[i]Another sign that the people of this world are engaged in a "green cult" of Earth worship. Why does the far-left advance the causes of abortion and homosexuality? Perhaps it is because they fear for a world that they now worship. Yet our Lord's first commands to mankind was to "be fruitful and multiply" and to have "dominion" over this world. Abortion and homosexuality attempts to stop the multiplication of mankind; Environmentalism tries to place the rest of creation at the same level (or even ABOVE) the status of man (who was created in God's own image). Yet another sign of the times[/i]. - Chris

[b]UK population must fall to 30 Million, says Porritt[/b]
by Jonathan Leake and Brendan Montague
The Sunday Times
22 March 2009

JONATHON PORRITT, one of Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, is to warn that Britain must drastically reduce its population if it is to build a sustainable society.

Porritt’s call will come at this week’s annual conference of the Optimum Population Trust (OPT), of which he is patron.

The trust will release research suggesting UK population must be cut to 30m if the country wants to feed itself sustainably.

Porritt said: “Population growth, plus economic growth, is putting the world under terrible pressure.

“Each person in Britain has far more impact on the environment than those in developing countries so cutting our population is one way to reduce that impact.”

Population growth is one of the most politically sensitive environmental problems. The issues it raises, including religion, culture and immigration policy, have proved too toxic for most green groups.

However, Porritt is winning scientific backing. Professor Chris Rapley, director of the Science Museum, will use the OPT conference, to be held at the Royal Statistical Society, to warn that population growth could help derail attempts to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

Rapley, who formerly ran the British Antarctic Survey, said humanity was emitting the equivalent of 50 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year.

“We have to cut this by 80%, and population growth is going to make that much harder,” he said.

Such views on population have split the green movement. George Monbiot, a prominent writer on green issues, has criticised population campaigners, arguing that “relentless” economic growth is a greater threat.

Many experts believe that, since Europeans and Americans have such a lopsided impact on the environment, the world would benefit more from reducing their populations than by making cuts in developing countries.

This is part of the thinking behind the OPT’s call for Britain to cut population to 30m — roughly what it was in late Victorian times.

Britain’s population is expected to grow from 61m now to 71m by 2031. Some politicians support a reduction.

Phil Woolas, the immigration minister, said: “You can’t have sustainability with an increase in population.”

The Tory leader, David Cameron, has also suggested Britain needs a “coherent strategy” on population growth.

Despite these comments, however, government and Conservative spokesmen this weekend both distanced themselves from any population policy. ”

*Note: The population of the UK is currently over 60 Million.

Click [url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5950442.ece]HERE[/url] to read the full article.

_________________
Christopher

So speaks the mouth of "The Lion" [Daniel 7 + Rev 13] - England/London.


The Georgia Guide Stones -

http://www.radioliberty.com/stones.htm

Hi Jesus-is-GOD...

I've read about the Georgia Guidestones before (and I have read the works of Thomas Paine...including both [i]Common Sense[/i] and [i]Age of Reason[/i]). It does seem like the Georgia Guidestones serve as the "holy" scriptures of far-left environmentalism and earth worship.

The stones were built in the late 1970s (after the "hippie" revolution of the 60s and early 70s). They inscribed the following "goals" in eight languages:

_________________
Christopher

Sounds like someone in the UK is begging for a [url=http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-malthusian-catastrophe.htm]Malthusian catastrophe[/url].

[b]Earth population 'exceeds limits' [/b]
By Steven Duke
Editor, One Planet, BBC World Service

[b]There are already too many people living on Planet Earth, according to one of most influential science advisors in the US government.

Current world population - 6.8bn
Net growth per day - 218,030
Forecast made for 2040 - 9bn
[i]Source: US Census Bureau [/i][/b]

Nina Fedoroff told the BBC One Planet programme that humans had exceeded the Earth's "limits of sustainability".

Dr Fedoroff has been the science and technology advisor to the US secretary of state since 2007, initially working with Condoleezza Rice.

Under the new Obama administration, she now advises Hillary Clinton.

"We need to continue to decrease the growth rate of the global population; the planet can't support many more people," Dr Fedoroff said, stressing the need for humans to become much better at managing "wild lands", and in particular water supplies.

Pressed on whether she thought the world population was simply too high, Dr Fedoroff replied: "There are probably already too many people on the planet."

[b]GM Foods 'needed' [/b]

A National Medal of Science laureate (America's highest science award), the professor of molecular biology believes part of that better land management must include the use of genetically modified foods.

"We have six-and-a-half-billion people on the planet, going rapidly towards seven.

"We're going to need a lot of inventiveness about how we use water and grow crops," she told the BBC.

"We accept exactly the same technology (as GM food) in medicine, and yet in producing food we want to go back to the 19th Century."

Dr Fedoroff, who wrote a book about GM Foods in 2004, believes critics of genetically modified maize, corn and rice are living in bygone times.

"We wouldn't think of going to our doctor and saying 'Treat me the way doctors treated people in the 19th Century', and yet that's what we're demanding in food production."

In a wide ranging interview, Dr Fedoroff was asked if the US accepted its responsibility to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be driving human-induced climate change. "Yes, and going forward, we just have to be more realistic about our contribution and decrease it - and I think you'll see that happening."

And asked if America would sign up to legally binding targets on carbon emissions - something the world's biggest economy has been reluctant to do in the past - the professor was equally clear. "I think we'll have to do that eventually - and the sooner the better."



THE MOST POPULOUS NATIONS

China - 1.33bn
India - 1.16bn
USA - 306m
Indonesia - 230m
Brazil - 191m

[i]The full interview with Dr Nina Federoff can be heard on this week's edition of the new [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/science/2009/03/000000_one_planet.shtml]One Planet[/url] programme on the BBC World Service [/i]



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7974995.stm

HISTORY OF EUGENICS

In 1798, an English clergyman and economist named Thomas Robert Malthus published the Essay on the Principle of Population.

The central idea of the book is that population increases exponentially and will therefore eventually outstrip food supply. If parents failed to limit the size of their families, then war or famine would kill off the excess. The idea has been remarkably resilient, although the specific predictions that Malthus made were wrong.

Malthus argued that the island of Britain could not sustain a population of 20 million, but 150 years later the population was more than triple Malthus' ceiling

HITLER'S EMBRACE

A key program of the eugenicists was cleansing the human race by sterilizing the "unfit." By 1931, sterilization laws had been enacted in 27 states in the United States, and by 1935 sterilization laws had been enacted in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland and Germany. But the efficiency of the German eugenicists caused trouble.

Galton's ideas had been taken up in Germany by Friedrich Nietzsche in the 19th century. Then Ploetz and R6din laid the foundations of an effective eugenics program in Germany. In 1922, two men, a lawyer and a psychiatrist, Karl Binding, J. D., and Alfred Hoche, M.D. cooperated on a short book entitled Die Freigabe der Vernichtung lebensunwerten Lebens (Permission to Destroy Life Devoid of Value). The book encouraged Austrian physicians who were beginning to practice euthanasia illegally. And then Adolf Hitler, who had described his own eugenic ideas in Mein Kampf, came to power.

Hitler's determination to establish his "Master Race" was embraced by German eugenicists. And eugenicists elsewhere failed to criticize the Germans. In the United States, the Birth Control Review praised the effectiveness of the Germans, and published articles by R6din and others.

In the United States today, there is a great deal of confusion about Hitler's view of abortion. Pro-lifers denounce abortionists furiously for imitating Hitler, who legalized abortion, and proponents of abortion denounce pro-lifers furiously for imitating Hitler, who outlawed abortion. In fact, both sides are half right. Hitler was a eugenicist, and he outlawed aborting Aryan babies for eugenic reasons, but encouraged aborting Slavs and Jews also for eugenic reasons.

After Hitler had killed millions of people, including one third of the Jews in the world, he lost the war. The name of his political party became and remains one of the most offensive words in the language, and ideas that are tightly associated with him are universally condemned. So the idea of building a master race became extremely unpopular. However, the eugenics movement did not die.

SECOND NEW FIELD: POPULATION CONTROL

After World War II, the eugenics movement discovered (or invented) the population explosion, and whipped up global hysteria about it. From 1952 on, a major part of the eugenics movement was the population control movement. The population explosion made it possible for eugenics movement to continue its work more from the fit, less from the unfit with the same people to do the same things, but with a new public rationale.

Seems there are some men using the green agenda to push there eugenics doctrine. I wonder who would the first to suffer if such a wicked teaching was to take root again.

I can see that the antichrist is going to use this green agenda in getting his way in this world. As christians we are aware that the earth is going to go through turmoil, natural disaters this will play into the hands green agenda as they'll put it down to Global warming and the anti christ will be in the middle of that.

The green agenda will use this crisis of natural disaters and will convince goverments that people will have to give up there freedoms and goverments will take more ane more control.

Wicked men will devise wicked plans and say it's in the best interest of humanity.

[url=http://www.emmerich1.com/EUGENICS.htm]EUGENICS[/url]

_________________
Colin Murray

Whenever I hear the word "green" in conjunction to these things that are happening around us, I think of the movie "Soylent Green."

The level of depravity that mankind is exhibiting is beyond words . . .
__________________________________________________

The Independent Science Panel (ISP) is a panel of scientists from many disciplines, committed to the Promotion of Science for the Public Good.

[b]Rice with human genes: pharming in California[/b]

In 2002 Greenpeace disclosed the location of a site in Northern California where rice plants modified with the human genes lactoferrin and lysozyme were being tested(1). Lactoferrin acts against bacterial pathogens by preventing them from taking up iron needed for their growth, while lysozyme acts against the cell wall material of the bacterial pathogens. The biopharmaceutical rice crop was being tested by a California biotechnology company, Applied Phytologics.(1,2). In spite of the intense public scrutiny efforts are being made to continue the open field testing of the rice plants modified with two human genes. The Greenpeace disclosure created an avalanche of concern from the public and from both conventional and organic rice farmers who feared contamination of their crops would lead to economic disaster. Washington State University field tested barley altered with human genes for lactoferrin, lysozyme, antitrypsin and antithrombin (3) but that field test release was not acknowledged by the public even though it posed a threat to both conventional and organic production of beer and animal feed. Maize modified with human lactoferrin was field tested by Biochem SA company and by Meristem Therapeutics company in France (4). The French field tests do not appear to have been acknowledged by the public even though such tests threatened both conventional and organic maize production on the continent.

Most of the field testing of genetically modified (GM) biopharmaceutical crops appears to have been done in the United States (US), France and Canada. US completed 315 such tests between 1991 and 2002, the main modified organisms included maize, rice soy and Tobacco Mosaic Virus .The majority of tests were done in Nebraska, Hawaii, Wisconsin and Puerto Rico (5). Canada completed 53 field tests of biopharmaceutical crops between 1995 and 2003 (6) while France completed 24 field tests on GM biopharmaceutical crops 1995 and 1998 (4). The US and Canadian field trials of GM biopharmaceuticals are clouded by the use of confidential business information (CBI) designations which hide the details of the gene construction and the exact locations of the field tests. Those neighboring the field trials have no means of relating any illness or discomfort experienced from exposure to polluted plant debris or pollen, or to contaminated ground or surface water escaping from the test site to the GM biopharmaceuticals being tested, certainly an unjust situation.

Returning to the rice GM biopharmaceutical genetic construct, like other biopharmaceuticals produced in seed , the construct includes the human genes for the primary biopharmaceutical protein driven by a seed specific promoter and the protein is expressed with a fusion polypeptide (the signal peptide) that causes the fusion protein to accumulate in a cell compartment such as a vacuole or seed endosperm (7). Human lactoferrin produced in plants has been described (8). Human lysozyme produced in plants has been patented as a biopestide to protect plants against fungal and animal pests (9). Human lysozyme produced in rice has been localized to the endosperm of transgenic rice (10,11).

Expression of human milk proteins in plants has been discussed by nutrition authorities who have maintained that such products should be tested using feeding experiments in rats then human volunteers(12). The problem of inadvertent exposure to the products by consuming crops contaminated by the products by accidental spread of pollen or seeds was not discussed. Chicks were fed rice bearing human lysozyme and lactoferrin and the rice was found to have antibiotic like properties (13).

Lactoferrin is a protein that participates in regulation of immune functions and contols pathogens by binding iron required for bacterial growth. Lactoferrin has been in asthma with fatal outcomes (14). Lactoferrin variants has been associated with localized juvenile periodontitis (15). It has been suggested that milk lactoferrin possesses allergenic sites (16). Lactoferrin is a protein modified by glycosylation, a modificatoion that contributes to enzyme activity and to allergenicity of the protein, human lactoferrin was found to be glycosylated differently from the human transgene protein produced in tobacco(17).The different pattern of glycosylation observed in human and the tobacco transgene product should not be considered insignificant until full studies of allergenicity of the transgenic protein are completed. Chicken egg lysozyme is a well known potent food allergen (18) while human lysozyme is clearly not allergenic. Like lactoferrin , lysozyyme is a glycosylated enzyme and variants of human lysozyme have been studied (19). The glycosylation patterns of the transgenic enzyme produced in plants seems to have been neglected even though that pattern will influence allergenicity of the product. Clearly, both transgenic lactoferrin and transgenic lysozyme are potentially hazardous to human health and such concerns should be made clear to those exposed to the field test sites or those living nearby.

Transgenic rice crops may spread pollen or seeds to adjacent fields thus contaminating those crops. Rice is known to be somewhat self fertilizing but clearly capable of spreading both pollen and seeds to nearby fields. Gene flow has been studied between commercial rice and weedy red rice (20,21). These studies suggest that transgenes may spread to non-transgenic rice. Once established the transgenes may be difficult to impossible to eliminate. Organic and conventional rice producers have a legitimate concern over secretive field testing of transgenic rice.

Transgenic glufosinate resistant rice (Liberty Link) was de-regulated in the US during 1999, the Animal Plant Food Inspection Service (APHIS) of USDA guessed that the transgenic rice would not pollinate weedy red rice but even if it did the weed could be eliminated using herbicides other than glufosinate (22). Concern over the threat of transgenic rice to organic and conventional producers was outlined and the probable instability of transgenic rice do to soma clonal variability was discussed (23).

Recently, recombinant biopharmaceutical production in transgenic crops has been actively promoted , in spite of incidents of contamination of food production observed during field test releases of the transgenic biopharmaceutical crops (24,25). Production of the biopharmaceutical crops in confined greenhouses was deemed un-economic even though such production provides the barest essentials for protecting the food crops from genetic pollution. The unacceptable practice deeming secretive field tests to be confidential business information must be stopped. Both testing and production of transgenic crops producing biopharmaceuticals should be restricted to confined greenhouses that provide isolation from the atmosphere and groundwater. Transgenic crops bearing human milk proteins are promoted because “mother’s” milk is presumed safe for all, but the crop transgenic “mother’s milk” is far from identical to the real thing. Furthermore , the transgenic milk crops will soon be followed by anticoagulants, human growth hormone, antibodies and a range of other biopharmaceutical products all potentially significantly different from the original products. The biopharmaceutical dam may soon burst leaving the human population with an array of hidden medications in their food.


http://www.indsp.org/Ricehumangenes.php

Thank you Murrcolr, Heartsong, Michael & Chris.
This isn't nearly as painful as it would be if there were no one out there that sees with you.


Thank you - with prayers.