Hi Tom
MY SERVER REJECTED THE ORIGINAL EMAIL OF THIS AS 'SPAM' SO I AM SENDING IT TO YOU, TOM AS A MERE LINK!
[It must have been those yellow highlightings!]
[It must have been those yellow highlightings!]
I notice that Adam Creighton felt the same way per his great article in The
Oz Friday – he must have heard your programme on Thursday.
Oh –and see Bernard Salt in March 2012 See above link.
I have not tried the WSJ – or Simon below – here is a link—should be fun,
non? Julian Simon, the Doomslayer –
Wired
THERE ARE LOTS OF LINKS BELOW!!!
Oh dear.
Clearly I did not see Adam’s article – before yesterdayI found it with my
grandchildren.
They all wanted to be assured they were no incombrance to the socially pure
proletariat.
There are nine of them Tom: my wife and I are especially blessed.
Every one of them has a computer game to play: it takes all my effort to
get them interested in Malthus / Ehrlich when they visit us.
So – I ask you – do you feel like conceding you were wrong? And also to
treat me better when I wish to have a go at one of your cadres?
Take an extra day in
responding: the world’s population will have grown only a ‘libedit’
AAH my cute 3 year old’s word: it will take off ,
non?
LOOK AT THESE
HYSTERICS!!
Regards
Geoff
Talking Points & Facts - The Population Institute
https://www.populationinstitute.org/programs/gpso/gpso/
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 3:49
PM
Subject: Re: IS THAT ALL THERE IS, TOM??? Tom and the Dick Smith
person on 3AW yesterday!
Of course I'm too busy!
On 15 Aug 2014, at 3:44 pm, "g87" <g87@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
Hello TomLet me know if that is all there is to your comments ...surely you are too busy being on air.RegardsGeoffSent: Friday, August 15, 2014 3:22 PMSubject: Re: Tom and the Dick Smith person on 3AW yesterday!Dick Smith has a contrarian point of view. I think it's worth hearing.Tom
Sent from my iPad
On 15/08/2014, at 3:09 PM, "g87" <g87@optusnet.com.au> wrote:Tom and the Dick Smith person on 3AW yesterday!307 pm to 4 pmHi Tom,
You had an interview just after 3 pm Thursday 14/8 with that arch - antediluvian socialist Dick Smith giving his spiel on his favourite proletarian theme; population growth.My person was clearly going to have a ‘go’ at DS and the amazing Melange of acolytes of Dick.All elderly like your writer but manifest twirps
You were in earlier days a respected financial reporter. As such you should never have vouchsafed all the arrant nonsence from Dick and his appendages.
Your programme was a Malthusian mess, a demographic disaster, filled with environmentalist alarmism, replete with Hawksian silly old buggers.
LOTS OF THEM. NON STOP.
Why one old codger had the gall to declare that rationalist contrarian views were promoting .... guilty of a ponzi scheme!
I guess I understand enough about demograhics to appreciate that, that old twirp ( hey Seidner you are 66 years old!) should know – and by now should have been told that he is a moron!! Come to think of it, Tom, how many know and accept that they are not all that bright? I hold his friends to an ethereal standard.But YOU, Tom? How is it possible that you were so intensely determined to be everyone’s friend that you became wilfully blind: see my recent essay on another subject on my bloglate July. See link here.http://socialistdystopia.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/a-modern-trichotomy-stupidity-willful.html
However he surely the old fellow had enough ‘marbles’ in kinder.......yet sadly todayhe understands not that his comments were stupid. An incorrigible fool of the meta - socialist type: simply he has come across information yet not understood it.
I mean there was no rational appendant / caller till well after 4 pm to profer a barely correct view; how did you get so many of dickian supporters to phone your programme?
YET YOUR PANEL OPERATOR LEFT ME HANGING FOR ALMOST AN HOUR...THIS WAY REFUSING TO PUT ME TO AIR ...KNOWING I WAS GOING TO ATTACK HIS DICKNESS SMITH!!
THEN THE DEAR LADY FAILED TO PHONE ME BACK AFTER AGREEING IT WAS NOT FAIR THE WAY I WAS TREATED!! Ie she treated me.
And you, Tom vigorously agreed with all these imbeciles.Indeed you have often been shown up as agreeing with everyone.. especially whoever happens to be your current interlocutor! Great for ratings because few people listen in critical analysis.LO! I recall you refused to allow criticism of Danny boy Andrew .....his new nomenclature.And Latham remains a protected species as well.I CLARIFY: EACH TIME YOU LEFT ME DANGLING LIKE A PARTICIPLE YOU THE PEDANT MAY HAVE SAID RE CORRECT SPELLING.Sadly clear thinking is of greater import than anything else.So I continue.
First...why not take a lesson about how China is feeding herself and there are no yellow hordes invading our foodstores?
- Second the world food production continues to soar exponentially!!
- Third ...why not contemplate the cheaper cost if there was no urban sprawl...
This is the way local councils think these days. You did not know? Such a shame...basivc really.
- FOURTH.
You kept asking peoplehow pleased they would be if enough people procreated productively, often enough to ensure a population of 100 million within 100 years!?????
As if anyting they said now ...did now ..or tomorrow or next year...oh I give up. Do you not see that before 50 or more years passed 'they' will surely invent a way which will enable even silly people to understand that there are billions .. nay trillions of variables in demographics. ALL MAKING YOUR OPENING QUESTION TO THE TWIRPS RISIBLE AN INEPT.
In the utopia of 2114, surely no one will fail to understand these variables are beyond anyone with the vaguest imagination and intellect.
- Why not get that mega twit Paul Erlich and raise that defunct, demised discredited Malthus as guests on your show to discuss Erlich's current discreditum.... climate lunacy?? Why even a stopped watch can be right twice in 24 hrs!
- Why not get the global warming fanatics to project to my 100th birthday food production via their usual extravagant extrapolated - style?
- But the worst were a couple of kindergarten failures who seriously suggested that those who would be part of any new population growth would be takers not givers. This wss a real 'lulu'
- Their frustrated kinder teacher could have told them that no such characteristics can be hypothecacated basis even a deranged aged mind which yearns for the halcyon days whan life was simply miserable and pathetically keeps getting better.
- I suppose we can post facto call them generation selfish takers?
You insist on nomenclatures of gen. Y and more.. it is more than silly...
LO...I HAVE RAISED eclectic?? ISSUES WHICH PERHAPS YOU UNDERSTAND??
- Let us go on. The Vietnam demonstrators generation...are they any different from the lunatics at universities today? Is Nimbin much different today?
Why not create the nomenclatures re generations... a b c .???
I did not join the marchers.
- ALL THIS contradicts another of dikkies theories about the good old days of his creation. His parents are responsible for his dickness' socialist dogma.
- One more thing – mainstream rational economists agree with me to your inverse cost. I spy many worthy articles in the Wall Street Journal https://www.google.com.au/#q=Malthusian+nonsense+ehrlich+wsj
In spite of all, I enjoy our semi regular on air conversations.Even if most of the time you cut me off after a mere few seconds – I guess you fear being upstaged?I dunno – or what other reason is there?Maybe you think I will get you into trouble and even take your job?Ho Hum.You amaze me in that you respond to my emails within short minutes even as you run your successful programme.it is not only the girl – people who can multi – task.I spent too much time on this. My wife and I recently returned from Israel and Europe: I will send you an email I sent the Hungarian PM.I plainly wanted an eclectic friendly ‘war’ with someone: I chose YOU, poor fellow.Do not come with the rejoinder about too much time on my hands: this is brilliant material – you should be flattered...RegardsGeoff SeidnerEast St Kilda
Melange - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Melange comes from the French meaning of a "mixture" or "medley". It may also refer to: Mélange, a geological breccia above a subduction zone environment ....
7 Billion Reasons Malthus Was Wrong - Forbes
Oct 31, 2011 - Thomas Malthus is famous (or infamous, depending on your [...] ... from reality and more sad you are spilling your nonsense to other people. ... There's Daniel Yergin's fine op-ed in the WSJ “There Will Be Oil. ...... In closing, allow me to quote eugenicist Paul Ehrlich, from an interview he conducted in 2009.Malthus at the Movies | John C. Wright's Journal
Oct 17, 2013 - Ehrlich's strongest critic was the economist Julian Simon, and Ehrlichproved to be enough of ... Five years after losing his bet, he would tell the Wall Street Journal, “If Simon .... Malthusianism is nonsense; always has been.Overpopulation arguments wrong?, Malthus and Ehrlich ...
... should be encouraged to smoke at an early age" (From the Wall Street Journal). ... "peddles calamity as science" (Denver Post), and Paul Ehrlich, the "bumbling ...... in this case, Mr. Harsanyi is peddling name-calling nonsense as journalism. vggvggv
Accord-ing to Malthus, all those people should have been long dead, the country reduced ... was going down to the corner newsstand to purchase a copy of The Wall Street Journal. .... But there were those who were - Paul Ehrlich, for example. .... Julian Simon read this stuff, which he viewed as unalloyed and total nonsense.Book Review: The Bet - WSJ
online.wsj.com/.../SB1000142412788732416520457902663159329078...
Aug 30, 2013 - Jonathan Last reviews "The Bet: Paul Ehrlich, Julian Simon, and Our ... of Thomas Malthus —people were overbreeding, the supply of food and ...
Missing:nonsense[CTRL] Potted Plants - The Mail Archive
Jun 27, 1999 - ... Malthusian nonsense predicted by the likes of Paul Ehrlich — never ... Thanks to the Amazon, > (Wall Street Journal, 18 May 1999, p A1).UK Indymedia - Population Overload
Feb 16, 2011 - February 18, 2011. When it comes to population, the name Paul Ehrlichinevitably comes up. ..... re: malthusian racist nonsense. 18.02.2011 12: ...Bill Totten's Weblog: Paul Ehrlich interviewed
Apr 24, 2005 - Paul Ehrlich: We're in a situation of vast overpopulation, and the population is still ... PE: Well, Malthus wrote several hundred years ago and was basically correct .... PE: Well, my feeling about that is that it's utter nonsense. ..... there are the editors of the editorial pages for the Wall Street Journal that'll print it.Is Scarcity a Fallacy? Part One ~ European-American blog
Jun 6, 2014 - On April 25, Matt Ridley wrote an article in the Wall Street Journal ... Optimists such as Ridley say that Malthusian doomsday prophecies are nonsense, ..... For example, Paul Ehrlich's predictions have failed so spectacularly ...GREENIE WATCH: Murry Salby: climate science innovator ...
Jul 3, 2013 - Contrast the Malthusian nonsense below with the more .... That's the paradigm you see in every WSJ business story about global warming.
No comments:
Post a Comment