Comments on: Are humanists the new “flat earthers”? http://www.amerika.org/globalism/are-humanists-the-new-flat-earthers/ New Right, Conservationist, Traditionalist, Deep Ecology and Conservative Thought: Conservation Conservatism (Crunchy Paleoconservatism) Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:22:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Tea Party | AMERIKA http://www.amerika.org/globalism/are-humanists-the-new-flat-earthers/comment-page-1/#comment-2125 Tea Party | AMERIKA Sun, 02 May 2010 18:41:06 +0000 http://www.amerika.org/?p=2191#comment-2125 [...] left is demonstrating its absolute inability to see beyond its own perspective. These are the people of black and white because they have never accepted that life is a space in [...] [...] left is demonstrating its absolute inability to see beyond its own perspective. These are the people of black and white because they have never accepted that life is a space in [...]

]]> By: Overpopulation shows humanism fails – AMERIKA http://www.amerika.org/globalism/are-humanists-the-new-flat-earthers/comment-page-1/#comment-390 Overpopulation shows humanism fails – AMERIKA Thu, 02 Apr 2009 01:56:26 +0000 http://www.amerika.org/?p=2191#comment-390 [...] worth also mentioning that our dominant paradigm does not permit us to think of solutions that involve limiting the rights of people like us, which is why we are paralyzed on global warming [...] [...] worth also mentioning that our dominant paradigm does not permit us to think of solutions that involve limiting the rights of people like us, which is why we are paralyzed on global warming [...]

]]> By: The biological basis of race – AMERIKA http://www.amerika.org/globalism/are-humanists-the-new-flat-earthers/comment-page-1/#comment-362 The biological basis of race – AMERIKA Mon, 30 Mar 2009 20:41:48 +0000 http://www.amerika.org/?p=2191#comment-362 [...] fits in with what we know about humans as a whole, which is that traits like intelligence are heritable along with physical constraints, with a small amount of influence for other factors of gene [...] [...] fits in with what we know about humans as a whole, which is that traits like intelligence are heritable along with physical constraints, with a small amount of influence for other factors of gene [...]

]]> By: Pete Murphy http://www.amerika.org/globalism/are-humanists-the-new-flat-earthers/comment-page-1/#comment-230 Pete Murphy Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:58:04 +0000 http://www.amerika.org/?p=2191#comment-230 The biggest obstacle we face in changing attitudes toward overpopulation is economists. Since the field of economics was branded "the dismal science" after Malthus' theory, economists have been adamant that they would never again consider the subject of overpopulation and continue to insist that man is ingenious enough to overcome any obstacle to further growth. This is why world leaders continue to ignore population growth in the face of mounting challenges like peak oil, global warming and a whole host of other environmental and resource issues. They believe we'll always find technological solutions that allow more growth. But because they are blind to population growth, there's one obstacle they haven't considered: the finiteness of space available on earth. The very act of using space more efficiently creates a problem for which there is no solution: it inevitably begins to drive down per capita consumption and, consequently, per capita employment, leading to rising unemployment and poverty. If you‘re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, then I invite you to visit either of my web sites at OpenWindowPublishingCo.com or PeteMurphy.wordpress.com where you can read the preface, join in the blog discussion and, of course, buy the book if you like. Please forgive the somewhat spammish nature of the previous paragraph, but I don't know how else to inject this new theory into the debate about overpopulation without drawing attention to the book that explains the theory. Pete Murphy Author, "Five Short Blasts" The biggest obstacle we face in changing attitudes toward overpopulation is economists. Since the field of economics was branded “the dismal science” after Malthus’ theory, economists have been adamant that they would never again consider the subject of overpopulation and continue to insist that man is ingenious enough to overcome any obstacle to further growth. This is why world leaders continue to ignore population growth in the face of mounting challenges like peak oil, global warming and a whole host of other environmental and resource issues. They believe we’ll always find technological solutions that allow more growth.

But because they are blind to population growth, there’s one obstacle they haven’t considered: the finiteness of space available on earth. The very act of using space more efficiently creates a problem for which there is no solution: it inevitably begins to drive down per capita consumption and, consequently, per capita employment, leading to rising unemployment and poverty.

If you‘re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, then I invite you to visit either of my web sites at OpenWindowPublishingCo.com or PeteMurphy.wordpress.com where you can read the preface, join in the blog discussion and, of course, buy the book if you like.

Please forgive the somewhat spammish nature of the previous paragraph, but I don’t know how else to inject this new theory into the debate about overpopulation without drawing attention to the book that explains the theory.

Pete Murphy
Author, “Five Short Blasts”

]]>