population control

[akarunway 1]

How manyhttp://www.nobeliefs.com/freethinkers.htmFreethinkers out there?------------------------------------------Professor's population speeches unnerve some
He says he's issuing warning, but others see talk of pandemics as a threat.
By Laura Heinauer

AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF


Wednesday, April 05, 2006

University of Texas professor Eric Pianka's enemies say he advocates wiping out 90 percent of the population and that his seemingly giddy obsession with death and disease coupled with power over young minds is dangerous and disturbing.

His supporters say while his rhetoric may be shocking at times, he's just trying to get people to think about the consequences of uncontrolled population growth.


Eric Pianka, a UT professor since 1968, has given recent speeches where he says disease pandemics could wipe out 90 percent of the world's population. Some critics say he's promoting such a disaster.

"I've found that it takes courage to tell people what they don't want to know," Pianka, 67, said Tuesday, two days after a newspaper story in Seguin's Gazette-Enterprise ignited a firestorm that has resulted in e-mail threats on Pianka's life.

The controversy surrounds comments made during two recent speeches in which Pianka discussed the need for population control and the impending disease pandemic that might well just take care of it. Some heard the comments as simply a warning. To others, however, it sounded like Pianka was advocating the use of deadly viruses to kill off millions of people.

Pianka, who calls the latter interpretation nonsense, says the whole thing has blown out of proportion. Many, however, seem to be taking his critics seriously. Pianka said he is scheduled to meet with FBI officials today.

"Someone has reported me as a terrorist," he said. "They think I'm forming a cadre of people to release the airborne Ebola virus into the air. That I'm the leader and my students are the followers."

There's no denying that Pianka, even at first glace, seems a little eccentric.

His office, which he has inhabited for 38 years, is cluttered with books, stacks of paper, bones and even a few beers. There's a photo of him dressed like British naturalist Charles Darwin. Scattered pictures of lizards and a copy of his semi-autobiography, "The Lizard Man Speaks," reveal his area of expertise — lizards and evolutionary ecology. On his desk, he keeps a stuffed likeness of the Ebola virus that was sent to him by students who enjoyed his speeches.

He is particularly troubled by the recent explosion in the human population. He says we now take up about 50 percent of all livable space on Earth and that people should have no more than two children. Humans, and the way they've multiplied, are "no better than bacteria," he says.

Such talk makes Forrest Mims' skin crawl.

Mims, an author and amateur scientist who heard Pianka speak in early March before the Texas Academy of Science, said Pianka's remarks were degrading and that he was deeply disturbed by Pianka's comments comparing different diseases and their potential to decimate the human race. He's one of dozens of bloggers who have expressed displeasure with Pianka's point of view.

A Gazette-Enterprise reporter who heard Pianka speak Friday on the same topic quoted him saying disease "will control the scourge of humanity. We're looking forward to a huge collapse."

"It was 'Twilight Zone' material. It was like sitting in a science-fiction movie," Mims said Tuesday, adding that he is worried young doctors and scientists with access to deadly diseases might take literally what he claims is a call by Pianka to control population growth through the spread of disease. "The big concern is this professor is instilling this in the minds of students."

Pianka said only meant to warn about the potential for epidemics in the face of uncontrolled population growth. No recording or transcript of either that speech or another delivered last Friday at St. Edward's University in Austin was available. Pianka, who said his daughters are now worried about his and their safety, says his life has been turned upside-down by "right-wing fools."

Those roaming the corridors at Patterson Hall on the UT campus were very supportive of their teacher and colleague.

Fellow professor David Hillis said most people were sympathetic of the nationally renowned professor's plight. "There's a strong anti-science sentiment in the country right now," Hillis said. Pianka "has such a passion for life and diversity. How anyone could paint him as pro-death is unbelievable."

Tracy Heath, a doctoral student who has taken classes taught by Pianka, said he's known for living on a ranch, driving a Toyota Prius and raising bison. "He likes to captivate students with interesting pictures and stories," she said. "He's just trying to make waves to get people to think."

Pianka hopes this experience does just that. "We could be gods," he said. "We could be such great stewards of the Earth."

Oh, and one other thing — "Maybe it will help me sell a few books."

lheinauer@statesman.com; 445-3694



Eric R. Pianka

Born: Jan. 23, 1939, in Yreka, Calif. Now lives in Blanco County.

Education: Bachelors in biology, Carleton College 1960; doctorate in zoology, University of Washington, 1965; doctorate in ecology, University of Western Australia, 1990

Career: University of Texas, 1968 to present.

Family: Two brothers, a sister, two daughters, two granddaughters, two ex-wives and a small herd of American bison.

Publications: Several papers and more than a dozen books, including 'Varanoid Lizards of the World', 2004, and 'Lizards: Windows to the Evolution of Diversity', 2003, which won a Robert W. Hamilton Book award in 2005.

Hobbies: Chess, falconry

Worth noting: Guggenheim Fellow, 1978-79; Fulbright Senior Research Scholar, 1990-91; Denton A. Cooley Centennial Professorship in Zoology, 1986; Herpetologists League's 'Distinguished Herpetologist,' 2004; Texas Academy of Science 'Distinguished Scientist,' 2006

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

University of Texas professor Eric Pianka's enemies say he advocates wiping out 90 percent of the population...

He should set the example by volunteering to go first.

[akarunway 1]

I see you ARE a freethinker

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[sfzombie13 324]

it sounds like he's echoing one of my thoughts, that our population is rising too fast for the earth to sustain us. the thing we can do to stop it is just quit trying to extend our lives. the earth formulated cures for overpopulation many times in the past: aids for one, ebola, bird flu, etc... we need to stop looking for cures for them and just accept that we're all gonna die eventually.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[Gene03 0]

Quote

Quote

University of Texas professor Eric Pianka's enemies say he advocates wiping out 90 percent of the population...

He should set the example by volunteering to go first.

I agree John. You have to admire someone who has the courage to live up to their own convictions. Think it will happen????

“The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all is the person who argues with him.

Stanislaw Jerzy Lec quotes (Polish writer, poet and satirist 1906-1966)

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

it sounds like he's echoing one of my thoughts, that our population is rising too fast for the earth to sustain us. the thing we can do to stop it is just quit trying to extend our lives. the earth formulated cures for overpopulation many times in the past: aids for one, ebola, bird flu, etc... we need to stop looking for cures for them and just accept that we're all gonna die eventually.

completely silly. I suppose if you were, say, attacked by a wild animal you would just sit there & let it kill you.

Humans struggle to survive. It is what we are supposed to do. That could mean stabbing a sabre tooth tiger with a pointed stick, or it could mean spending your life working in a laboratory to find cures to life-threatening diseases.

These idiotic ivory-tower types come up with this "save the planet, kill yourself" bullshit by treating human beings as numbers.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[narcimund 0]

I'm confused... where does Pianka express ANYTHING to get mad at? The only contentious thing here is some unnamed "enemies" who are said to be putting words in his mouth and you're all taking the bait.

You look like a snapshot of a society of trained attack dogs. "Kill, boy!" "Arf, snarl, chomp!"

It doesn't take much of a trigger to set you people off against someone, does it? Doesn't it embarass you to be so easily controlled? Don't you have a little curiosity to know who exactly is doing this controlling... and for what purpose?

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[sfzombie13 324]

you may think it's silly, but if we weren't struggling to live past 100 and wiping out every disease that exists, then we wouldn't be overpopulating the planet. it is a fact that there is only so much room to live and grow enough food, not to even mention provide comforts for, so many people on the planet. i'm not going to convince anybody anything on this website, and i'm not trying. i'm merely pointing out a point of view, mine. and it's not silly, it's a fact that the earth is trying to control it's own population. the silliest thing is that the people in power are too greedy and stupid to see it and fix the problem before it's irreversible: think global warming.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

I'm confused... where does Pianka express ANYTHING to get mad at? The only contentious thing here is some unnamed "enemies" who are said to be putting words in his mouth and you're all taking the bait.

Well, Forrest Mims was named. For once, I agree with Littlejohn; putting words in someone else's mouth is a mindless means of rebuttal. You folks need to go back and re-read what the guy was actually saying.

Quote

You look like a snapshot of a society of trained attack dogs. "Kill, boy!" "Arf, snarl, chomp!"

John, I'm surprised at you. Normally you put some good thought into your responses. Here, you simply "took the bait" offered by Mr Mims.


Oh, for me? Off the top of my head, I see that over-population is a major problem that can only be solved in two ways:
Culling or Voluntary birth-rate reduction.

Good luck on trying to succeed at either.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[akarunway 1]

If you are aiming that response at ME you are wrong. I totally agree w/ the man. Human beings suck for the most part. 90% less would make my day. I'm living in L.A., Right now. Get the hint?

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[SpeedRacer 1]

still silly though.

with more people inventing more technology, we can figure out ways to use resources more efficiently. A person is not just "another damn mouth to feed." People are assets. They can invent & produce things.

If for example we had kept the same technology we had 100 years ago without advancing, the world's environment would be far MORE polluted & generally devastated than it is now.

Part of the solution is contraception, which gives people more conscious control over when they reproduce. History has shown that this is far more effective than disease.

Letting ourselves get killed off by disease IS silly. Whatever thought process leads you to the conclusion that we shouldn't fight disease must be a flawed process.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[sfzombie13 324]

when you have one of the major religions of the world (catholicism) that will allow no use of contraception, i'm thinking that you are making a flawed argument. and the thought process isn't mine, i simply agree with it. there is no sense in allowing the infant mortality rate to be as low as it is, when that was just nature's way of weeding out the weak from the gene pool. why do you suppose that there are more and worse diseases and ailments today than previously in history? hell, we as a people can't even get along with each other long enough to come to terms on feeding the world's hungry, or providing basic and i mean less than $20 worth of immunizations for 3rd world people, and you think that we can agree on any type of contraception that would control the population? i'd like to join you in your utopia if there are any seats left. i live in the real world, where we are destroying the planet we live on, with no place to go, and the saddest part is, if there were any money in it, we could stop it in 15 years. but there are too many people making too much money and unwilling to give up any creature comforts in the civilized parts of the world for it to change soon enough to make a difference. and people like you continue to spout this bullshit about people being assets. right. some are, the vast majority are just along for the ride. i can't remember inventing anything useful in my lifetime, and nobody that i personnally know has either. granted, i only know about 1500 to 2000 people (estimated), but still a dismal percentage. i'll say it again: wake up, america!

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[Lindsey 0]

I don't understand what's so disturbing about what he's saying. He's stating the obvious. Maybe he's going a step further and suggesting that something good might come out of a pandemic? Still nothing to get your panties in a wad over.

I think statements like "Humans are no better than bacteria" probably gets some folks upset. I do think it's a ridiculous statement, even if there is a little darkish humor in it. If he were advocating taking steps to cause a pandemic or, as another poster suggested, ceasing to treat illness, then I'd see something worth arguing over.

It's true that we have, for some time, outwitted mother nature as far as natural population control goes. He's certainly not the first to notice.

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[kbordson 8]

OK... This post made me think and do a little research (yes, just on the internet... but nonetheless)

Learned some concerning things:

The world population has grown from an estimated number of 200million in 1AD (range 170m-400m) to 6.5 billion for this year. The average life expectancy in the US (all races, both sexes) has changed from 63 in 1940 to 77 in 2001 (reference National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 52, No. 3, September 18, 2003). And I know with advances being made in cancer research and cardiovascular disease (the two leading causes of death overall) that the top end will climb even higher.

I found this site very interesting on understanding (with visual representation) the popultion prymadis (sex and age breakdown) in the US through the years 1955-2050 (projected of course) Displays the baby boom and what that means as that generation grows and then shows how future generations continue to have that expanded birth rate and longevity.

http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs.pl?cty=US&out=d&ymax=250


And this was a very interesting 10page document from the U.N. on The World at Six Billion

http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/sixbillion/sixbilpart1.pdf

Overall... we are growing, as a species, at an incredible rate. Something needs to be done to either control the growth or find other methods of dealing with these numbers. I personally would like to see advances in science to allow growth in other nontraditional habitats. (underwater, space, ect) But can see how others might come to the belief of reducing numbers (I don't think it's reasonable or practical though to discuss culling or forced infertility) Whether Pianka ends up being right or wrong about world disasters remains to be seen.

Karen

[twibbles 0]

Quote

there is no sense in allowing the infant mortality rate to be as low as it is, when that was just nature's way of weeding out the weak from the gene pool. why do you suppose that there are more and worse diseases and ailments today than previously in history

It's won't work, some people don't accept selection and evolution, the same people who's religion forbids the use of birth control. And Selection doesn't weed out the weak, it weeds out those who can't adapt to a new environment.

Quote

i live in the real world, where we are destroying the planet we live on, with no place to go, and the saddest part is, if there were any money in it, we could stop it in 15 years.

I think it's a lot harder to kill the planet. The planet as we see it now, yes. But The Planet? As far as it's concerned, humanity's just a blip. People complain about global warming. the fact is that we don't have enough data to even guess what the climate is going to do if humanity isn't around. The planet is very big, and we only live on a tiny layer on the surface.

I digress, sorry!

Eugene

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of
people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."

[napaguy99 0]

"been around the world and found
that only stupid people are breeding
the cretins cloning and feeding
and i don't even own a tv "

"Let the misinterpretation and attacks begin."

[narcimund 0]

Quote

The planet is very big

I have an idea. Let's just stipulate that in conversations about population control "destroy the planet" doesn't mean explode the rock and send the fragments into deep space. It means sterilize the surface.

That should save some time, ok?

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[twibbles 0]

I'm just pointing out that the statement can be read in another way, no reason for you to think i'm an idiot. While you're at it, care to say what you mean by sterillizing the surface? Complete melting of the continental plates? Jeez...

Eugene

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of
people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."

[twibbles 0]

Damn it.. I keep trying to stay clear of Religion, Politics, and Speakers Corner, but i keep getting drawn into it...

Eugene

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of
people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Complete melting of the continental plates?

I have an idea. Let's just stipulate that in conversations about population control "sterilize the surface" doesn't mean ...

Oh, forget it.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

it sounds like he's echoing one of my thoughts, that our population is rising too fast for the earth to sustain us. the thing we can do to stop it is just quit trying to extend our lives. the earth formulated cures for overpopulation many times in the past: aids for one, ebola, bird flu, etc... we need to stop looking for cures for them and just accept that we're all gonna die eventually.

It is arguable that regardless of what we do, if it is in the earths best interest to get rid of us, that will happen regardless of what we do. This is evidenced by the many new strains of antibiotice resistant viruses. We were given, the desire to survive and the ability for a reason, and nature will always balance things out if so required. Recall our presence on the earth in terms of a timeline is nothing more than a blink in the earths history. Perhaps there could be unforeseen negative consequences if we follow the "let ourselves die off" approach that many people advocate. I don't really know but Adam Smiths "Invisible Hand" theory that applies in economics could also apply to the human interaction with the environment, if we look at it from a long run perspective.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[twibbles 0]

No, please do go on. Don't you see sarcasm when you see it? Apparently not. You're taking it out of contex. All i'm saying that increasing populations... forget it, we're not understanding each other anyway. Although i do admit that i was out of point earlier.

Eugene

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of
people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."

[twibbles 0]

If the earth is trying to kill us off, that means that humanity would try to survive. We do what's in our best interest, that's life. If humanity decides to let ourselves die off, we'll just be a dead end in evolution. That's my thoughts.

edited to add: i agree with you.

Eugene

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of
people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

If the earth is trying to kill us off, that means that humanity would try to survive. We do what's in our best interest, that's life. If humanity decides to let ourselves die off, we'll just be a dead end in evolution. That's my thoughts.

Eugene

I think that is along the lines of what I was getting to. Maybe if we subscribe to the virus host theory, then maybe our role could be to strengthen the earths defences. For example, doctors are now saying that babies who are not exposed to a bit of dirtiness when they are younger tend to develop weaker immune systems. Basically viruses do sometimes serve the purpose of keeping our immune system strong, for when we hit bad viruses. In the same way we need to focus in what is in our best interests and in theory the earth should develop means to protect itself against us. Again I am not a science guy so I am just speculating (polite speak for talking through my ass).

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Don't you see sarcasm when you see it?

Here's a hint for online survival: If you post a sarcastic response to something, consider yourself at a disadvantage.

And you should never get frustrated with someone for not recognizing your unmarked sarcasm, especially if you're not well known for it. It really doesn't pay.

First Class Citizen Twice Over