NY Times admits “Population Bomb” theory false?

Recently, a surprising admission was made by the MSM.

As shall be explained further, this stunning admission – published by one of the most prestigious, highly-esteemed, and most widely read American periodicals –  completely undermines the sweeping “carbon footprint reduction” premise formulated by climate change activists and the revolutionary bureaucrats at the UN, those acting in zealous support of Agenda 2030 (formerly Agenda 21).

This admission, both in the form of a headlining article and a subsequent opinion-editorial piece, was published as recently as January of 2020, and appeared in “America’s newspaper of record”, the New York Times, and concerned the dubious phenomenon known as the “Population Bomb.”

SEE: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/18/opinion/sunday/the-chinese-population-crisis.html

For those unfamiliar with either the “Population Bomb” concept or the infamous book which portended a global famine due to an explosion of population growth, written by Stanford University professor Paul R. Ehrlich, both have been utilized to undergird the austere philosophy and shrill urgency of the climate change movement.

But as the New York Times has recently taken liberty to elucidate, the dire claims resulting from Professor Ehrlich’s tome have been left in a thorough shambles.

Yes folks, the same periodical that scared Americans into thinking Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq possessed “weapons of mass destruction”, and later admitted this was a falsehood, is now admitting the apocalyptic claims of climate change scientists and activists, that the world is overpopulated and needs to reduce its “carbon footprint” to save the planet, are also a falsehood and are tantamount to nothing more than scaremongering propaganda. While this may not surprise one’s loyal readers, and those who were already sceptical of such dubious claims, the Times’s admission is typical of the shopworn but all-too-effective tactic which has been utilized, time and again, by the thirteen, ruling elite Jesuit families – psychological warfare.

Upon clicking the link, provided above, and wading into this Times op-ed piece – written by author/columnist Ross Douthat – the slathering dollops of spin and misdirection which are utilized become increasingly and strikingly evident.

It appears, Douthat would have his readers believe, the utter saturation of media promotion, throughout these last several decades, given to the concept of the “Population Bomb” was merely in offered to the general public in error and was not deliberately promulgated propaganda.

But what else would one expect of the mealy mouthed New York Times; a bullhorn of pernicious propaganda and outright lies disguised as a prestigious source of authoritative information?

Before attempting to highlight some of the more pertinent excerpts from the Times opinion-editorial of January 18, 2020, there is much to reveal concerning Professor Paul R. Ehrlich, the progenitor of the vastly influential “Population Bomb” theory.

THE MAD PROFESSOR EHRLICH

The earliest editions of Paul R. Ehrlich’s “Population Bomb”, a book published in 1968 which went on to become a best-seller, stunned readers with this opening salvo: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970’s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate…”

Wading further into Ehrlich’s tome, and we discover the professor was one of the earliest proponents of adding “temporary sterilants” to both global water supplies and or staple foods”, to help control total population growth. In his book, Ehrlich also urged the US to take a leading role in international population control efforts as a moral imperative –  not only in the West, but in other industrialized regions of the globe.

Additionally, this excerpt, drawn from Wikipedia, further elucidates Ehrlich’s Malthusian plans for population control and reduction:

“He {Ehrlich} suggests a tax scheme in which additional children would add to a family’s tax burden at increasing rates for more children, as well as luxury taxes on childcare goods. He suggests incentives for men who agree to permanent sterilization before they have two children, as well as a variety of other monetary incentives. He proposes a powerful Department of Population and Environment which ‘should be set up with the power to take whatever steps are necessary to establish a reasonable population size in the United States and to put an end to steady deterioration of our environment. The Department should support research into population control, such as better contraceptives, mass sterilizing agents, and prenatal sex discernment (because families often continue to have children until a male is born. Ehrlich suggested that if they could choose a male child this would reduce the birthrate). Legislation should be enacted guaranteeing the right to an abortion, and sex education should be expanded.”

Suffice to say, a thorough examination of this key excerpt, from Ehrlich’s book, followed by an objective and contemplative analysis of its sweeping implications, allows for a comprehensive understanding of the corollary emergence and subsequent pervasiveness of the indoctrinating influence of the current so-called “Social Justice” movements.

Clearly, Ehrlich and his academic and bureaucratic colleagues well-understood, targeting of the incremental deconstruction of the nuclear family, among the proletariat, would be key in not only preparing and indoctrinating entire generations of humans to willingly submit to the collective will of the state, but to eschew any lingering conception of individual sovereignty or legal privilege.

Considering Ehrlich’s entreaties for the offering of “incentives” in helping to spread blatant propaganda and the aiding and abetting of the progress of population control and reduction programs, is it any wonder your local public officials, bureaucrats, and politicians have become so willing to parrot the idea of “climate sustainability”, terms which are tantamount to nothing more than all-encompassing buzzwords, fabricated terms which are repeatedly utilized to signal the symbolic surmounting of a faux moral high-ground.

Yes folks, it seems every one of your local politicians, without exception, have proved all-too-willing in promoting the UN’s Agenda 2030, and they have proved dedicated to the sacrifice of the future of humanity and individual sovereignty, in lieu of short-term financial and political gain. That state of unfortunate affairs best serves to illustrate the ruthless and pathological nature of their prevailing sociopathy.

THE CLUB OF ROME

Of course, what was never elucidated or highly publicized, at the time of the publication of Ehrlich’s tome, were the correlating efforts of the Club of Rome and its multi–tiered plan to utilize food as a strategic weapon, to not only manipulate commercial markets and global trade agreements, but to control and, ultimately, reduce global population levels.

SEE: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/12307033/

In other words, folks, food scarcity, and the scarcity of other natural resources – the “Peak Oil” propaganda comes immediately to mind –  were manufactured for the sake of ulterior and covert motives, for the sake of deliberately fabricating social and political chaos, climate crisis, and, perhaps, most importantly, to manufacture greater commercial profits. Scarcity of natural resources has always been a keen tactic of the thirteen families to manipulate market prices and to influence the value of global trade tariffs.

“EMPTY PLANET RESULT”?

Though, for decades, this idea of the “Population Bomb” has been tirelessly promulgated by seemingly all MSM outlets, now, claims New York Times’ columnist Ross Douthat, the scientists made an honest mistake in formulating their global population growth statistics. Douthat claims, a new reinterpretation of scientific data reflects that, in fact, the population of the globe, rather than increasing at ever unsustainable rates, is leveling off, if not decreasing. The following, is perhaps the most illustrative, if not alarming, excerpt from Douthat’s column, “The Chinese Population Crisis, How Communist cruelty and Western folly built an underpopulation bomb,” published on January 18, 2020:

“As Lyman Stone writes in the latest National Review, the human race is increasingly facing a ‘global fertility crisis,’ not just European or American or Japanese baby bust. It’s a crisis that threatens ever-slower growth in the best case; in the worst case, to cite a recent paper by the Stanford economist Charles Jones, it risks ‘an Empty Planet result: knowledge and living standards stagnant for a population that eventually vanishes’.”

Despite this, however, climate activists, and Professor Paul R. Ehrlich, are still chanting their tiresome slogans, which deliver the mordant mantra of an approaching doomsday scenario: genuine efforts, by draconian force if necessary, must continue to encourage humanity to reduce its carbon footprint to sustainable levels, for the sake of an environmentally sustainable future.

In truth, this sort of pernicious propaganda veils a well-funded psychological operation – tied-in and related to China’s formerly implemented One Child policy, and the LGBTQ/transgender/third-wave feminism movements here in the West – to program humanity to favorably view global economic austerity, and to revel in the nihilism of its own eventual obsolescence for the sake of the environmental health of the planet.

But is there a hidden and even larger agenda which the Times’s Douthat is purposefully omitting?

Does Douthat’s notion of an “underpopulation bomb” represent something other than Stanford economist Charles Jones’s “Empty Planet result”?

Are large swaths of human populations being eliminated then replaced by an artificial sentience which the thirteen, ruling elite Jesuit families speculate will be much easier for them to govern, going forward into the 21st century and beyond?

It seems, not only are entire swaths of the global population being actively fooled into believing adopting this nihilistic and suicidal dogma conveys some measure of moral superiority but, what seems more sinister, they’ve been psychologically tricked into believing the austere philosophical dogma of the climate change agenda has been adopted via their own free wills, as if each zealous adherent has observed the wisdom of such a philosophical conception due to the faculties of their own conscious volition.

Sinister, indeed.

This philosophical conception, this idea, that mankind must accept economic austerity and reduce its carbon footprint for the sake of the global environment’s health and ultimate survival, represents a cleverly designed, but deeply deceptive and manipulative ruse.

In truth, the genuine aim of the “climate change” agenda has never had anything to do with saving the environment.

Rather, it is a cleverly conceived veil intended to shield the movement of a sweeping and global economic, social, and political transition.

To summarize, and as I’ve articulated in previous installments, the proliferation of digital and advanced technologies were developed, chiefly, to facilitate a widespread, if not revolutionary, process of transitional automation fully applied to the commercial business of global industrial production and distribution, from that of human commercial resources to sentient artificial intelligence.

Since before the Post-War period of the mid-20th century, the thirteen families have been incrementally planning to replace entire production workforce sectors, those formerly dominated by large-scale human workforces, with robotics and AI.

But don’t believe the New York Times or its columnist Ross Douthat that, the MSM’s decades-long promotion of Professor Ehrlich’s Population Bomb theory, was an honest mistake.

Though they would have everyone believe otherwise, Douthat’s culminating and eye–opening analysis of Professor Paul R. Ehrlich’s theory, that scientists are just now realizing Ehrlich’s notion of a “Population Bomb” was mistaken, was neither a mistake nor was it a miscalculation. Rather, Ehrlich’s theory was propagandized to justify the intended result of an underpopulation bomb.

Rest assured, the thirteen, ruling elite Jesuit families, and their accomplices and conspirators at London’s Crown Temple and the Vatican in Rome, don’t make such mistakes. They are, however, very good – through the use of propaganda – at making them appear as such.

No folks, in the words of a former US president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt AKA Randolph Churchill (SEE: Your spell is broken, Mister Crowley), the hidden son of former British PM Winston Churchill AKA Alistair Crowley, “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”