John B. Miller, a climate scientist at the University of Colorado, Boulder, doing research for NOAA, has been filmed at a “350” climate change rally at the Denver statehouse calling for control of population and an end to the “madness” of economic growth.
In what was clearly a passionate and deeply heartfelt speech, Miller told the audience, to cheers and applause:
I would be remiss, as a scientist who studied this, if I didn’t mention the following two things:
The first is that, most importantly, we need to do, as a society, in this country and globally, whatever we can to reduce population. [Cheers, applause.] It’s the ‘master variable’ that controls everything [shouts of “that’s right”].
Doing whatever it takes to reduce population is the number one thing for the good Dr Miller. And the second thing? Ending the “madness” of economic growth.
Our whole economic system is based on growth, and growth of our population, and this madness has to end.
Well quite. Who said this global warming business was politically driven? All they’re demanding is control of reproduction and the economy.
See for yourself:
.
hauntingthelibrary 
I suppose he means the economic growth currently lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. Is that the economic growth he’s whining about? I assume his own lack of poverty was arranged by his mummy and daddy.
This is a 40 year cycle. The first Earth Day (1970) incorporated a ZPG (zero population growth) component. It was attacked by the Left as it blamed the Third World. All of the insanity whether Climate change or ZPG arises from the belief in a “limit to growth” and a zero sum world.
Pingback: NOAA Climate Goal : “End Economic Growth” | Real Science
Here is the published mission statement of the Air Research Laboratory of NOAA:
“Our Mission is to improve the ability of the Nation to protect human and ecosystem health and to support a vibrant economy through advanced atmospheric sciences and technologies.”
I guess Mr. Miller does not agree with his organizations stated mission as stated by his own words at an activist function. Unless by vibrant economy they mean one with less people and no growth. Maybe all their research into advanced atmospheric sciences and technologies indicates the best they can do is reduced population.
Was this guy speaking because he is employed by NOAA?
How many kids has he got? And how many kids do those in the audience have?
In that case then, we and the Russians ought not be storing those weapons removed from service following ‘New START’, we ought to be firing them at those areas of the Third World with rapidly growing populations.
That is, after all, what he’s suggesting here…
You have provided another peek into what may be driving the gross irresponsibility on the part of some climate scientists who cry ‘alarm! alarm!’ on the basis of flimsy computer models. I have just posted more on this here: http://climatelessons.blogspot.com/2011/01/poisoning-childrens-minds-with-climate.html
The real irony is that the best way to curtail population growth is through properity. Well developed and prosperous countries often have birth rates so low thier populations would decline without immigration. As with most religions, Miller creates a situation where it is impossible to ever do enough for the sake of the god you worship.
This guy works for the US Government and can make these types of idiodic pronouncements? I know for a fact this behavior would not fly with very many Fed agencies. It’s time to gut and re-focus the NOAA, NASA, EPA, and DOJ.
I suspect that he may be harboring a peak oil sentement. That’s the mantra of the peak oil people who think we can save civilization from the effects of peak oil. They want a controled, voluntary reduction of the population to just 5% of today and a return to a hunter/gathering lifestyle. To meet the goal of a 95% cull in 20 years would require the deaths of 250,000 people every day for the next 20 years.
Peak oil may indeed be a serious problem, may indeed mean changes in our civilization, and if it is, there is nothing we can do about it. Demanding that we just stop reproducing is pie in the sky, most of the world’s increase in population, absolute numbers, is in India and China. So these people should be preaching there, not here.
Demanding that we just stop the economy is murder, plane and simple.
Certainly does expose the eco-nutcases.
He could start with himself, fine by me…
I couldn’t have said it better.
Sooner or later population growth has to stop. It seems that once women are educated and free to participate in the work force, they naturally decide to have fewer babies. For example, several countries in the world have such low birthrates that they are not even maintaining population. Population growth is an important issue that should be discussed openly.
Population growth is already stopping. The UN says that population is only increasing now because of people already born (in other words, the ‘lag’ effect), that population will peak at around 9 billion in 2050 and decline thereafter.
There’s no need to condemn most of the world to poverty just to combat a problem that’s already fading.
Err – excuse me for mentioning it, but what exactly is the learned gentleman sporting on his, ahem, private parts … is it not a codpiece? Rather mixing the message, surely?
Great catch. FYI, Climate Depot links you but says you have the wrong John Miller at NOAA linked. Here is the link to the correct link:
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/about/stafflist_group.html
I guess the other John Miller vehemently denied it was him. Who can blame him!
You know the wheels are coming off when the Eco-tards publicly start talking about plans to eradicate people.
Two posts in a row…different useful idiots…same message.
But they are cowards. I remember Buddhist monks who acted on their convictions. Would that these idiots would do the same.
Pingback: U.S. Gov’t Climate Scientist: “We Must Do Whatever We Can to Reduce Population”
Has there been a study of the political affiliation of scientists vis a vis their view of AGW? It would be good to have a study of the correlation with Democrat/Republican/Independent or Conservative/Moderate/Progressive.
I expect it helps explain the famous finding that “97%” of climate scientist support AGW.
Makes sense that he’s fighting to reduce the carbon available to the biosphere . All that CO2 based organic life is such continuing darwinian carnage .
I suggest he join the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement .
Pingback: NOAA Climate Scientist: “We Need to Do Whatever We Can to Reduce Population” | hauntingthelibrary « The Seventh Seal
I am genuinely interested in whether this man has a view on any specific populations to be reduced or would he only condone an ‘across the board’ reduction?
Love the blog. Please keep it coming. I’ve made the following, from the text above, Quote of the Week:
“Who said this global warming business was politically driven? All they’re demanding is control of reproduction and the economy.”
All the best in the New Year!
Economic growth and technology have allowed China and India to improve to the point of being able to feed all their people with their own food production.
It is the fearmongering of all starving to death that is also gone. There is more obesity on this planet today than starvation.
What economic growth, what population growth the west is dying with 1.2 replacement rate you need 2.2 for a constant population, only immigration keeps up the numbers. Eugenicist gaia-worshiping anti-technological neo-feudalistic moron.
“The first is that, most importantly, we need to do, as a society, in this country and globally, whatever we can to reduce population.”
I don’t wish to be crass, but could someone point out to John B. Miller and his audience that there is one very quick and easy thing that they could all do to reduce the population. Somehow, I don’t think they’d be up for it though. But if this is such a huge problem then they could show the way, surely. I guess this is a problem for other people to take action on, not them.
Pingback: Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, Jan 6th 2011 « The Daily Bayonet
Over 70% of Planned Parenthood abortion offices are in the inner city, Is this already being done?….And don’t forget that the libdems and Barry have sent them tons of money….
jmiller@brain.uccs.edu
All these “progressives” are about is redistribution of wealth via the U.N. and population control. Look at Obama’s science czar, John Holdren. He’s for forced sterilization via drinking water. Even U.N. officials have been documented saying the global warming scheme is nothing but a redistribution of wealth scam. Enjoyed the article.
Big question: birth rates are falling, not only in the industrialized world, where many countries are below replacement level, but in developing countries as well. Why isn’t the overpopulation crowd celebrating?
Sorry, I’m just writing this so I can keep track of any follow-up comments (forgot to click the box in my last message).
Pingback: Climate Lens: Politics, hype, and science | Abort America
I’m having a hard time viewing this information from my iPhone. Maybe you could upgrade the site and make it more accessible from my phone. Thatd be real cool!
He has within his power to peacefully and without aggression reduce the population by 1, and yet he does not. I wonder why?