Thursday, June 24, 2010 ... Deutsch/Español/Related posts from blogosphere

Frank Fenner: humans extinct by 2110

Frank Fenner is an 95-year-old Australian scientist who helped to eradicate smallpox. He wrote a 3.5-kilogram book on it, too.

However, now he claims that humans will be gone in 100 years: Google News, China People's Daily. It's an irreversible situation. Anthropocene has accelerated urbanization etc.

Who are the two main culprits?

He also believed that humanity's impact on earth is much worse than the ice age and even a comet's hitting on the planet. Without science and carbon dioxide, ancient people could live for 40 to 50 thousands of years, but current human being cannot make it any more.
You could have guessed one culprit: it's global warming (and carbon dioxide), of course, However, the other villain is science itself. Good job, Mr Fenner.

However, this conclusion indicates that there exist two things that are worse than global warming and science, namely senility and gullibility.

I wonder what is the quantity that measures how "bad" an impact humans and comets have on Earth so that he concludes that the people are worse. People have disadvantages but any situation with people is better for Earth than the situation without the people because the people are so far the most precious thing that this planet has created.

By the way, Australia has a new prime minister.

Kevin Rudd was fired and Julia Gillard took his job.

She has gone through all kinds of left-wing institutions, labor unions, Socialist Forum, and so on. A decade ago, she wrote the rules of affirmative action within the Labor Party. She did a good job because these rules elevating female reproductive organs in politics have just promoted her into the first Australian female prime minister.

She has also immediately declared that she will be fighting against global warming.

That's a truly ungrateful behavior. She was actually born in Wales, U.K., in 1961. After Julia suffered from bronchopneumonia as a child, her parents were advised it would aid her recovery to live in a warmer climate. The family chose to migrate to Australia in 1966, settling in Adelaide. (Copied from Wikipedia.)

So the warmer climate may have saved her life and allowed her to become a prime minister, too - because she would be unlikely to achieve the same thing in the U.K. How does she reward the warmer climate? She declares jihad on it. That's the Labor Party ethics.

Add to Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (0) :