Is American "science" taking the road to fascism along with the "tea baggers?"

In this article below a group of scientists and professors claim that "over population" is the number one environmental problem we are facing. This smacks of a fascist mentality.



Notice: climate change comes in second and a failed capitalist system isn’t even questioned; and, there isn’t a single mention about the need for peace and to re-order priorities away from war and military spending.



This in spite of the fact that militarism and production for war has consumed almost thirty percent of all the iron ore mined on the Iron Ranges of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan in the last one-hundred and thirty-five years and there is no figure available that I can find documenting how much industrial production has been wasted on militarism and war.



How is it that this kind of group of scientists would not even consider militarism and wars after the Black Forest of Europe and huge, huge tracts of forested land in the Soviet countries and all over the rest of Europe have been destroyed in two major wars? Not to mention the number of trees that have been required to rebuild from wars and the forestry requirements to fight wars.



That these scientists can get away with this kind of “study” in the name of science is atrocious… it demonstrates the weaknesses of the anti-war, anti-imperialist movements in this country and the poor job environmentalists have done in demonstrating the impact of militarism and war on our ecosystems.



Nor does this reflect the tremendous waste under capitalism.



Instead, too many people are the primary problem; and, it has been the capitalist system of production which has encouraged an out of control population… if everyone was assured a decent job with adequate pay with a real education where real life problems from war to socialism to population could be freely discussed free from religious reaction population would not even be a question.



But note: this article claims 100 million people on earth would be good; but 10 million would be better.



What kind of “science” is this?



We have to ask: Where are the professors and educational community who should be on top of exposing a “study” like this with such a conclusion?



Rather than looking at population as it is and what needs to be done to create a better world, we get this.



Tax-payer funds are being used for something as racist and anti-working class as this. This is what passes for “science” in the United States.



Where are the progressive voices of the university community? Out cheering Barack Obama on?



Note where protection of our freshwater aquifers is--- right at the bottom.



Not a single mention that the capitalist mode of production and the corporate drive for profits has largely driven the population explosion.



And, we need to ask: Where is the challenge to this from the student movements?



Where is the left-wing media to take this kind of report on?



One can only imagine what scientists like Albert Einstein would have to say about this kind of study coming out of an American University.



Alan L. Maki





From:

Science News

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090418075752.htm





Worst Environmental Problem? Overpopulation, Experts Say

ScienceDaily (Apr. 20, 2009) — Overpopulation is the world’s top environmental issue, followed closely by climate change and the need to develop renewable energy resources to replace fossil fuels, according to a survey of the faculty at the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry (ESF).

Just in time for Earth Day (April 22) the faculty at the college, at which environmental issues are the sole focus, was asked to help prioritize the planet’s most pressing environmental problems.


Overpopulation came out on top, with several professors pointing out its ties to other problems that rank high on the list.

“Overpopulation is the only problem,” said Dr. Charles A. Hall, a systems ecologist. “If we had 100 million people on Earth — or better, 10 million — no others would be a problem.” (Current estimates put the planet’s population at more than six billion.)


Dr. Allan P. Drew, a forest ecologist, put it this way: “Overpopulation means that we are putting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than we should, just because more people are doing it and this is related to overconsumption by people in general, especially in the ‘developed’ world.”


“But, whether developed or developing,” said Dr. Susan Senecah, who teaches the history of the American environmental movement, “everyone is encouraged to ‘want’ and perceive that they ‘need’ to consume beyond the planet’s ability to provide.”


The ESF faculty pointed to climate change as the second most-pressing issue, with the need to develop renewable energy resources to replace fossil fuels coming in third.


“Experimenting with the earth’s climate and chemistry has great risks,” said Dr. Thomas E. Amidon, who invented a process for removing energy-rich sugars from wood and fermenting those sugars into ethanol. “This is a driver in climate change and loss of biodiversity and is a fundamental problem underlying our need to strive for sustainability.”


Rounding out the top 10 issues on the ESF list are overconsumption, the need for more sustainable practices worldwide, the growing need for energy conservation, the need for humans to see themselves as part of the global ecosystem, overall carbon dioxide emissions, the need to develop ways to produce consumer products from renewable resources, and dwindling fresh water resources.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adapted from materials provided by SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, via Newswise.





Alan L. Maki

58891 County Road 13

Warroad, Minnesota 56763

Phone: 218-386-2432

Cell phone: 651-587-5541

E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net



Check out my blog:



Thoughts From Podunk



http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/