- by Alan Adaschik

Now that all the "Flat Earthers" have come around and realized that global warming caused by the doings of man is happening, our so called leaders, in their infinite capacity for doing too little and too late, are bombarding us with ideas and suggestions as how to combat this threat. To be sure, we are told that all will be well if we change light bulbs, carry re-usable supermarket bags, utilize carpools, and use one less sheet of toilet paper when the need arises. The problem is that global warming and all other environmental problems, such as acid rain, fish stock depletion, ocean pollution, dead zones, mass extinctions, air pollution, etc., are symptoms of one huge overriding and unmentionable problem; overpopulation. There are too many people in the world and our numbers are such that the World's environment and natural life giving systems are overstressed and in jeopardy.

The notion that the world is over-populated is not speculation or the irrational posturing of an end of the world nut job, but instead, a scientific fact. With 6 billion people presently occupying this puny and over-stressed planet, the environment within which we live is not only threatened, but deteriorating and approaching collapse. We are not completely over the edge yet, but approaching it rapidly. Furthermore, even if we are able to achieve zero population growth in the immediate future, our environment will still continue to deteriorate for years to come no matter how many florescent light bulbs we use. This is what the money master's of the New World Order do not want us to know and at their behest, this is what the leadership of this nation continues to ignore. Unfortunately for us, this is what will eventually make hell on earth a reality for all of mankind. But our situation is far worse than this.

Let's assume for a moment that things are not as bad as they are as most people believe. Popular opinion tells us that if we all pull together, become more energy efficient, and conserve natural resources we will be able to achieve a sustainable world environment. How comforting, problem solved and we can all go back to watching Dr. Phil or As the World Turns. Unfortunately, the problem is not solved and to think that everyone will cooperate to save the world is wishful thinking, especially when our leaders continue to be in denial over how serious the problem really is. Just the other day George Bush said we will not join the efforts to reduce green house gas emissions because it would be bad for our economy. I guess George believes that having two cars in every garage is preferable to being able to go outside and breath air that will not kill you.

The truth of the matter is that even if every person living today cooperated fully with conservation efforts, this would still not be enough to solve the problem because scientists calculate that a sustainable population level for our planet is only two billion people. Do we really think that that 6 billion people can change their ways such their net impact on the environment would be equivalent to that of 2 billion people living at today's level of human activity? I think not and even if these results could be achieved, what quality of life would be enjoyed by people living under such restrictive circumstances?

Compounding our environmental problem is the fact that the emerging economies in China and the 3rd World are rapidly increasing mankind's impact on our environment. Do we really think that China and the rest of the world will stop their march toward modernization and return to living in the Stone Age so we can continue to enjoy a higher standard of living here? The answer to this question is obvious and the truth is that economic growth in the undeveloped countries of the world will overwhelm all efforts towards conservation no matter how extensive these efforts are. But our situation is far worse than this.

The world's population stands at approximately 6 billion and this level was reached in a span of 5,000 years. As of this moment, the world's population is exploding and in the next 50 years will increase again by half. Yes, you read right! It took 5,000 years to reach a world population of 6 billion people and in just fifty more short years, there will be 3 billion more of us to deal with. A world populated of 9 billion people, which most people around today will live to see, is mind boggling.

Putting a calculator to this eventuality and under the reasonable assumption that as of this moment we are standing on the edge of the abyss, simple math tells us that just to maintain the unacceptable status quo, every man, woman, and child living today would have to become 33% more efficient doing things just to accommodate the added population. Now throw in the fact the emerging economies of China and the third world are adding to our pollution woes at an ever increasing rate and the fact that we are way over the line as far as a sustainable environment is concerned and you will begin to get the true picture about how effective changing light bulbs or having your own supermarket bags will be in solving our problems.

There is an old adage that one man's freedom ends where another's begins. The truth of this is self-evident. However, an associated truth is that as you cram more and more people into a limited finite environment, the freedom enjoyed by each individual goes down accordingly. Due to increased population levels, you and I do not in anyway enjoy the same level of freedom as Americans did when our Nation was first formed. Nor do we enjoy the same amount of freedom as people did in this Nation in the 1950's. As human beings, we do and use things and the ability to do so at will is freedom. In a finite world, as more and more people enter the scene, the right to do and use things is curtailed because the increased numbers of people, necessarily, place more and more restrictions upon what an individual can use and do.

Where does this leave us? I don't know about you, but it leaves me in a frightful world that I do not like or wish to be in. Don't get me wrong, I love life and treasure it dearly, but I have a pervading fear that mankind is on the verge of destroying itself and this is not a comfortable thought no matter how good my life is personally. The simple truth is that planet Earth is not capable of sustaining life as we know it because of overpopulation and that the combined threats of continued population growth and the emerging economies of the third world have eliminated all solutions to our problems save one; the reduction of our population to a sustainable level.

I can understand why people believe that by becoming more efficient we will solve our present problems. But what I can't understand is how anyone can think life as we know it will survive the influx of 3 billion more people into the world. Such thinking is not just unreasonable, it boarders upon lunacy and this raises the question as to why isn't our government doing anything to solve and make people aware of this problem? At the very least they should be encouraging people to limit the number of children they have or refrain from having any at all. I can think of only one plausible answer to this question and it is not a very nice answer.

Freedom is the ability to do and use things. Similarly, money gives us the ability to do and have things. Therefore, money is freedom and the more money we have the more free we are. This truth is not lost upon those who lead us and this is why they place acquiring wealth above all other considerations including their duties and obligations to this nation and its people. They are so busy figuring out ways to become more wealthy that they find little time to do their jobs and address the really tough issues like overpopulation. Unfortunately, this problem is the toughest mankind has ever faced. It is not only tough because the right to reproduce is considered sacred, but also because the entire socio-religious fabric of the world is to go forth and multiply. What politician or President wants to touch upon or, heaven forbid, begin to address an issue as controversial as encouraging people to forgo having children?

This is where we are today. Mankind is at a crossroad and two paths lie before us. One path is to use the intellect and wisdom given to us by God to reduce our numbers and thereby build a sustainable world that will allow man to live far into the future as God intended. The other path, which has already been chosen for us by our New World Order masters, is to ignore the problem so people will not become alarmed while these robber barons steal everything they can for themselves. They know how serious the problems we face are and could care less because when the proverbial shit hits the fan, they will be safe and secure on their mega-yachts, private islands, and in their walled estates. In contrast, you and I will be left suffer the consequences as life as we know it disintegrates.

The choice belongs to us. We can take a path which leads to a sustainable world where everyone shares in its bounty or we can follow our present leadership down a path that leads to servitude, deprivation, and the destruction of life as we know it on this planet. It's that simple! Reaching the high road will not be easy because we are presently traveling down the low road chosen by our New World Order masters. They care nothing for us and greed and selfishness is the only thing that motivates them. However, we are also our own worst enemies because the urge to reproduce is primordial.

We must use our minds and intellect to conquer what nature has programmed into us. Our survival as a species means that families should have, at most, one or two children. Those that have more should be reviled as the pariahs they are and childless couples should be revered as heroes. To those who say this is ridiculous or impossible, I say let's be ridiculous and do the impossible because the only other choice we have is deprivation, misery, and death. In the not to distant future, if we keep reproducing as we do now, having a child will not only be the worst thing you can do to it, but a tragedy for everyone else in the world.

In closing, I wish to acknowledge that most people who read this article will conclude I am in left field because they believe science and technology will save us from the scourge of overpopulation and this being the case, reducing population levels is an unnecessary and extreme solution to the problem. To these people I say that science and technology, at best, will only put off what is inevitable and the longer the inevitable is put off, the more radical the solution will have to be. The signs of stress and crisis within our environment are clearly evident as I write. This being the case, it is unconscionable for us to ignore these warnings and leave the challenge we fact for future generations to deal with. Even if I am wrong in my timing, this does not justify putting off what will inevitably become true. The time to act is now and waiting may make it too late to do anything at all. To hold that we should take this chance is lunacy and we surly will be cursed by our children if we fail to act now.