on purpose for the express purpose of lowering the population.

  • sam000

    The European Green parties and Green MP's are going to visit the Iranian Mullahs at 28th of this month.
    At least, they have a strong argument for this trip, control of the population of the earth,
    the Mullahs are acquiring the nuclear weapon (thanks to OBAMA), and the Mullahs have expressed clearly that they will annihilate Israel and a part of the planet.
    Iran is so happy from this OBAMA / GREEN / leftism encouragement that increased the daily numbers of street executions,
    yesterday, Iran executed 23 prisoners, including 2 women.

    • Rifleman

      Good to 'see' you again Sam.

      • sam000

        Thanks AMI; good to see the old friends again

    • Alex Kovnat

      I never hear about executions in Iran or for that matter, Saudi Arabia.

      Except for Adolph Eichman being hanged in 1962, Israel has never executed anybody, not even the most heinous murderers. If Israel were to have executed a terrorist or, for that matter a person of any race, religion, nationality or political affiliation for cold blooded murder during the course of armed robbery, everybody would be on Israel's case over it. Yet Iran and Saudi Arabia execute people all the time (Some of them for what I, for one, would consider good reason) but the liberal news media wowsers never protest about it the way they would if it were Israel.

      • sam000

        You said;
        (Some of them for what I, for one, would consider good reason)
        My answer;
        the judgment of anti-Christ on any crime and criminal, is criminal,
        in a country like Iran under occupation of ISLAMISM, all the crimes are the result of that ruling regime.
        Israel is a democratic nation, there is no comparison between ISRAEL and IRAN, you have elected freely your rulers and you can remove them in every election even those extreme religious who think that they are chosen by GOD.
        In Iran the executions are done under the name of GOD and the international community approve the crimes.
        GERMAN GREEN parties are the same BROWNS of the WWII, just the have removed the yellow color from their mixtured BROWN COLOR.
        this article talks about the ideological reasons of the GREENS, I would say that the IDEOLOGICAL motivations of the GREENS are always ignited by the economical favors.
        IF FPM permits I can post the daily links of the executions, yesterday 23 executions, today we waked up with 8 executions, and it continues.
        in IRAQ after the withdrawal of US ARMY, the executions has become like IRAN, the UN Envoy to IRAQ (Martin Kobler) who was the EX-GERMAN Green party president approves all these executions, the death condemned in IRAQ are all the innocents who are against pro IRAN government of IRAQ.
        In the absence of USA in IRAQ, IRAN has taken place and governs IRAQ.

        • Indus Valley

          As you mentioned about the GERMAN GREENS, I want to tell about the 'Stuttgart 21' protests against the railway & urban development project called 'Stuttgart 21'…..The last time(18 months back) when I visited that place I could see the protestors squatting in the park(the area of protest) in tents with their families & leading their day to day life….They would love to see the whole world live like that….Pathetic to watch their life style in this 21st century….

  • Softly Bob

    Of course the Greens are commies, they have been for decades. When you take God out of your life, you either worship false gods or you think you are god!

    • Mary Sue

      Decades ago, New age Hollywood moonbat Shirley Maclane proclaimed "I AM God!"

      Nice, Shirley. Now how about doing something about Global Warming, then? [/sarcasm]

    • mkat68

      That's why they hate and deny the real God so much – they want to declare themselves gods and don't wnat any competition.

  • IMHomo

    Let's see, I spent Earth Day drinking out of a styrofoam cup at each meal, which were on styrofoam plates, which were placed in between my full day of burning tires in the open field. I did spit on the ground a lot too.

  • davarino

    So thats why they hate the GMOs. They create to much food, but if they were able to ban them they could reduce the population quicker. These are scarry people.

    • Mary Sue

      they've hoodwinked ordinary Low Information Voters into believing that GMOs will cause everything from mutations, to poisonings, to cancer, to lawsuits from Monsanto. Regular dupes simply believe that GMO foods are "not safe" and are likely to poison them and their children somehow.

      It's the same kind of logic that caused a parent in Maryland to tell their children that since Grandma died of cancer, and they don't want that happening to them (dying of cancer as an elderly person!), no more milk products!

  • Robin

    I was just explaining to a commenter concerned about what was going on in his child's school this week how the Smithsonian is involved with Understandings of Consequence to promote systems thinking in science classes and the Big History Project to get us back to the Marxist historical progression without using the M word. And Global Competence.

    When I clicked to the screen on their GC powerpoint I found a new definition of Global Competency with ties to CCSSO, the so-called creators of the Common Core state standards. It mentioned the "historical forces that have shaped our current world system." Think about that phrasing and a mandate to all US classrooms. Our current world system.

    No wonder education is the ticket that caused Paul Ehrlich to remark

    His Millenium Assessment of Human Behavior and its links to the UN's International Human Development Programme and its agenda should be on all of our radars. Because from what I can see Common Core is propaganda to cultivate false but inflential beliefs. As far as the eye can see.

    And further than any free society can tolerate.

  • Steeloak

    The irony is that the places on earth where the kind of government control over the economy envisioned by the greens was most fully implemented are also the most polluted.

    Whether it is the Aral sea and Chernobyl in the former Soviet Union or the massive coal-fired pollution of China, centralized government control causes, rather than cures pollution.

    In contrast, the most free and capitalistic places on earth are also the cleanest.

    • Mary Sue

      plus they want us to believe that us in the West pollutes more than Soviet Union or China….

    • Julien Peter Benney

      Actually, the most capitalist nations, like Australia, are far from the cleanest.

      Because of the extremely low land prices and low externalities, the very most fragile countries like Australia, but also including the southern tier of Africa, have the poorest environmental record and least regulation. Their low regulation is related to that fact that orogeny and glaciation have uniquely bypassed Australia and Southern Africa and left them with valuable lithophile minerals like aluminium, iron, manganese, titanium and uranium. The mineral industry in Australia, in essence, is the government, and the abundant living space and high job opportunities from Australia’s cheap farmland and mineral resources means Australia’s working masses have never possessed the incentive to protest that they do in Eurasia, the Americas or New Zealand.

      Yet, if you know the distribution of global biodiversity and the contrasting character of the ecology of the “old lands” of Australia and Southern Africa, no conclusion can be drawn except that thorough and comprehensive conservation of Australia and Southern Africa is the keystone to global conservation, and that these nations have been a severe failure.

  • Rifleman

    This is another leftist bunch that's been spectacularly wrong time and time again over the years, with no detrimental effect to their credibility.

    GMA and other technological advances monkey wrenched their great famine and societal disintegration. They hate GMA, and want this great dissolution and die off so bad, people have starved to death in Africa because of GMA fear ginned up by them. They've done the same thing regarding vaccines and pesticides. It's about what one would expect from people who say the human population needs to decrease by at least 2/3, to about 2 billion.

    • Mary Sue

      it's no secret that they believe fervently that Africa (and Asia) could stand to have much less population. The last thing they want to do is feed the people they've been starving to death!

    • sam000

      GREEN Movements are the TALIBAN of the west,
      The Taliban claim that "GOD has made a mistake by creating man" so, the TALIBAN has got the mission to reduce the population.
      The Greens say the same thing but without GOD,
      ONE WORLD RULE gathers all these forces.

  • HiPlainsDrifter

    Paul Ehrlich could not have been more wrong about most everything he every ventured his pathetic opinion on. That seems to make him the media "go to guy" in the green movement. Where being wrong, ill informed, misinformed, and brain dead are resume enhancers….as long as you also promote big socialist one world government..

  • tagalog

    George Alexander was a lumber mill worker, operating a large band saw cutting logs into flat lengths. Alexander was sawing a log into strips when the saw blade struck a spike that some environmentalist had driven into the tree. The saw blade disintegrated and a piece of it struck Mr. Alexander, cutting his lower face from his body. He lived.

    Dave Foreman of Earth First! had advocated tree spiking. Earth First! subscribed to Dave Foreman's view. Evidently someone followed his counsel. Edward Abbey, the popular evironmental novelist and IWW member, also favored it. The policy of the IWW is against tree spiking.

    Has anyone noticed the environmental movement acknowledging Mr. Alexander, who did nothing except be working in the wrong place at the wrong time? Have they shown any of their famous alleged compassion for him?

    • Mary Sue

      of course not, because it's in their mind his karma for hurting a poor innocent defenseless tree that has just as much right to live as he does! [/sarcasm]

      • tagalog

        Dave Foreman, when asked to show some compassion for Alexander, said that he was too concerned with the well-being of our natural environment to worry about a mere human being. What a guy.

        The IWW blamed the spiking on Louisiana-Pacific, the company that employed Alexander, in what seems to have been an effort to blacken the company's name for the sake of the IWW's idea of the labor movement. That attempt to paint the company black, for (apparently) trying to blacken the environmental movement, seems a bit strained.

    • Drakken

      The tree huggers don't protest too much in northern MN for the simple reason the loggers will just make them disappear.

  • Alex Kovnat

    As a member of the Detroit automotive engineering community, I have believed for a long time that one of the biggest elephants in our national living room is hatred of the automobile on part of intellectuals. The above article reminds me that this hatred is not just of the automobile, but our western way of life. How else do you explain that the same kind of people who demand 50+ miles per gallon corporate average fuel economy, also want more and more draconian safety requirements, which would limit us to less and less capable cars? How else, other than hatred of our way of life, do you explain that the same people who insist the world is coming to an end from carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere, also want us to give up on nuclear power for all time?

    • tagalog

      Intellectuals also make much of hating television. They stupidly fail to distinguish between television itself, a highly advantageous medium for the dissemination of information and communication, and what is shown on television. Besides, what is on television is much better now than it was when we were stuck with NBC, CBS, ABC, and PBS. The intellectuals seem to be stuck in the early 1960s.

      • Mary Sue

        It amazes me how many Leftists I know don't own a television. Particularly since so much television, be it the news or anything else, is so leftist-progressive friendly it's not even funny.

        Several have told me "I have better things to do" than watch TV. Oh really, what? Walking in the woods, you say? You can do that and still watch tv later!

        • tagalog

          And what do they mean by "better things?" I'm sure if they actually thought about what they were saying instead of relying on stock phrases that they've reduced to habit, they'd understand that they mean "other things." After all, when you have a chance to watch an excellent historical treatment of the Dust Bowl by libbie darling Ken Burns, or watch a fascinating and informative program about the Solar System or quantum physics by watching the Science Channel, or watching a program about how satellites have made the earth's climate phenomena much more understandable on NOVA, that walk in the woods is not superior, just another alternative.

          Or maybe I'm wrong; maybe the libbies you know are the type who would spend their TV time watching The Voice or Dancing With the Stars.

          Since they don't have TVs, what in fact do they do with their time? No doubt they'll say reading. So if it's reading, what are they reading? Dostoevsky or Barbara Cartland?

          • Mary Sue

            oh likely reading. And from what I could tell, reading absolute garbage. The leftist eco garbage.

            What scares me most about people who think TV is a waste of time who are ALSO leftists is, just maybe, what TV has to offer isn't Leftist enough? What, PBS Nature shows aren't worth at least basic cable? You'd think leftist moonbats would LOOOOVE PBS!

    • SuicidePrevention

      Yes, bring back leaded gasoline. And lead paint. Evil environmentalists
      banned these useful substances.

      • Mary Sue

        the reason they put lead in gasoline was to cure engine "knocking" but that is largely a thing of the past as engines and technology and fuels have been improved.

        I remember when a car my folks had, had instructions on how to start a car with a catalytic converter, right on the visor.

    • Webb

      How about the advent of the flat-roofed little socialist clown cars blighting the landscape? If you can't get along without a car, might as well drive the ugliest one possible.

  • PAthena

    I taught a college-level course called "Man and Nature," and had biologists as guest speakers on ecology. A group of students were from the "Environmental Studies" program and complained about me to the chairman of my department. Their complaint was that I taught too much biology! (The requirements for their degree did not include any biology. They learned instead how to engage in politics.)

  • Chris_Shugart

    Environmentalism is such an easy political posture to assume. It can't argue back and tell you how full of crap you are.

  • Parenthetical Phrase

    Environmentalism is not just collectivism, although it is largely that; it is also the re-branding of the eugenics movement. After WWII, American and British eugenics supporters realized that they would have to change their image to something kinder and gentler and different from the gruesome philosophy of the Nazis. So they put the emphasis on saving the earth and the wild creatures and not on eliminating those humans they deem "undesirable." In Paul Ehrlich's book, he talks of "Chinese hordes" overwhelming the earth's population, but the photographs in most of the books on the dangers of overpopulation are largely of black people in Africa.

    • theleastthreat

      The Fabians believed in a "scientifically controlled population". George Bernard Shaw was a Fabian who believed in euthanasia for "unworthy" or "unproductive" people. Who gets to decide who makes the cut?

  • david elder

    For another influential anti-human Green hero-figure see the late Lynn White Jr who in 1967 blamed our eco-problems on the Genesis passage giving humans a 'dominion' (NOT a 'domination' as White argued) over the earth (the piece was first published in Science journal and is now easily located on the internet). He wanted all species treated as equal. See where he ends up: Plagues or nuclear wars may give us a better planet by culling humans. We should act to cull the human population by means including abortion targeted especially at the 'burden' of the genetically 'abnormal' (Ecumenical Review 30 (1978) p. 99). God help us.

  • BS77

    The Green Earth day types say, "We love humanity, it's people we can't stand." Most of the environmental wackos are simply nut jobs with an agenda. Say you are skeptical about global warming and they get hysterical.

  • Mary Sue

    Just recently a whack job wrote into the newspaper claiming the HORROR that GMO foods' DNA can be assimilated into a person's body when they eat it.

    Uh, well, if that happens with GMO's, doesn't that also happen with REGULAR FOOD?!

    So then they panic and try to get everyone else to panic and get all their panties in a bunch about this modified garbage.

    Though I am kind of in agreement with them that Monsanto has to be reined in, patent law is kind of stupid in this regard and innocent farmers get penalized because Monsanto wants a monopoly and won't let farmers grow from seed from the crop itself, but forces them to buy seed every year.

    Though I have to laugh, the Greenies against GMOs are afraid that Monsanto is out to control the world's food population! Come on! That's what the greenies want to do!

  • cynthia curran

    Think of this about 30 years ago the Sierra Club was opposed to high levels of legal and illegal immirgation to keep the population down to preserved the enviroment. Now they are full blom leftist that want to expand population but forece everyone to lived in the major cities.


    Pretty! This was an extremely wonderful post. Many thanks for
    supplying this information.