Governments and dictators assembling in Rio de Janeiro for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development must adopt even more stringent policies to reduce the number of people in the world and make sure that those who remain stop consuming so much, a taxpayer-funded network of more than 100 science institutions demanded in a newly released statement.
Meanwhile, new economic models are also needed, claimed scientists associated with the IAP Global Network of Science Academies. Politics and ethics — in other words, the will and morality of the people — cannot be allowed to stand in the way of the UN “sustainability” regime any longer; at least not if the world is to be saved from its primary enemy: humanity.
“For too long, population and consumption have been left off the table due to political and ethical sensitivities,” complained U.K. Royal Society fellow Charles Godfray (pictured next to IAP logo), chairman of the IAP working group, in a bizarre attack on humanity and prosperity. “These are issues that affect developed and developing nations alike, and we must take responsibility for them together.”
The draft UN agreement being developed by national governments and environmental activist groups already deals with population control and reducing consumption, according to statements issued by the global body. But to the anti-population scientist coalition, whose controversial joint statement is being widely touted in the global media, more must be done.
“Increasing population growth and unsustainable consumption together pose two of the greatest challenges facing the world,” claimed the IAP statement, released ahead of Rio+20 in an effort to put more pressure on governments to take drastic and immediate action. “The combination of unsustainable consumption patterns, especially in high-income countries, and of the number of people on the planet, directly affects the capacity of the earth to support its natural biodiversity.”
The network demanded “urgent action” from national and global policy makers, offering a list of highly controversial recommendations to achieve the ever-elusive goal of what the UN calls “sustainability.” None of the suggestions will be easy or cheap, but according to the government-funded academies, the alternatives might possibly be bad too.
Among other points, the statement urged rulers to consider ways to restrict both population and consumption through coercive policies at all levels of government. Virtually every field of policy making should be put at the service of the agenda: poverty, “gender equality,” education, health, “global governance,” economic development, the environment, and more.
“If the right conditions are in place, measures that reduce fertility rates while respecting human rights can stimulate and facilitate economic development, improve health and living standards, and increase political and social stability and security,” the network claimed. People living in richer nations, meanwhile, need to become much poorer.
The collection of scientists also demanded that “everyone” have taxpayer-funded access to “reproductive health” and “family planning” – terms which generally refer to contraception, sterilization, and abortion. And more government “planning” on everything from economic activity to urban development will also be needed to save the earth, the network claimed.
“Everyone has a role to play: individuals, non-governmental organizations, and both the public and private sectors,” stated the joint statement. “It is critical that national and international policy makers, acting individually and collectively, take immediate action to address these difficult but vitally important issues.”
According to estimates cited in the statement, by 2050, there might be between 8 billion and 11 billion people on earth, up from around 7 billion today. That is simply too many humans for the planet to handle, claim anti-population extremists with no confidence in the free-market system. So governments must step in, create a planetary regime, and ensure that the UN keeps everything under control.
“If we act now, it is realistic to imagine trajectories where population growth comes to a halt, consumption becomes sustainable, human-induced global change is kept within manageable limits, and human well-being increases,” offered the IAP statement. “A failure to act will put us on track to alternative futures with severe and potentially catastrophic implications for human well-being.”
Much of the press – especially taxpayer-funded outlets like the BBC — praised the dubious statement, trying to create a perception that it represented some sort of compromise. According to that line of thinking, rulers of poor countries want populations in rich countries to stop consuming so much. Governments in the developed world, meanwhile, are simply seeking to eliminate the people of developing countries.
Because the scientists backing the dubious recommendations come from poor and wealthy nations, and the schemes incorporate both population reduction and less consumption, “world leaders” assembled in Rio can finally act. And the world can move forward into a progressive and utopian age of centrally planned “sustainability.”
“The determination to work for the common good is encouraging,” said Rio+20 summit Chairman Sha Zukang (pictured next to Rio+20 logo), a long-serving former diplomat with the Communist dictatorship ruling over mainland China — infamous for its forced abortions and barbaric “one-child” policies. “The whole world is watching us and we cannot afford to let them down.”
Over a dozen respected scientists and elite university science professors contacted by The New American in recent days lambasted the environmental fear mongering ahead of Rio+20. According to those experts, much of the hysteria is based on discredited computer models, false assumptions, and flawed reasoning.
Of course, anti-human alarmists have been warning about alleged “overpopulation” or assorted catastrophes for decades – global cooling, global warming, mass starvation, and more. Across the board, however, those dire predictions of imminent doom and gloom have consistently proven to be way off the mark. The stunning implosion of the UN’s hysterical “climate” theories was only the most recent example.
“This is the same Malthusian material they have been pushing for more than 20 years. Make doomsday predictions and they never happen,” noted retired Georgia Tech nuclear engineering Professor Jim Rust when asked by The New American about a recent UN report calling for population control and reduced consumption. “They put them out in the future far enough that people forget the predictions or don’t live long enough to see them fail.”
Rust, who also serves as a policy adviser for The Heartland Institute, a respected science-oriented think tank, blasted the UN’s largely discredited computer models as well. “Would you want a life-threatening operation performed upon you based upon such speculative information? This is what the UN is asking from you,” he explained in an e-mail.
“Give up use of our abundant fossil fuels, the developed nations will revert back to 19th century lifestyles and developing nations have no hope of uplifting themselves from the poverty they have endured for centuries,” concluded Rust, who has over 50 years of experience dealing with energy-related subjects.
But the UN and its member governments – mostly despotic regimes of different varieties – are not giving up yet. Official documents released in recent months show that the global body hopes to use the Rio+20 gathering to amass a vast array of new powers. The purpose: literally re-shaping human civilization. Even people’s thoughts and lifestyles are in the crosshairs.
Also on the agenda, according to UN documents, is the erection of a worldwide regime of central planning under the guise of moving toward what the organization touts as a “green economy.” “Specifically, in a transition to a green economy, public policies will need to be used strategically to reorient consumption, investments, and other economic activities,” the recently released UN report explained.
Opposition to the controversial global schemes, however, is growing quickly – especially in the United States. Local and state officials across America, for example, under increasing pressure from their constituents, are scrambling to protect citizens and property rights from Agenda 21, the global “sustainability” regime adopted at the first “Earth Summit” two decades ago. Alabama just banned it. And the anti-UN outcry is only getting louder.
Related articles:
Media Hypes UN Fear-mongering Before Rio+20 Sustainability Summit
UN Report for Rio+20 Outlines Top-down “Green” World Order
UN Seeks New Powers to Remake World at Rio Sustainability Summit
UN Bosses Secretly Plot Global Govt Through “Green Economy” for Rio+20
Ambitious UN Sustainability Conference in Rio to Avoid Climate Talk
Alabama Adopts First Official State Ban on UN Agenda 21
Rockefellers Fund Global-warming Protests as Earth Cools
IPCC Researchers Admit Global Warming Fraud
Global-warming Alarmism Dying a Slow Death
