From Zero Population to Global Warming

"People did what worked. Now people are doing what sounds good. " Thomas Sowell

The Florida insurance company's skyrocketing rates on homes was scientifically justified using meteorological models to predict hurricanes in 2006 and 2007. The scientific agreement on an active hurricane season for these years was absolutely wrong. None occurred although there were no rebates for the exorbitant rates. So much for certainty of scientific predictions.

These are the same models that have difficulty predicting tomorrow's weather. Computer programs are only as good as the programmer and the data used.

In the 1960s sitting in a university classroom studying Malthus's theory of overpopulation written in 1798, it sounded inevitable that as the world population increased man's ability to supply ample food would lead to worldwide famine and disease. This Maltusian doctrine was the rationale for the Zero Population movement.

The world's population has exploded from less than a billion in the 1700s to over 6 billion yet the food supply has increased to more than meet the demand of the increased population. Today, instead of famine and disease we have obese people living longer than ever.

This theory based on consensus science to control world population has been a dismal failure. It has not curbed the earth's population but has politically destabilized the most environmentally concerned nations on earth, the western societies.

Zero population has reduced European and North American birth rates causing modern nations to rely on a large influx of immigrants to remain economically viable. At the same time the developing nations' population has exploded. The world's population has grown rapidly even with western nations reducing their birth rate to zero. This has undermined the ability of these nations to survive not from over population but from under population.

The same arrogance of changing the world on what sounds dreadfully plausible is seen in the "bird flu pandemic" scare, the "Y2K" fiasco and the hysteria over nuclear energy plant meltdowns. Bird flu has not mutated, computers functioned as the millennium barrier was crossed and not a single person was killed by nuclear energy even though France has cut its reliance on oil by using nuclear energy.

The latest "scientific sky is falling " consensus fad, global warming, is taking the world by storm. Extrapolating from the fact the earth's temperature is rising, a host of dire predictions for mankind has been trumpeted throughout the world's media. The theory behind this warming says it is caused by manmade CO2 emissions. The world can only be saved by humanity cutting back on the production of carbon dioxide. "To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective and being honest." Stephen Schneider (the lead author of the 2007 UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report )

There is no demonstrative evidence to prove the global warming hypotheses that manmade CO2 levels are going to devastate the earth. Disregard other possible explanations for the sake of argument and let us assume this global warming thesis is true.

The UN's IPCC solution is the Kyoto Treaty. This protocol would limit developed nations' CO2 emissions to 1990 levels and exempt developing nations like China and India from any CO2 or other pollutant requirements.

Obviously by adopting the Kyoto protocol world wealth would be redistributed from once prosperous western nations to underdeveloped nations. "Climate change provides the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world." Christine Stewart, Canada's former environmental minister. Government and corporate elites will increase their power and riches from their ability to tax some industries and grant waivers to others. This Kyoto agreement would eliminate free international trade replacing it with a world centralized economic system. Jacques Chirac: "Kyoto is the first component of an authentic global governance."

Before we are swept away by another rationale for saving the planet let us remember the subjective opinions of a group of experts, even scientists does not mean following them will result in a better existence. Science is based on the scientific method and replicating of studies, not a group of experts proclaiming consensus. This pop science's bandwagon led us to addictive prescription drugs, the housing and dot.com boom and bust.

We cannot rush to judgment. Rational thought, not hysterical fear, leads to healthy decision making. Only through careful step-by-step evaluation of the unfolding facts can we reach a rational policy on global warming. It is ridiculous for global warming alarmists to censor open discussion by claiming scientific certitude through consensus. This has been tried over and over again with negative consequences to the world, from the earth is the center of the solar system to zero population growth.

"Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels: it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled." Michael Crichton

Dr. Maglio is the author of Invasion Within and Essential Parenting. He is a psychotherapist and the owner/director of Wider Horizons School.