Study in contrasts: Christian scientist vs. eco-mad scientist
My syndicated column below contrasts the Left’s “unease” over the evangelical Christian faith of NIH director-designate Francis Collins with its radio silence on the eco-zealotry of Obama science czar John Holdren. But first, some late-breaking developments: As Zombie notes, the White House has responded to rising blogosphere unease with Holdren’s cultish ideas by pooh-poohing Holdren’s co-authorship of the nutball manifesto, Ecoscience. Team Obama told the Washington Times that Holdren “never has been an advocate for policies of forced sterilization.” Never? Whom do you believe: the White House or your own eyes?
Image source: Zombie
The White House also released a statement to the Washington Times from Holdren’s co-authors Paul and Anne Ehrlich downplaying their book Ecoscience as an “encyclopedic textbook” from “a third of a century” ago. Just an archaic relic not worth paying attention to, la-dee-da. Funny. That’s not how Holdren’s own official curriculum vitae treats the book (hat tip – Treacher):
Dr. Holdren is the author of some 300 articles and papers, and he has co-authored and co-edited some 20 books and book-length reports, such as Energy (1971), Human Ecology (1973), Ecoscience (1977), Energy in Transition (1980), Earth and the Human Future (1986), Strategic Defences and the Future of the Arms Race (1987), Building Global Security Through Cooperation (1990), Conversion of Military R&D (1998), and Ending the Energy Stalemate (2004).
The Ehrlichs also issued this challenge through the White House: “[A]nybody who actually wants to know what we and/or Professor Holdren believe and recommend about these matters would presumably read some of the dozens of publications that we and he separately have produced in more recent times.”
Well, I have indeed read one of Holdren’s recent works that reveals his clingy reverence for, and allegiance to, the gurus of population control authoritarianism. He’s just gotten smarter about cloaking it behind global warming hysteria. In 2007, he addressed the American Association for the Advancement of Science conference. Holdren served as AAAS president; the organization posted his full powerpoint presentation (you can download the whole thing here.)
Take a gander at the opening slide that set the tone for his entire speech. Holdren admitted that his “preoccupation” with apocalyptic matters such as “the rates at which people breed” is a lifelong obsession inspired by scientist Harrison Brown:
Who is Harrison Brown? And what’s in “The Challenge of Man’s Future?” Holdren’s hero was a “distinguished member” of the International Eugenics Society. And, lo and behold, Harrison Brown advocated the same population control-freak measures Holdren put forth in Ecoscience.
Harrison Brown, writing to us from the year 1954 in his book, “The Challenge of Man’s Future,” suggests a method that would strike us as a crass violation of the rights mentioned above:
Let us suppose that in a given year the birth rate exceeds the death rate by a certain amount, thus resulting in a population increase. During the following year the number of permitted inseminations is decreased, and the number of permitted abortions is increased, in such a way that the birth rate is lowered by the requisite amount. If the death rate exceeds the birth rate, the number of permitted inseminations would be increased while the number of abortions would be decreased. The number of abortions and artificial inseminations permitted in a given year would be determined completely by the difference between the number of deaths and the number of births in the year previous.
But that wouldn’t be all. If we are to maintain a worldwide sustainable industrial society, we will need to control population across current borders. If we don’t, many members of overpopulated societies will soon be knocking at our doors asking for assistance or even entry.
Brown also suggests that such control over reproduction might be used to slow down the deterioration of the human species. This has occurred in industrial society because humans are no longer subject to natural selection to the same degree that they have been in the past. Those who are healthy and able might be encouraged through incentives to have several offspring, while those who have deficiencies, say, of sight or hearing or mental ability might be discouraged. The problem, he notes, is in deciding what really constitutes “fit” or “unfit” and overcoming our revulsion to such a eugenics scheme. Still, he adds, when one considers the bald evolutionary facts, it behooves human societies, if they want to remain resilient in the face of changing conditions on Earth, to somehow replace nature’s cruel hand in pruning the so-called “unfit” with something less drastic. It’s that or face eventual extinction.
Brown acknowledges that none of this will seem acceptable to the vast majority of his readers. But, he is concerned that unless population stability and other problems are addressed head on, arrangements that are far more restrictive and objectionable than the ones he proposes may be implemented in their place.
Harrison Brown’s book — the book that inspired Obama science czar John Holdren — also infamously likened the world’s growing population to “a pulsating mass of maggots.” Don’t just believe me. Believe your own eyes:
A Time magazine profile of Brown published when his book came out in 1954 reported: “Scientist Brown is not confident that anything can be done, but he insists that population control is the first and essential measure; only by cutting their birth rates drastically can the crowded agricultural countries hope to enjoy the benefits of industrialization.”
If, as the White House claims, Holdren no longer believes that “that determining optimal population is a proper role of government,” then why does he still pay homage to one of the country’s most renowned population control advocates and plug his half-century-old tome advocating better-living-through-engineered-abortions? Don’t just take my word. Believe your own eyes:
Maybe Holdren will adopt the Sotomayor strategy and chalk this all up to a “rhetorical flourish” that “fell flat.”
And yes, this is just one more reason to feel very, very nervous about the specter of Obamacare.
***
Two scientists, two standards
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2009
The New York Times recently warned its readers about a wacky scientist in the Obama administration. But the fish wrap of record let the real nut job off the hook.
Reporting last week on the president’s choice to head the National Institutes of Health, Times writer Gardiner Harris noted that praise for Dr. Francis S. Collins “was not universal or entirely enthusiastic.” The geneticist is causing “unease,” according to the Times, because of his “his very public embrace of religion.” Stomachs are apparently churning over a book Collins wrote describing his conversion to Christianity.
It’s called – gasp! – “The Language of God.” Harris intoned: “Religion and genetic research have long had a fraught relationship, and some in the field complain about what they see as Dr. Collins’s evangelism.”
And…that’s it. Yes, the mere profession of Collins’s faith is enough to warrant red flags and ominous declamations. A quarter of all Americans identify themselves as evangelical Christians and “publicly embrace their religion.” But to the Times, Collins’ open affiliation with 60 million Americans believers in Christ is headline news.
The rationality police in the newsroom have not, however, seen fit to print the rantings of a radical secular evangelist now serving as the White House “science czar.” John Holdren, Obama’s director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and co-chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, co-authored the innocuously-titled “Ecoscience” in the 1970s with population control extremists Paul and Anne Ehrlich.
Earlier this year, Ben Johnson at the online publication Front Page Magazine provided quotes shedding light on Holdren’s embrace of “compulsory abortion” for American women “if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.” In “Ecoscience,” Holdren and the Ehrlichs also outlined their desire for “a comprehensive Plenetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources.”
Johnson outlined the book’s ugly eugenics plan and neo-Malthusian vision of enviro-crats engineering the population. Yet, there was scant mention of Holdern’s stomach-churning proposals during his confirmation hearings in February. Holdren’s defenders might have comforted themselves by claiming that the quotes were taken out of context. But last week, another online investigative journalist scanned copious pages from the book to show that his words had been unedited and accurately transcribed. The disturbing documents can be found at http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/.
There, you’ll find Holdren musing about how to infect the nation’s water supply to make women infertile for the benefit of Mother Earth:
“Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control…No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.”
Holdren’s planetary regime would also breed out undesirables “who contribute to social deterioration” and “insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption—especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone.”
Single mothers who wanted to keep their children would be “obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it.”
If a conservative blogger or Republican political candidate had published such lunatic claptrap, the Department of Homeland Security would have him on a watchlist. Instead, Holdren is Overlord of Science Policy. “Ecoscience” remains on his curriculum vitae. Obama is still perceived as the champion of reason. And the national media, so concerned about the dangers posed by a born-again Christian scientist, have responded to a secular extremist’s wild blueprints for forced abortions and mass sterilizations with a collective shrug. Scary.
***
David Harsanyi at the Denver Post reports:
Holdren spent the ’70s boogying down to the vibes of an imaginary population catastrophe and global cooling. He also participated in the famous wager between scientist Paul Ehrlich, the now-discredited “Population Bomb” theorist (and co-author of “Ecoscience), and economist Julian Simon, who believed human ingenuity would overcome demand.
Holdren was asked by Ehrlich to pick five natural resources that would experience shortages due to human consumption. He lost the bet on all counts, as the composite price index for the commodities he picked, like copper and chromium, fell by more than 40 percent.
Then again, it’s one thing to be a bumbling soothsayer and it’s quite another to underestimate the resourcefulness of mankind enough to ponder how “population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution . . .,” as Holdren did in “Ecoscience” in 1977.
The book, in fact, is sprinkled with comparable statements that passively discuss how coercive population control methods might rescue the world from … well, humans.
When I called Holdren’s office, I was told that the czar “does not now and never has been an advocate of compulsory abortions or other repressive measures to limit fertility.”
If that is so, I wondered, why is his name on a textbook that brought up such policy? Did he not write that part? Did he change his mind? Was it theoretical?
No straightforward answer was forthcoming.
No big deal. Even today, many environmentalists and anti-immigration activists believe in the myth of population disaster. In this world, human spammers are a disease, not a cure.
And Holdren has never ceased peddling calamity as science.
***
Previous:
The deafening MSM silence over eco-zealot/forced abortion advocate John Holdren
The ghoulish spirit of Margaret Sanger lives
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Wenesday Morning Reading
- PheistyBlog » Blog Archive » More on John Holdren
- Pirates! Man Your Women! » Blog Archive » Meet the Science Czar
- Christian scientist vs. eco-mad scientist | Citizen Right
- The “Planetary Regime” Czar updated « Gunservatively!
- Obama’s Eugenicist Science Czar « The Clampdown
- Climate Change and the Horror of Eugenics | The Great Illuminator
- News Obamas USA - Seite 14 - Aktienboard
- Who you gonna believe–the Obama Adm. or your lying eyes? « Lindy’s Blog: Where Mom is Always Right
- Talking Out Both Sides of His Mouth « Running At Large
- Not Just Pro-Abortion: The Obama Administration Is Anti-Life « Blog Entry « Dr. Melissa Clouthier
- Right Wing News
- Bombshell: Deployment Orders for Soldier Challenging Obama Citizenship Revoked | The Substratum
- Eo-Eugenecists On the Hill: Obama Lies Edition « The Climate Heretic
- Random Thoughts » When character counts…
- ‘Okie’ on the Lam » Blog Archive » Obamacare Fallout — Eugenics, Eco-zealotry, Forced Sterilization, Forced Abortion — What’s Not To Like?
- Bookworm Room » John Holdren gets creepier all the time
- The Anchoress — A First Things Blog
- Study in contrasts: Christian scientist vs. eco-mad scientist « NObama Blog
- Shopfloor » Blog Archive » Wonder if Union of Concerned Scientists Would Retract Any of This
- Jeremiah Films
- The Ten Commandments: God’s Version vs. the New World Order’s Version « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)
- Is there room for God? The fundamentalist faith of Darwinism « Jim Blazsik
- Evangelical Ecologist Blog - Conservative Christians and the Environment
- Maggie's Farm
- Dan Cleary
- Pirates! Man Your Women! » Blog Archive » Maybe the Idiots In Washington Didn’t Get the Memo
- Random Thoughts » Study in contrasts: Christian scientist vs. eco-mad scientist and Forced Sterilization
- Dirty Democrats » Not Just Pro-Abortion: The Obama Administration Is Anti-Life–UPDATED
- Chew on this: Vs. « Chockblock’s blog
- The Greenroom » Forum Archive » Big Money and the Culture of Death
- » A Czar Too Far - #2 NoisyRoom.net: Where liberty dwells, there is my country…
- Brutally Honest
- Population Explosion « Ice People
- Eugenics a Choice? « Michigan Redneck II
- American Glob » Blog Archive » Meet Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren, Known to His Friends as Maax
- The Strident Conservative
- Michelle Malkin » The science czar stonewalls
- CALIFORNIA TEA PARTY WIN! « Temple of Mut
- Michelle Malkin » Ghoulish science + Obamacare = health hazard
- Random Jottings
- Obama’s attack on a “Woman’s Right to Choose” : Urbin Report
- Photomaniacal » Blog Archive » Ghoulish Science Plus Obamacare Equals Health Hazard
- OPPOSING ECO-TYRANNY: March on Sacramento on Aug.28! « Temple of Mut
- Permitted Insemination? Quality of Life Requires a Balance of Life & Death (Thank The State, We Have Them to Guide Us) « Zipline Conservative
- » Science Czar: John Holdren NoisyRoom.net: Where liberty dwells, there is my country…
- Obama Denies Flyover of ‘God & Country Rally’: A New Culture of Hostility toward Expressions of Christian Faith? « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- Caution: Obama’s weird scientists at work
- Michelle Malkin » Wackjob science czar to appear on David Letterman
- Wackjob science czar to appear on David Letterman « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian
- Obama’s Natural Born Citizen Status – Mario Puzzo – Another Dr. Orly Taitz Interview – Afghanistan Worries – Obama Administration Full of Extremists – WND – Michelle Malkin – The BOPAC Report « “
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Abortion, Enviro-nitwits, John Holdren
Legal Insurrection
» In The End: No Public Option, No Abortions, No Pelosi, No Reid
The Powers That Be
» Obama: ‘Don’t Jump to Conclusions’ About Ft. Hood; Immediately Jumps to ConclusionsLegal Insurrection
» NY Times Names NamesThe Powers That Be
» A Picture is Worth a Trillion Dollars and Lots of Lost FreedomRiehl World View
» Health Care Bill In A Few WordsPundit & Pundette
» Not a huge victoryJustOneMinute
» Ari Fleischer Needs To Cowboy UpThe Other McCain
» Debunking Frank Rich's NY23 fantasies
chap, chap, chap.
I already have an Aquamarine. I own no cubic zirconia. Nice try.
By the way…I don’t like diamonds. Did you know that all blue topaz is irradiated to make it blue?
props to all the dawgs fer goin’ to Tiffany’s website tho’!
I can never think of Tiffany’s without the iconic scene of Audrey Hepburn gazing into it’s windows whilst muching a danish and sipping coffee coming to mind.
Did you knw that “Tiffany Blue” is a registered trademark color? (True)
yes, the colour of their little boxes.
Isn’t this the same thing?
Yup. So you should live in fear that the Tiffany Color Cops can kick down your door if you’re making knock-offs!
Glad I didn’t have a mouth full o’ coffee for that one!
Based on this thread being hijacked, I am wondering when did LGM get more than one persona?
The tone of the comments sounds like his Folsum Street Fair rainbowish sort of drivel.
GSP
“This is Sparta!”
Look at all the fake Burberry plaid out there! Look at all the Louis Vuitton knock offs! Hey–did you know that even the ‘real’ Coach handbags are made in China?
This thread has degenerated into Earring Chat with Spacey.
What’s next? Are we going to talk about our relationship, cuz I feel the need for a beer comng on.
What about our relationship with beer?
LOL GSP
no WAY. I hate that kind of talk (relationships). I’d rather you guys talk about what you really talk about when you’re having a beer….
as long as it’s not people riding dinosaurs.
Or Hitler.
“…grabs your glocks when you see 2pac
call the cops when you see 2pac…”
You mean relationships then?
I love you guys!
*goes to fridge for next beer.*
Phhtt! Gonna have to avoid drinking coffee altogether while here tonight. My screen’s dirty enuf the way it is.
Be careful what you wish for.
Unless its Aloha.
Glocks suck! Colt 1911’s are better!
Actually, my favorite pistol is my S&W .357 revolver.
riiiiight, chap. So where does your beloved Scarlett fit into that?
They forgot to mention a perfect body.
Why do Glocks suck? I was considering a Springfield XD. Should I go with 9mm or .45?
I do talk about Tiffany’s whilst I’m drinking. Well, not obsesseively, just when the topic comes up and it drifts to the movie. And I prefer an adult beverage that doesn’t have me excusing myself, off to the head every 15 minutes.
I’m enjoying a brief but very sensual relationship with a rum & coke and a Cusano 18 Paired Madero Churchill.
I hope that would make Dr. Holdren’s head spin around like an owl.
I like gin. My preference is Beefeater’s.
When it comes to alochol, I admit I am pretty much a whore. Sometimes I’ll even have multiple partners.
chap, any chance you like Malibu?
Do I seek it out? No. Would I turn it down if it was last call and it was the only drink available? No.
“to pick women who have the characteristics they value in a potential companion, like intelligence, humor, charisma, and ambition.”
Heh. But being somewhat consistent with my theme, I’d have a reply
“intelligence, humor, charisma, and ambition”, albeit retro.
How many types of drinks would you turn down if it was the only drink available?
People I know who have one think well of them. I consider them too expensive, myself.
There is a middle between the 9mm & .45, being the 10mm, or .40 cal.
Gun writers make money by the word, so there is a lot of controversy about which is good, better, best. Hitting what you shoot at, and shooting it at least twice is far more significant, IMNHO.
Anything anise flavored.
One of the worst evenings I ever had was drinking Jim Beam exclusively. I swear that stuff was a diuretic.
Shame! chap! I love anise.
I sense ambition…
Ah…a Long Island Tea man…
To quote Indigo Montoya, “I do not think that means what you think it means…”
For me that would be gin, staight up. Like sucking on an evergreen tree.
Why does this not surprise me?
That is what I am drinking right now.
Scarlett Johansson says … “It’s an honor to be chosen by over 10 million AskMen.com readers as one of world’s most desirable women.”
I sense the wind, whistling between her ears.
Not to mix. Double fisting.
chap, do we know each other? That club in Baltimore? That bar in LaJolla?
She has ears?
Ohhhh. Up there…
I have a theory that tequila is only partly intoxicating because of alcohol. There HAS to be something else in there…
Try a Vampyre…Clamatoe Juice, Worcestershire, lemon or lime, and tequila.
“For me that would be gin, staight up. Like sucking on an evergreen tree.”
Well, that explains a lot.
But y’know if you were to make it 90% Grape KoolAid and 10% gin (i.e. Christmastree-rot), it might be halfway drinkable. Kind of an upper class “Purple Jesus”.
I’m pretty sure that it’s a diuretic because of the alcohol. Or am I missing something in your comment?
And, “guy movie”? Maybe “Brian’s Song”? (directed by the underappreciated late, great Buzz Kulik)
Not one of the comments from 400 on up are on topic (including this one.) Shameful.
There you go again. Trying to push your fundie religion on us atheists again.
Just to avoid another 250 post flame war, I will break from my rule and note that I was kidding.
Corkie,
You’re not missing anything. It was just a terrible night. The only thing I wanted was a catheter.
Oh well, the tales of a misspent youth.
Now that Yuengling number two is empty, the wife wants to decide what we should have for dinner. I suppose she deserves some of my attention, so I’ll talk to you guys later.
Cheers!
(Scroll way down toward the bottom, third picture from the end. My favorite politician, and the G8 ladies raising a glass. The woman in yellow with the odd expression looks like she has one of those plastic water-squirting flowers on… LOL.)
You want tacos.
.
Nah, otherwise I woulda said “Purple Jesus That’ll Send You Heatehens To Hell”.
Gee, isn’t this the President who proclaimed in his inauguration speech that “science” and not partisanship would predominate in his Administration?
I thought so.
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/15/modeling-for-global-warming-never-mind/
In response to a post that asked if scientists are ever wrong…(a question that elicits gales of laughter from any trial attorney who has cross-examined one)
This, hot off the presses…
Yeah, I expect Michelle is likely to send us all off to bed without supper. (a lttle plastered, but hungry nonetheless.)
OTOH, she might just think that sometimes girls and boys just wanna have fun once in awhile. She’s a sweetie that way.
Had tacos for lunch. Looks like baked ziti for dinner.
And Yuengling number three.
Which apparently has a low alcohol content because I can still spell Yuengling.
Which apparently has a low alcohol content because I can still spell Yuengling.
Jewelry and shopping? BOR-ING… but Harley-Davidsons… now you’re talking! I used to have my own Harley. 1999 Dyna convertible. Good memories!
Is that beer from PA?
I’ve been gone all day…did zeroangel poop all over this thread?
Eagle Rare Single Barrel in a tumbler over ice, with a steak. A small table spoon of mashed potatoes, and about 4 steamed but crisp sprigs of asparagus.
Multiple refills are acceptable.
Preferably at Del Friscos.
Couldn’t resist…
And for the record I know to some the ice is an afront.
I also enjoy it without the ice, but usually that is after dinner.
For me. Live and let live.
A tablespoon!?!? Why bother. Load me up, please.
Reminds me of the quote by Chesterton:
MM on Fox and Friends this morning!!
Another great job by MM!! Keep up the great job of exposing the corruption and what is really happening in this country!!
Yes, it’s one of the few American breweries left.
What? There was an explosion of brewing in America in the last two decades, wasn’t there?
Microbreweries, yes.
Let me clarify. It’s one of the few mass produced, affordable, yet enjoyable beers made by a company owned and operated in the U.S.
Anheiser-Busch and Coors-Miller are now owned by foreign companies. They take up most of the shelf space at the local mega mart.
I see. My brew-nazi friends would agree with your assessment. I enjoy the products that are made in Shiner, Texas, and a few other quirky breweries around the country, and from overseas.
So, I guess that wasn’t chap I met in Baltimore…
Huh?
Yeungling is pretty good. Definitely better than most other macros. I’ll still take Sam Adams (which now does qualify as a macro).
I asked earlier up in the thread…
never mind.
Unfortunately, here in FL, they really push Corona and the mass market brands. They even changed the name of Dolphin Stadium to LandShark Stadium.
Just a friendly reminder… we just passed the 40th anniversary of fatboy Ted Kennedy careening off of Dike Bridge into Poucha Pond in Chappaquiddick. (Mary Jo Kopechne remains unavailable for comment.)