Follow me for a moment---CO2 represents approximately .04% of the atmosphere. The current global warming theology is that through industrialization man is releasing so much CO2 that we may have something like .045% concentration in the atmosphere. This tiny change, an increase that is barely measuarble in PPMV (that's parts per million by volume) is supposedly going to cause the planet to increase in global mean temperature by as much as a couple of degrees over the next 50 years. Let's concede that all these things will happen, man cannot stop, intervene, prevent, etc...and let's also concede that a change by a couple of degrees will ruin the planet...
Switch gears.
Right now, there are children dying of malaria. In fact, another one dies every 30 seconds, so in the time it took for you to read this, at least two more died. Today. And we can prevent it. So we can focus our energies and efforts on possibly preventing the planet from possibly increasing in mean temperature by possibly a couple degrees and it may possibly be a bad thing...or we could save lives of millions of people, right now.
Professor Pianka at UT is an evolutionary ecologist and lizard expert that recently gave a speech to a few hundred scientists as part of a Texas Academy of Scientists conference where he identified some grave areas of concern for the world population including overpopulation and limited fossil fuel resources. Those two ideas are common enough but his suggestion for fixing the “problem” is beyond extreme. He has decided the only way to save the earth from humans is for a massive reduction in population.
This guy has even pegged a number of how many people should go…and it’s a big one. He figures 90% of the world population—which works out to roughly 5.5 Billion people (too many). Without presenting any data to justify this number, he asserted that the only feasible solution to saving the Earth is to reduce the population to 10 percent of the present number. . . . His favorite candidate for eliminating 90 percent of the world's population is airborne Ebola (Ebola Reston), because it is both highly lethal and it kills in days, instead of years. However, Professor Pianka did not mention that Ebola victims die a slow and torturous death as the virus initiates a cascade of biological calamities inside the victim that eventually liquefy the internal organs. . . . When Pianka finished his remarks, the audience applauded. It wasn't merely a smattering of polite clapping that audiences diplomatically reserve for poor or boring speakers. It was a loud, vigorous and enthusiastic applause. Then came the question and answer session, in which Professor Pianka stated that other diseases are also efficient killers. The audience laughed when he said, "You know, the bird flu's good, too." They laughed again when he proposed, with a discernable note of glee in his voice that, "We need to sterilize everybody on the Earth." . . . He spoke glowingly of the police state in China that enforces their one-child policy. He said, "Smarter people have fewer kids." He said those who don't have a conscience about the Earth will inherit the Earth, "...because those who care make fewer babies and those that didn't care made more babies." He said we will evolve as uncaring people, and "I think IQs are falling for the same reason, too." With this, the questioning was over. Immediately almost every scientist, professor and college student present stood to their feet and vigorously applauded the man who had enthusiastically endorsed the elimination of 90 percent of the human population. --italicized portion from Forrest Mims of the Texas Academy of Science, Chairman of the Environmental Science Section