Okay, Drudge has up this provocative link: "Obama Science Czar tell students: We can't be #1 indefinitely.... The server is overwhelmed as every conservative blogger wants a piece of this. But the Obama science czar, Dr. John Holden, has prompted plenty of discussion without this headline that I must assume means exactly what it says: America can't always be No. 1 in...(then pick your category and insert it here). Whatever he is saying today to our students, this is a man who believes we should have a planetary regime - a "superagency for population...regulating all food on the international market...The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world...." That's who is talking to your kids today.
John Holdren - Science Czar
To the chagrin of Holden, opponents have taken him at his word. In 1977, about 5 years after he published the suggestion that zero population growth was a good idea, he co- authored with Paul and Anne Erlich,
Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment. Here are snippets:
..."coercive," "involuntary fertility control, including "a program of sterlizing women after their second or third child," [which doctors would be expected to do right after a woman gives birth].
"Unfortunately, such a program therefore is not practical for most less developed countries," [due to a lack of physicians present at the time of birth].
Those who criticized Holdren and the Erlichs are accused of "misreading" their writings. They "described" draconian measures, but did not "recommend them, they say.
Yet in 1972, in a paper titled
Population and the American Predicament: The Case Against Complacency, (Pages 31-35) John Holdren not only suggests Zero Population Growth, but Zero Economic Growth as well: (Holdren's paper was included in a series of papers featuring at least 12 authors all examining Growth vs. No Growth).
Most students of contemporary American problems seem to have agreed, at least, a that the costs of long-continued population growth would considerably outweigh the benefits;...Do the potential consequences of continued population growth in the United States justify systematic measures to hold fertility at replacement level...?
Should such measures be used to push fertility well below replacement, if it does not drop that far without them, in order to bring the attainment of Zero Population Growth (ZPG) closer than seventy years hence and to render the intervening population increment smaller than some 70 million?...Should there be zero economic growth as well as zero population growth?
Holdren argues that the U.S. population in 1972 of 210 million "is too many" and the "280 million projected in 2040 "is likely to be much too many...(today our population is
309 million), and he says:
"accordingly, a continued decline in fertility to well below replacement should be encouraged with the aim of achieving ZPG before the year 2000...."
It will be no surprise to you that John Holdren is one of the leading advocates of global warming - an obnoxiously loud alarmist - who believes the overpopulated earth ls leading to the demise of the environment. Dr. Tim Ball and Jidi McLeod, writing for
Canada Free Press don't hold back in characterizing John Holdren as "another snake...slithering out from the ongoing [ClimateGate] controversy:
In fact, according to files released by CEU hacker or whistleblower, Holdren is involved in what Canada Free Press columnist and noted Canadian climatologist
Dr. Tim Ball terms:
"a truculent and nasty manner that provides a brief demonstration of his lack of understanding, commitment on faith and willingness to ridicule and bully people."
Dr. Tim Ball
Ball is alleging that two scientists, Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, were "authors of excellent work confirming the existence of the Medieval Warm Period," - well-sourced work - which did not fit with the theory that warmists were using to demonstrate that the 20th century was the warmest ever. According to Ball, and now ClimateGate has borne this out, the Climate Research Unit knew their theories of "the 20th Century the warmest ever" were untrue. Baliunas and Soon "destroyed their credibility" - especially that of Hockey Stick developer, Michael Mann," and then Baliunas "politely" withdrew from the climate studies.
Holdren sent a series of emails claiming credit for re-educating a blogger who often quoted Soon and Baliunas - and who was considered a supporter of theirs. In otherwords, he denigrated two entirely credible scientists - Soon and Baliunas.
The thing to remember about Holdren, no matter what we finally hear about his claims that American cannot be No. 1 forever, is that he is willing to sacrifice human life to save the planet, and he thinks a planetary regime is the way to control it all. Holdren was a perfect fit for the Obama administration, which views
total control their personal domaine. For the quote in the first paragraph
read a very detailed report on Holdren, his own words and see snapshots of his book at ZombieTime.
![Twitter](<a href="http://www.twitter.com/maggiesnotebook"><img src="http://twitter-badges.s3.amazonaws.com/follow_me-b.png" alt="Follow maggiesnotebook on Twitter"/></a>){kind=small}
