Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore explains the species scare: “Since species extinction became a broad social concern, coinciding with the extinction of the passenger pigeon, we have done a pretty good job of preventing species extinctions."
Moore bluntly mocked species extinction claims made by biologist Edward O. Wilson from Harvard University. Wilson estimated that up to 50,000 species go extinct every year based on computer models of the number of potential but as yet undiscovered species in the world. Moore: “There’s no scientific basis for saying that 50,000 species are going extinct. The only place you can find them is in Edward O. Wilson’s computer at Harvard University. They’re actually electrons on a hard drive. I want a list of Latin names of actual species.”
UK scientist Professor Philip Stott, emeritus professor of Biogeography at the University of London: “The earth has gone through many periods of major extinctions, some much bigger in size than even being contemplated today...Change is necessary to keep up with change in nature itself. In other words, change is the essence. And the idea that we can keep all species that now exist would be anti-evolutionary, anti-nature and anti the very nature of the earth in which we live."
The founder of a group of "birth strikers" says choosing not to have children is only rational when faced with the potential havoc that climate change may inflict on future generations."We're looking at famine and we're looking at mass displacement. We're looking at severe weather systems, we're looking at general drought and sea-level rise," said Blythe Pepino, who launched the BirthStrike movement.
"We need to prepare, not for the consequences of a population boom, but a population bust. A child born this decade will probably reach middle age in a world where population growth has stalled, and may already have begun to shrink. "--Darrell Bricker and John Ibbitson, The Observer, 27 January 2019
"The basic claim that global population, now 7.5bn, will decline rapidly later this century after peaking at below 9bn — rather than the 11bn that is the UN’s central forecast." - "Market economics failed to topple Chinese communism, but perhaps the halving of its population by the end of the century will do the trick instead."
Why? "It can be summed up in one sentence. As societies urbanize, women become better educated (including about contraception) and more financially autonomous thanks to working outside the home, and this causes fertility rates to plummet, which is reinforced in most places by the weakening ties of family, clan and organized religion."
“Since the 1960s, the environmental left has had the same solutions regardless of the current environmental scare of the day,” Marc Morano, publisher of the Climate Depot website, a former Republican political aide, and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change told The New American. “The solution is global governance, central planning, wealth redistribution, and loss of national sovereignty to international bodies. They started this in the late 1960s chiefly with overpopulation — the Paul Ehrlich [author of The Population Bomb] scare, resource scarcity, and other environmental concerns at the time, and always the same solution.”
Global warming is merely the latest environmental scare with the same solution, Morano says.
"The catechism of environmental alarmism demands that we denounce the sinful nature of “destructive capitalism” for which punishment is not so much inevitable as it is richly deserved. If our disappearance from the planet is to be contemplated with complacence it is not because it is in any sense a realistic scientific scenario (or at least not until the sun becomes a red giant 5 billion years from now) but because it is the fate such extremists believe we deserve. The talk of extinction from those who accept the gospel of environmentalism is merely a new-age version of biblical warnings that First Temple–era Jews would be vomited out of the land of Israel if they worshipped false gods."