Victoria Serda wrote:
Best ways to address population overgrowth:
Education of women, better health care & relief of poverty, all of which have been proven to slow and eventually reverse population growth, as well as being ethically and socially acceptable in any case.
Genocide should never be tolerated.
Victoria
.
And if that doesn’t work? How do you get to “sustainable population”? – vaccines, sterilization, tax on children or………..
The C02 scam is being used to vilify the human race.
“Carbon emitters” is being used to describe humans.
If you have not read Cloak of Green or the Green Agenda (top of blog) – please take the time. Watch Agenda 21 – last video on sidebar, tell me the information is incorrect.
PS- still waiting for you to agree to a debate.
Invite those you blindly follow ie: Bill Ryerson, Suzuki, Gore or anyone one else of your choosing.
Let’s get this out in the open.
You win the debate, I will personally become a promoter of your mantra.
You lose – you denounce the scam for what it is – environmentalism/sustainability, used as a front for eugenics/population reduction, the removal of individual rights and the sovereignty of our nation and its people.
Victoria, you obviously have a great deal of energy and conviction – please consider using it for your country, not against it.
Waiting for your invite to debate.
Ron Stephens
Independent Huron – Bruce
519-396-1958
Bill Ryerson wrote: 
On March 26, there was posted on your site (http://kincardine.wordpress.com/2010/03/26/tim-hortons-endorses-earth-hour/) an article entitled “Tim Hortons Endorses Earth Hour” which defamed our Global Population Speak Out program as a “Eugenics Society.”
No support was provided for the assertion, and it is false, absolutely false. Neither the Global Population Speak Out program, nor the Population Institute which sponsored it, condones, supports, is sympathetic to, or in any way promotes eugenics.
A common definition of eugenics is the scientific study and practice of selective breeding as applied to human beings. Another definition describes eugenics as any one of a number of social and or political movements aiming to achieve certain goals as they pertain to human genotype and/or phenotype. In contrast, the mission statement for the Population Institute under our Section 501(c)(3) status recognized by the Internal Revenue Service of the United States of America is “to promote voluntary family planning and reproductive health services and increase awareness of the social, economic, and environmental consequences of rapid population growth.” Eugenics is a reprehensible set of beliefs that is wholly unrelated to the goals of the Population Institute or the activities of its Global Population Speak Out program.
To avoid legal action, we request that you immediately retract the defamatory language regarding the Population Institute’s Global Population Speak Out program, specifically the language falsely and libelously characterizing the program as a “Eugenics Society.” We believe this step is required by your contractual obligation with WordPress.com and as a matter of libel law.
Sincerely,
William N. Ryerson
President
Population Institute
107 Second Street
Washington, DC 20002
Sir:
Eugenics, or massive population reduction, we both know what the aim of the environmental movement is.
If your desire is to have the wording changed from Eugenics to “massive population reduction” – we may be able to accommodate you and your group. We both know we are speaking of the same end goal, regardless of the words used to describe it.
Legal threats are a serious matter!
I will be passing this email on to my Lawyer.
Quote from you-
“In 1990, Prince Philip of the United Kingdom stated in a speech at the U.N.:
The population explosion, sustained by human science and technology, is causing almost insolvable problems for future generations. It is responsible for the degradation of the environment through the pollution of the air and the water; it is consuming essential as well as non-essential resources at a rate that cannot be sustained. Above all, it is condemning thousands of our fellow living organisms to extinction.
In February 1992, the presidents of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the British Royal Society issued a joint statement on population growth and resource consumption that included the following sentence:
If current predictions of population growth prove accurate and patterns of human activity on the planet remain unchanged, science and technology may not be able to prevent irreversible degradation of the environment or continued poverty for much of the world.”
http://www.mediamonitors.net/ryerson1.html
Bill Ryerson is also on the advisory council of the OPT (Optimum Population Trust)
Mr Ryerson, please read the words of Prince Philip and his co-conspiritors, then explain the problem you have with the video.
http://canadiantruths.wordpress.com/2009/01/21/word-of-the-day/
Better still -
pick up the phone and lets talk
Ron Stephens
519-396-1958
There are approximately 7 billion people in the world and there is 2.97 million square miles of land in the Island continent of Australia. 2.97 million square miles breaks down to 1 billion, 900 million, 800,000 acres which then converts down to 7,603,200,000 quarter acre blocks of land. So we could hypothetically give every person in the world a quarter acre block of land and they would all fit into an area the size of australia, each would have enough land that they could all have gardens and grow a substantial supply of their own food, and we would still have 1,603,200,000 quarter acre blocks, or an area roughly half the size of queensland left over – plus the entire rest of the world.
