Paul R. Ehrlich

Winner of many accolades for being wrong, authoring the discredited Population Bomb, popularizing the Global Cooling scare. Winner of many accolades for repeatedly being wrong: authoring the discredited and derrivative Population Bomb (regurgitating Malthusian Catastrophe via environmental Tragedy of the commons and popularizing the Global Cooling scare. The former disproved long before he authored/championed them. The latter flipped a few years after he made them. ℹ️ Info           ~ Aristotle Sabouni Created: 2018-04-04

Failures

• Earth Day - Earth Day was a fake Holiday invented to support the far left, Marxist, anti-Humanity (Population Bomb Phobia) movement.Earth Day was a fake Holiday invented to support the far left, Marxist, anti-Humanity (Population Bomb Phobia) movement. The early message wasn't resonated so they moved to more green and less soylent green. The founders were kooks and criminals, the cause would hurt humanity, but if you sell anything with peace and love, the rubes and sheep will follow.
• Global Cooling Scare - The dishonest, partisan and uninformed downplay the Global Cooling craze of the 1970's, because it makes them look bad.Many downplay the Global Cooling craze of the 1970's, but it was a real, large and popular movement based on the "Scientific Consensus" of the day, and was sensationalized by the media. When the temp trends flipped, they flipped too: same cause, same cure -- man is to blame, we need Marxism to save us. So says the Marxists and their flock.
• The Population Bomb - Marxist-sponsored hippie environmentalists re-invented the Malthusian catastrophe, and the only solution was Marxism.Marxist-sponsored hippie environmentalists re-invented the Malthusian catastrophe as "The Population Bomb". This suicide cult believed that if we don't give the government supreme power to enact compulsory population control, then there would be mass starvation and war by the early 1980s. It didn't happen. But they assure us that Marxism is the only cure for what's coming any day now.
• Tragedy of the commons - Malthusian Catastrophes and Tragedy of the commons is used to justify leftist actions, despite always being wrong.We often get dire warnings about Malthusian Catastrophes, Ehrlich's population bombs and how individuals can't be trusted to manage shared interests. We need government to protect us from ourselves. History shows the opposite: individuals form small governments for common interests better than big governments, unless big government stops them.

Earth Day

           Main article: Earth Day

Earth Day has always been about Scare Tactics. First it was Global Cooling and littering. Then it was that we were running out of landfills, peak oil (and all other resources), and later global warming. Once it stopped warming, they switched the terminology to "Climate Change". There was destruction of rain forests or wetlands was one of their scares. Always there's been extinction of species that would be the end of us (like the Beepocalypse. Now it is plastic waste or ocean acidification. Chicken little is desperate to get your attention. There's a ton of silly exploitation in the name of the planet. Like going to electric cars which are browner in every way but tailpipe emissions (which is the least of our problems). Another example I like is Apple. In order to up their green cred, they go to all these environmentally safe materials for their cables, that wear out faster and create more pollution than they help. But if they try to work with Greenpeace or other environmental loons to explain, "if we use a little of this plastic, it'll reduce wear and save in the long run", those are nuances that beyond environmental activists. They demand being greener, by using materials that are far more wasteful to the environment. In announcing the first Earth Day celebration, the Cleveland Press headline summed it up perfectly, "Hippies and Housewives Unite to Protest What Man is Doing to Earth." While a little condescending, it was closer to the truth than anything the NYT would publish on the topic today. In the end, both Marxist and Environmentalists can't tell the truth, because that wouldn't advance their cause. "Things have been getting better despite our warnings, so lets change everything!", isn't a good sell. So when you know the truth is unpopular, and you still want your agenda, your only option is to give up your dreams, or lie. Most choose the latter. For example, while Earth Day sells itself as some rainbow coalition, the truth is they're not very open minded (as seen how they treat people who disagree), and more exemplified by the history of the anti-humanity and anti-immigrant views of many of the founders and proponents. Or despite it being sold as a day of celebration for the Earth and Peace, Earth Day has never been a celebration of the beauty and bounty of this awesome blue marble. Instead it’s always been an assault on humanity. Man is the great polluter that must be stopped because of failed predictions like Peak Oil, the Population Bombs, and so on When that fails to agitate the gullible, or time proves them wrong, they shift to something else: "Tree Killers" was popular in the 1980's, let's spike trees and kill/maim loggers for the greater good. Then in the 1990's it was man is bad for all the animals they're killing, like the Great Horned Owl, Polar Bears or Whales. When those aren't dying out as they predicted, then it's on to our cars or lack of green energy is the cause for badness. And so on, and so on. But if you mention the failures of their past predictions, they'll attack you like Stalin on a capitalist street vendor trying to feed his family. While the problem of the day (year) keeps shifting, the cause (humans) never does. And their solution is always the same: give them (government) the power, to take away your liberty, and they'll protect the trees and environment from you. Just like the USSR did in Chernobyl, or China does as the greatest strip-miners in history.

Global Cooling Scare

           Main article: Global Cooling Scare

The left/media/polemics of today will pretend this didn't exist, or it was just a few outlets that were claiming it, and there was no science or momentum behind it. That's a lie. Paul R. Ehrlich, Watermelon environmentalist of the 1960's, not only wrote the discredited The Population Bomb, but he also started another Tragedy of the commons based chicken little disaster: the Global Cooling Scare. Both disproven. In 1968 Ehrlich claimed fossil fuels had raised CO2 levels 15% which was causing clouds to block out the sun and causing the global cooling they had been observing (a minute fraction of a degree). He was wrong, warming had caused CO2 to go up (not fossil fuels), and it wasn't causing the cooling. But all the watermelon sources bought in: NCAR, CRU, NAS, NASA, NYT, Science, CIA, and so on. We needed big government authoritarianism to fix it, or we we're doomed. This was all the rage until something bad happened... and they realized that despite the 40 year drop in temperatures (right as Man had started recycling dinosaur juice into CO2), that we were actually warming again. So man couldn't be causing the prior 40 years of cooling, because we were warming again. Reverse engines. Time for the next theory/excuse why we needed centralized Marxism to cure what ails us: this time it was Global Warming... and when that paused, they changed the term to Climate Change: so that they could use up or down trends as an excuse to prove themselves right).

The Population Bomb

           Main article: The Population Bomb

When the 1960’s happened the hippie collectivist environmentalists started their watermelon movement (green on the outside, red on the inside). They had nothing logical to support their fear-mongering, so they just went with the long disproven falsehood of Tragedy of the commons, again. First Garrett Hardin regurgitated the Tragedy of the commons, despite the fact that it was disproven 160 years before he wrote it. Then Ehrlich did a shallow, plagiaristic, pessimistic derivative of Hardin and Malthus, entitled "The Population Bomb", basically saying that if you didn’t give the government all your money and rights, so they could enact compulsory population control, then there would be mass starvations and war in the 1970s and 1980s that would destroy civilization. Of course it didn't happen, but many on the left seem it will, soon, and believe in overpopulation is a problem. As far as we know the carrying capacity of the earth far expands with technology and exceeds population growth (so is infinite) -- and current projections are that we'll peak in population in a couple more generations (well below any imaginary ceiling), as currently, the population of the world could fit in Texas. Only science deniers think overpopulation is a serious capacity problem. 🗒️ Note: While overpopulation is not a carrying capacity problem, it can be an economics problem if population grows faster than the demand for labor. So there are spot population problems in many parts of the world. But that's not the same thing as Ehrlich and others on the left's premise. Paul made bone-headed predictions like: "[i]n ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct”, "By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by... hungry people.” He predicted the UK would be 70M staving people by 2000. The 66M denizens of 2019 seem perfectly well fed. “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.” India can't handle going from 400M to 600M because they'd never be able to feed themselves. The 1.2B there today, kindly disagree, and there's LESS malnutrition and starvation than there was at 400 or 600M. (Falling from 90% back then to <40% today). He predicted an increase in the death rates in the 70's, but it's fallen from about 13.4/100K to nearly half that at 8.4K. Which should make the problem worse -- but we're much better off today. Despite the opposite of all his predictions coming true, he claims to this day that his book was, "way too optimistic”. Showing this old dog can’t learn from his mistakes. And because his ideas were so wrong, and derivative, he’s won every award the left can throw at him: Sierra Club, World Wildlife Fund, MacArthur Prize, UN, American Institute of Biological Sciences — it’s like the whose who of those that don’t know what’s what.

Tragedy of the commons

           Main article: Tragedy of the commons

🗒️ Note: Failed ideas should die out when they’re disproven. But old collectivists don’t learn, and new ones are created in Universities/factories at an alarming rate. They just keep spoon-feeding slightly tweaked variants of the same bullshit, and the gullible gobble it down, “Sure, all the other variants have failed before, but this time it’s different...”. Malthusian Catastrophes and Tragedy of the commons (the idea that people can't cooperate for mutual interest), is defied by every cross industry standard, Open Source software, and everything ever released to public domain. Yet the idea that we need government to protect us from ourselves, is still used to justify Marxism, despite it being fundamentally wrong. If you want to see whether government can protect us from tragedy of the commons, just look to countries that had the strongest authoritarian governments like USSR, Eastern Europe, North Korea, Cambodia, Venezuela, Cuba, and tell us how well they’ve managed their resources compared to countries like ours? We created most of the innovations we consider “greener” and better for the environment, most coming not from Government but our private sectors, and Government jumping on board later. While they had Goverment policies to prevent the people from doing "bad things", that the government made exceptions for themselves, and the people mostly ignored. Those of us who have some idea of history, science, sociology, human nature, realize that individuals can cooperate for mutual interest just fine, and it’s been government interfering with those natural processes that has created far more problems than it has ever helped.

Conclusion

🗒️ Note:

Tragedy of the Commons: people need government force to work together. Yet: If people couldn't work together without government, explain all the industry standards, industry agencies, patent pools, and OpenSource software. If government could change behavior, explain why prohibition/drug war never worked, all the criminals and tax cheats in prison, why the FDA didn't save us from obesity, or why people that don't live off the government have better lives than those dependent on it?

So Ehrlich:

1. Plagerized the Malthusian Catastrophe (immitating chicken little) to pretend that The Population Bomb was about to go off, and kill us all, because of the disproven Tragegy of the Commons theory. And we needed Marxism to save us.
2. Ehrlich was an early voice in Earth Day, and supported their debunked ideals like Peak Oil Theory, and we needed Marxism to save us.
3. Ehrlich was an early voice in Global Cooling, and we needed Marxism to save us.

He was wrong on everything, but Ehrlich milked 30 years of fame by revising his debunked theories, or flipping them and support Global Warming. But like Marx got to mooch the good life of the bourgeoisie (or entitlement class) -- but instead of off one benefactor, he did it with a lifetime appointment as a Stanford Professor of ignorance. And isn't that what's important?

---

🔗 More

People This is the root for finding info on people

Environment I'm pro-environment myself, just anti-environmental-scarism.

TBD List all the articles that have work to be done on them.

Advocates Science is skepticism. If someone isn't a skeptic, then they're not a scientist: they're a politician or an advocate (zealot).

Earth Day Earth Day was a fake Holiday invented to support the far left, Marxist, anti-Humanity (Population Bomb Phobia) movement.

Democrats The problem isn't Democrats criticizing Republican incivility, it's that they don't hold their side to the same standard.

🔗 Links

• Wikipedia: Paul_R._Ehrlich

Tags: People  Environment  TBD  Climate Advocate  Earth Day  Founders  Polemics/Democrats