Sign Up for Our Newsletter

Facebook

"We're Doing God's Science"

Houghton first lectured on global warming 40 years ago.
Why Sir John Houghton Thinks Faith Can Help Save the World

My hiking companion and I have lost our way on this damp late-summer morning. We're on a treeless, mist-shrouded hilltop in Snowdonia National Park, 1,000 feet or so above the Irish Sea along the coast of northern Wales. The bleating of sheep drifts up from the slopes below, muffled by fog that hides the lay of the land. We're trying to reach a village called -- by those able to pronounce its name -- Abergynolwyn, which lies in a nearby valley. But with the murk, we can't find the way down. Sir John Houghton pulls a topographic map and a compass from his backpack. After a few moments of thought he says, "We want to head north. That should take us downhill." So we follow a sheep trail, and a bit later I watch Houghton, who is 76, nimbly hoist himself over a chest-high wire fence.

Charting a path through difficult terrain is nothing new for Houghton, who may be the most important scientist you've never heard of. From 1988 until his semi-retirement in 2002, he was one of the leaders of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a body created by the United Nations 20 years ago to study global warming. As cochairman of the IPCC's scientific working group, Houghton had to coordinate the efforts -- and cope with the egos -- of more than 2,000 scientists from dozens of countries. Against all odds, the IPCC, which could have been a fractious and unwieldy international boondoggle, produced a series of authoritative and scientifically rigorous reports firmly establishing the magnitude of the threat posed by climate change. Largely because of the efforts of Houghton's group, the IPCC shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore.

Houghton has been at the forefront of climate research for decades. He started investigating global warming more than 40 years ago, after joining the department of atmospheric physics at Oxford University. From 1983 until 1991 he was the head of the Met (short for Meteorological) Office, the United Kingdom's national weather service. He served as chairman of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution for much of the 1990s. However, the affiliation that means most to him is one rarely associated with a serious commitment to science or environmental activism. Houghton is a devout evangelical Christian.

"I'm constantly asking myself, why on earth should I believe in Christianity? Do I really believe it?" he says to me, discussing his faith while we pause for lunch beside a logging road. "It seems so impossible to believe in. But then I ask, can I not believe it?"

Houghton's faith is central to his response to the hard, inescapable reality of global warming. He believes we can still save the world from the worst effects of climate change, but he is also very specific about how little time we have left -- seven years. Despite the imminence of calamity, he remains hopeful that we will overcome the threat -- if the developed world recognizes that global warming is as much a moral and spiritual problem as an environmental one.

I first met Houghton at a talk he gave at Cambridge University earlier in the summer. He is a slender, elegant man, with a hawklike profile, deep-set blue eyes, and thinning white hair. He devoted the first half of his talk entirely to the science of global warming, arguing that we are already seeing its first effects in events like the heat wave that struck central Europe in 2003 and is estimated to have caused more than 20,000 premature deaths.

Then Houghton changed gears. The talk became intensely personal, a profession of his Christian faith. He called global warming "a weapon of mass destruction" and said that the rich nations of the world, which have generated most of the greenhouse gases, have a moral obligation to solve the problem. "We're generally good at sharing in families, communities, and nationally, but not so good globally," he said. "If the Old Testament prophets were here, they'd be tearing their hair out, cursing us, telling us we're absolutely greedy, and they'd be right."

The frank discussion of faith from such an eminent scientist surprised me, and I asked Houghton if I could speak with him at more length. He invited me to spend a couple of days at his home in Aberdovey.

image of Tim Folger
Tim Folger, an OnEarth contributing editor, has been writing about science and the environment for more than 20 years. In 2007 he won the American Institute of Physics science writing award. His work has appeared in Discover, National Geographic, Sci... READ MORE >

On the need for acknowledging God's science with regard to the human overpopulation of Earth in these early years of Century XXI...........

Dear Friends of the OnEarth community,

I want to at least try to gain your quick help. I'm not sure if you've heard, but yesterday the "AWAREness Campaign on the Human Population" submitted an idea for how we think the Obama Administration could change America. It's called "Ideas for Change in America."

I've submitted an idea and wanted to see if you could vote for it. The title is: Accepting human limits and Earth's limitations. You can read and vote for the idea by clicking on the following link:

http://www.change.org/ideas/view/accepting_human_limits_and_earths_limit...

The top 10 ideas are going to be presented to the Obama Administration on Inauguration Day and will be supported by a national lobbying campaign run by Change.org, MySpace, and more than a dozen leading nonprofits after the Inauguration. So each idea has a real chance at becoming policy.

Thanks.

Sincerely yours,

Steve

Steven Earl Salmony
AWAREness Campaign on the Human Population,
established 2001
http://sustainabilityscience.org/content.html?contentid=1176

I'm pleased that you've featured Houghton in the issue. It's one more piece of evidence showing Christian evangelicals need not be opposed to scientific inquiry. Very fit of us fit the negative stereotypes. It's frustrating that all too often the "Christians" who make the most noise are the most ignorant and foolish.

I was also touched by the setting of the article. I spent a semester in Wales and have been to most of the places mentioned. Thank you!

Faith will indeed see us through. Our knowing of how the mind works is still an intensely interesting and contested frontier. I offer this for your consideration.:
We each have a mind given us by the Love that created us; call it God or whatever. God is NOT a jealous God. What is all powerful and truthful needs not our petty emotion to be as it is. We have written many meanings on the face of truth. Organized religion has not necessarily helped in this regard.
We each also have a mindset we made. That is the ego. The egos goal is suffering and death and its defense is in studying itself and sophistication of all it knows, and it's defense is required daily to ensure it will survive in spite of your true mind, that remains with you. Ego will offer any solution, provided that it will not work.
Faith in your true mind is simple, but it seems difficult because it requires letting go of, or undoing the complexity of obstruction we made to hide it. The ego fights the undoing savagely because undergoing it means its death, and the corpses of many people have been piled up to defend this construct. It is based in illusion, and knows it, but also knows it must keep you from realizing this simple point. Seeing is a choice. See only Love in all beings and the ego will disappear. Seeing love is an inner realization reflected outward. Seeing with fear is what the ego wants for you because it means your death, even though it will die as well. This is the classic conundrum the ego hides from your awareness, and is why it is insane in all it sees.
This is not religion. It is simple mind truth.
Eternal life is granted in the vision of one mind, shared by all.

The dangerous devotion of so many leaders to a "business as usual" status quo as well as to unbridled global economic growth and outrageous per capita overconsumption could prove to be lethal for our children also to worship because these forms of idolatry could soon become patently unsustainable on a relatively small, evidently finite and noticeably frangible planet like the planetary home which God has blessed us to inhabit......and not to ravage as the leading elders in my "Not So GREAT GREED GRAB Generation" have been advocating so religiously and doing so recklessly in these early years of Century XXI.

Steven Earl Salmony
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population,
established 2001
http://sustainabilityscience.org/content.html?contentid=1176

Enlisting the energy of religious people to diminish carbon dioxide emissions that threaten us with global warming as you have described in your interview with Sir John Houghton is possibly the best way for America to lead in confronting this problem. I have been reading thoughts that abound from the organization Institute on Religion in the Age of Science and a book "Green Space Green Time" by Connie Barlow, and these sources make a good case that preserving the creation might be possible with such support.

I always assumed my inability to understand the division between religion and science was because of my irreligious beliefs, it particularly refreshing to hear from a scientist who is able to balance both belief systems without compromising either of them.

I hope that he is able to influence evangelical Christians in the U.S. who have a hard time seeing past the science label to the underlying truth of his statements. It will take concerted efforts on the part of all of us to deal with the problem of global warming and we need people who can bridge the gap between religious beliefs and scientific understanding.

Thank you for a wonderful and inspiring interview.

Faith and stewardship go hand in hand. I personaly believe that caring for what GOD made is essential to my faith as a Christian. My motivation is faith based, my tools are science and education. The two combined are a force for positive change.

Thanks for your clear voices.

More voices.......we need many more voices speaking out loudly and often. Time is being wasted by those with wealth and power who adamantly defend unsustainable status quo overconsumption, overproduction and overpopulation activities of the human species that are overwhelming and threatening to ravage the Earth in our time. Because these distinctly human activities could soon become patently unsustainable, necessary behavior change has to occur fast. If more members of the human family do not speak out to vigorously resist what the leaders of the human community are demanding all of us do now as we strive to ravenously overconsume Earth's resources; to relentlessly hoard wealth; and to overproduce unnecessary stuff, then the planetary home we are inhabiting and overpopulating could be made uninhabitable for our children and life as we know it by 2012.

Does it appear to you that we could move toward sustainability in a much more sensible way if we stopped willfully ignoring extant science of human population dynamics; stopped consciously refusing to communicate openly about peer-reviewed evidence of the human overpopulation of Earth? How on Earth do we reasonably address and overcome the human-driven global challenges looming before the human community if top rank scientists with appropriate expertise reject their responsibilities to acknowledge and deny their duties to examine published evidence and report findings?

Professor Emeritus Gary L. Peters and Professor Emeritus Albert A. Bartlett have chosen a different, seldom taken path, one that is morally courageous, because they have broken the silence by speaking out so loudly and clearly while many too many of their outstanding, similarly situated colleagues have remained electively mute.

Perhaps I am mistaken about the scientific research to which I draw attention. If that is shown to be case, I will end the AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population immediately. I make all of you the promise that from that moment forward you will not hear from me again. Given the human-induced global challenges that appear, at least to me, to be looming before humankind in our time, it will just fine if it turns out that I am indeed the fool so many people take me for now. Such an outcome has certain benefits. Fool that I am, still I will be free of a “duty to warn” and gratefully released to fulfill the promise I made years ago to my long-suffering spouse: end the AWAREness Campaign.

For a recent discussion of the global predicament posed by the unbridled growth of absolute global human population numbers in our time, please click on the links below.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6676

http://campfire.theoildrum.com/node/6680

Thank to all of you.

On standing up for science.... * * * One day soon, I hope, population biologists in particular and other knowledgeable people with appropriate expertise in population dynamics will carefully examine as well as openly report extant science of what could be giving rise to the recent skyrocketing growth of absolute global human population numbers. Experts are blindly ignoring, consciously avoiding and willfully hiding science in their silence. Experts with power to make a difference that makes a difference will not continue much longer, I trust, to deny their responsibilities to science and their duties to humanity by refusing to speak out about what they believe to be true regarding the unsustainable consumption, hoarding, production and overpopulation activities of humankind in our time, and by choosing instead to give credence to all manner of preternatural thinking, contrived logic, ideological idiocy, stupidity and madness. By remaining electively mute, they also silently consent to whatsoever is politically convenient, economically expedient, socially attractive, culturally syntonic and favorable to selfish interests of the wealthy and powerful. Are a tiny minority of influential people going to get away with their forfeiture of future human wellbeing, life as we know it, environmental health and the integrity of Earth's body? Speaking out loudly, clearly and often regarding whatsoever could somehow be true will not sink humanity or the Earth as a fit place for human habitation. On the other hand, if the brightest and best among us conspicuously deny what could somehow be real about the human overpopulation of Earth in favor of support for patently unsustainable overconsumption, overproduction and overpopulation acitivities by the human species, such as we see overspreading the surface of the Earth in our time, then what chance of a good enough future can the children realistically be expected to behold? * * * If it pleases you to do so, consider an exchange of ideas between a friend and me from yesterday. Friend --- Steve, I’m not sure that I get your point. What science is being suppressed or withheld? I’m thinking that the realities of things like overpopulation, overconsumption, etc. are axiomatic points. Or, as has been said before: You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows. Me --- Dear Friend, You have asked the question very few people have been willing to ask. Thank you for doing so. Inside and outside science, despite all the talk about independent-minded research, objective analysis, intellectual honesty and moral courage, there is something very few experts will acknowledge: human population dynamics is common to the population dynamics of other living things. In place of this scientifically-driven understanding they widely share and consensually validate the politically convenient, economically expedient, socially attractive and culturally syntonic idea that human population dynamics is different from the population dynamics of other living things. Their closely held misperception of what could be real is catastrophic because human beings are now known not to be exceptional in this way. Thanks to recent research we can understand how human population growth not only occurs like the population growth of other species, but also presents humanity with a non-recursive biological problem. It means that global human population growth is a rapidly cycling positive feedback loop, a relationship between food and population in which food availability drives population growth, and population growth fuels the mistaken impression that food production needs to be increased evermore. The best available scientific evidence appears to directly contradict the work of most current and former experts in the fields of population science and human demography, who erroneously hold the preternatural view that the human population dynamics is different from the population dynamics of other species. The textbooks our children and most of us have read are replete with all manner of pseudoscientific evidence regarding ways the human species is somehow different from other species with regard to population dynamics, among other things. At least to me, this failure to adequately understand and openly communicate about human population dynamics has profound implications for the future of life on Earth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czvxyDgqxmM Lyrics : David Gray Lyrics : Draw the Line Album : Full Steam Full Steam Lyrics - David Gray All our lives we’ve dreamed about it Just to find that it was never real Coming closer each turn of the wheel Forlorn, adrift on seas of beige In this our Golden Age Even in our darkest hour Never thought that it could get so bad Bullied, suckered, pimped and patronised Every day your tawdry little lives So loose your head And step within The silence deafening Now you saw it coming And I saw it coming We all saw it coming But we still bought it You saw it coming And I saw it coming but still Running full steam ahead In and out of consciousness It breaks my heart to see you like this Crying, wringing hands and cursing fate Always so little far too late It’s 3am I’m wide awake There’s still one call to make, one call Now you saw it coming And I saw it coming We all saw it coming But we still bought it You saw it coming And I saw it coming We all saw it coming But we still bought it Running full steam ahead Running full steam ahead Running full steam Gonna cover my eyes, gonna cover my eyes Runnin' full steam, yeah Now you saw it coming And I saw it coming We all saw it coming But we still bought it You saw it coming And I saw it coming We all saw it coming But we still bought it _end_ Steven Earl Salmony AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population, est. 2001 Chapel Hill, NC http://sustainabilityscience.org/content.html?contentid=1176 http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/ http://www.panearth.org/
One day I trust that a discussion of human population dynamics and human overpopulation of the Earth happens in many places. Sooner or later discussions of this kind have to occur, I suppose, despite the fact that free and open speech of what looks to me like the very last of the last taboos is forbidden by the self-proclaimed masters of the universe among us, the ones who value money, power and position before all else and exclaim their dishonest and duplicitous ‘work’ is, of all things, “God’s work”. My concern for children everywhere is this. If children in our time are "sold" the aberrant idea that economic success is what really matters, that arrogance and avarice actually rule this world, then from now here I expect those who are still young will follow a clearly marked and soon to become patently unsustainable primrose path to perdition, a path that has been adamantly advocated and religiously pursued by the masters of the universe. Let us not allow the 'economic success' that is derived from insider trading, hedging, dark pools of capital, CDOs and other financial instruments, market and currency manipulations, Ponzi schemes and economic globalization by the masters of the universe to be confused with the works of God, as given to us in the Creation and science. Despite all the efforts to foment confusion and uncertainty by economic theologians and other minions of the wealthy and powerful, I trust we can agree that the Creation and science itself are utterly different from the artificially designed, ideologically flawed, manmade global economy that is organized and managed by the masters of the universe for their benefit primarily. Regarding this single thing, can there be even so much as a shadow of doubt?
One day soon I trust that a HIGH LEVEL DISCUSSION of extant scientific evidence of human population dynamics and human overpopulation of the Earth happens in many places. Sooner or later discussions of this kind have to occur, I suppose, despite the fact that free and open speech of what looks to me like the very last of the last taboos is forbidden by “the powers that be”, the ones who value money, power and position before all else and exclaim their dishonest and duplicitous ‘work’ is, of all things, “God’s work”. My concern for children, much less grandchildren everywhere is this. If the children in our time are "sold" the aberrant idea that economic success is what really matters, that arrogance and avarice actually rule this world, then from now here I expect those who are still young will follow a clearly marked and soon to become patently unsustainable primrose path to perdition and destruction, a path that has been adamantly advocated and religiously pursued by self-proclaimed masters of the universe. Let us not allow the 'economic success' that is derived from "bigger is better" and "the biggest business is the best", and from insider trading, hedging, dark pools of capital, CDOs and other dodgy financial instruments, market and currency manipulations, ponzi schemes and economic globalization by the masters of the universe to be confused with the works of God, as given to us in The Creation and disclosed to us in science. Despite all the efforts to foment confusion and uncertainty by economic theologians, demographers and other smarty and clever minions of the wealthy and powerful, I trust we can agree that The Creation and science itself are utterly different from the artificially designed, ideologically flawed, manmade global economy that is organized and managed by the masters of the universe for their benefit primarily. Regarding this single thing, can there be even so much as a shadow of doubt? As for demography, it appears to provide a politically useful and economically attractive platform for looking at "the growth rate decreases" of human population numbers in one place after another and then for broadcasting this 'scientific' evidence everywhere as if these data provide actual assurance of the end of global population growth soon. All the while the demographers willfully ignore unchallenged scientific evidence of the skyrocketing increase of absolute global human population numbers. Demography is not the practice of science; it is a ruse. Demography is dangerous because it is so very misleading. The 'empirical' evidence derived from demography serves the selfish interests of the wealthy and powerful among us by disguising rather than disclosing the actual challenges posed to humanity in our time by the unbridled growth of the human population worldwide by approximately 75 to 80 million annually as well as by the gigantic scale of the global population that is projected to reach 9+ billion, likely during the lifetime of my children.
How on Earth are we going to adequately feed the hungry and starving, and simultaneously not keep 'feeding the problem' of human overpopulation? http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/frostovertheworld/2011/02/2011259341259393.html How is it possible for so many top rank experts of great stature to be adamantly advocating for more "food production to feed a growing population" and yet be failing to mention the profound implications of skyrocketing absolute global population numbers on Earth? For such a thing to be occurring in 2011 appears preposterous. It is morally outrageous and dangerous both to future human well being and environmental health, I believe, for well established experts to be reporting ubiquitously in high-level discussions such things as are directly contradicted by unchallenged scientific research of human population dynamics and human overpopulation. Is it possible that so-called, self-proclaimed experts are not aware of peer-reviewed, published research in their area of expertise that indicates the food supply is the independent (not dependent) variable and human population numbers is the dependent (not independent) variable with regard to the relationship between human population numbers and food supply? It appears that many too many experts are collectively reporting specious theory and data regarding the human population that cannot be supported by the best available scientific evidence, I believe. The food supply is the independent variable not the dependent variable. Human population numbers is the dependent variable not the independent variable. The believers in demographic transition theory and in the idea that "we must increase food production to feed a growing population" are simply mistaken. The false promise of Demographic Transition Theory, that population stabilization will somehow occur benignly and automatically a mere four decades from now, as well as the upside down thinking that human population numbers is the independent variable and food supply is the dependent variable, are at least two of the crucial and deliberate misunderstandings that are being deployed to direct the human community down a patently unsustainable "primrose path" no human being with feet of clay would ever choose to go. The uncontested scientific finding of the relationship between food supply and human population numbers is being obscured and denied by the very experts upon whom the human community relies for guidance and direction. Conscious obsfucation and willful denial by 'the brightest and best' of the scientific finding regarding the relationship between food supply and human population numbers has been occurring pervasively for way too long a time. This incredible failure of nerve by 'the smartest guys in the room' in my not-so-great generation has got to be acknowledged, addressed and overcome. The children's future is being stolen by thieves of the highest order. And what is the communal response? A code of silence! Are people going to choose yet again to be bystanders at a moment when bold action, intellectual honesty and moral courage are required? Willful blindness, hysterical deafness, elective mutism and utter passivity cannot continue. The children will soon enough express their anger and disbelief at what the elders in my not-so-great generation have either failed to do or else done poorly "on our watch", while wealthy and powerful crooks in high places robbed those among us who are still young of a good enough future. How on Earth are we going to adequately feed the hungry and starving, and simultaneously not keep 'feeding the problem' of human overpopulation? This is the question no one is asking, the one that needs to be asked. Please speak out loudly and clearly. The hungry must be fed now because we can and we care. Steven Earl Salmony AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population, established 2001 http://sustainabilityscience.org/content.html?contentid=1176 http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/ http://www.panearth.org/
—–Original Message—– From: sesalmony@aol.com To: john.sulston@manchester.ac.uk Cc: t.jackson@surrey.ac.uk; ezulu@aphrc.org; r.short@unimelb.edu.au; demissiehabte@yahoo.com; ahf1@york.ac.uk; caifang@cass.org.cn Sent: Fri, Apr 1, 2011 12:47 pm Subject: human population dynamics and human overpopulation Sir John Sulston, Chair People and the Planet Working Group UK Royal Society March 31, 2011 Dear Sir John Sulston: Your recent comments regarding the review of research on the human population and its impact on the planet we inhabit by a high level panel of experts give rise to hope for the future of children everywhere. Thanks for all you, the Planet and the People Working Group and the UK Royal Society are doing to protect biodiversity from massive extirpation, the environment from irreversible degradation and the Earth from wanton dissipation of its finite resources by the human species. I am especially appreciative for two quotes from you, …… “we’ve got to make sure that population is recognized…. as a multiplier of many others. We’ve got to make sure that population really does peak out when we hope it will.” …….”what we want to do is to see the issue of population in the open, dispassionately discussed…. and then we’ll see where it goes.” Inasmuch as you and an esteemed group of professionals with appropriate expertise are examining scientific evidence regarding the unbridled increase of absolute global human population numbers, please note there is research that has been summarily dismissed by many too many of our colleagues regarding human population dynamics and human overpopulation which I would like to bring to your attention. For the past ten years I have been unsuccessfully attempting to draw attention to certain evidence that to date remains both unchallenged and ignored by virtually every top-rank professional. They appear unable to refute the evidence and simultaneously unwilling to believe it. Their unexpected conspiracy of silence has served to conceal certain research by David Pimentel and Russell Hopfenberg. How else can it be that so many established professionals with adequate expertise act as if they are willfully blind, hysterically deaf and electively mute in the face of scientific evidence of human population dynamics and human overpopulation? The conscious denial of what could somehow be real about the growth of the human population in our time is not doing anything that can be construed as somehow right and good for future human wellbeing and environmental health, I suppose. It appears as if we could be witnesses to the most colossal failure of intellectual honesty, moral courage and nerve in human history. Peer-reviewed professional publications, letters to the editor, slideshow presentations et cetera can be found at the following link, http://www.panearth.org/ Thank you for attending to this request for careful, skillful and rigorous scrutiny of research from two outstanding scientists. Please know I am holding onto a ray of hope that the research of Hopfenberg and Pimentel is fundamentally flawed; that human population dynamics is different from, not essentially similar to, the population dynamics of other species; and that human population numbers are not primarily a function of an available supply of food necessary for human existence. That would be the best news. Sometime soon, I trust, many scientists will speak up with regard to apparently unforeseen and unfortunately unwelcome science of human population dynamics and human overpopulation the way people in huge numbers in the Mid-East are calling out for democracy now. Respectfully yours, Steve Salmony Steven Earl Salmony AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population, Established 2001
Willfully Ignoring The Science Of Human Population Dynamics By Steve Salmony 13 May, 2011 Countercurrents.org If human population numbers are a primary causative agent of the global predicament looming before humanity, then we certainly need to examine all the available scientific evidence of the population dynamics of the human species. It makes no sense to keep ignoring this vital subject. How are we to confront the global challenges humankind appears to be precipitating if we will not rigorously scrutinize extant scientific research regarding human population dynamics? With all due respect, it appears to me that something continues to be missing from public discourse about the human-driven aspects of the colossal predicament the human family could soon confront. How are we to begin talking about real issues regarding the human population, much less meaningfully acknowledge the formidable, emerging and converging global problems posed to the human family by skyrocketing absolute global human population numbers if experts consciously refuse to speak out about either the science of human population dynamics or the unscientific theory of the demographic transition? The former is assiduously ignored, even though it appears to explain why human population numbers have been exploding in our time, while the latter has been broadcast ubiquitously during my lifetime, even though demographic transition theory could be misleading all of us by giving rise to a false promise that human population growth is somehow about to come benignly to an end soon. The silence with regard to human population science as well as the broadcasts of preternatural thought regarding the demographic transition in the foreseeable future are significant forces with which we have to reckon, I suppose. Let us consider that we are currently confronting the denial of science as well as the steady, relentless broadcasts of what is pseudoscientific thought. We note that desire-driven, ideologically based, logically contrived, unscientific thought is seen and heard everywhere, thanks to a mainstream media that defends political convenience, economic expediency and the status quo. We also see that science is eschewed. Is this not the sum and substance of mass media 'ecology'? How is it possible for top rank experts with responsibilities to science and duties to humanity to be adamantly advocating for more "food production to feed a growing population" and yet be failing to mention the profound implications of skyrocketing absolute global human population numbers? For such a thing to be occurring in 2011 appears preposterous. It is morally outrageous and dangerous both to future human well being and environmental health, I believe, for well established experts to be reporting ubiquitously in high-level discussions and the mass media such things as are directly contradicted by unchallenged scientific research of human population dynamics and human overpopulation. Is it possible that population experts are not aware of peer-reviewed, published research in their area of expertise which indicates the food supply is the independent variable and human population numbers is the dependent variable in the relationship between human population numbers and food supply? It appears to me that many too many experts are regularly reporting attractive preternatural theory regarding the human population that is directly contradicted by scientific evidence. According to consciously ignored research of two outstanding scientists, Russell Hopfenberg and David Pimentel, the food supply is the independent variable not the dependent variable. Human population numbers is the dependent variable not the independent variable. The advocates of demographic transition theory and the idea that "we must increase food production to feed a growing population" could be mistaken. The false promises of the demographic transition theory, that population stabilization will somehow occur naturally and automatically a mere four decades from now as well as the upside down thinking that human population numbers is the independent variable and food supply is the dependent variable, present crucial misunderstandings which are being deployed by self-proclaimed masters of the universe among us for the purpose of protecting their self interests as well as for directing the human community down a patently unsustainable "primrose path" no human being with feet of clay would ever choose to go, much less send unaware and unprepared children. The uncontested scientific finding of the relationship between food supply and human population numbers is being obscured and denied by the very experts upon whom the human community relies for guidance and direction. Denial by 'the brightest and best' of what appears to be the best available science regarding the relationship between food supply and human population numbers has been occurring for too long a time. This failure of many experts has to be acknowledged and put behind us so that momentum can gather to move the human family in a new direction; so that we can begin making necessary changes toward sustainability. Steve Salmony is a self-proclaimed global citizen, a psychologist and father of three grown children. Married 39 years ago. In 2001 Steve founded the AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population to raise consciousness of the colossal threat that the unbridled, near exponential growth of absolute global human population numbers poses for all great and small living things on Earth in our time. His quixotic campaign focuses upon the best available science of human population dynamics and human overpopulation of the Earth, in order to save the planet as a place fit for habitation by children everywhere. He can be reached at SESALMONY@aol.com
http://www.ellenlaconte.com/scientists-silence-in-the-face-of-a-population-crisis/