by Marco Torres

January 30, 2012
from PreventDisease Website



Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.

According to a satirical piece from The Onion news source, the answer is yes.


However, satire aside, depopulation agendas are a serious matter that many top government officials and scientists believe in for fear of depletion of earth's resources. Unfortunately, those that endorse these concepts know very little (or don't want to know...) about,

The fact is, man-made depopulation of the earth is a ridiculous concept since Mother Nature knows exactly what to do with the planet and its inhabitants to maintain balance.


“I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing War has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective.


If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full."
- Bertrand Russell

Throughout history, some very frightening and chilling viewpoints have been seriously discussed by prominent figures who endorse depopulation agendas.


Some of these include, name but a few.

Ted Turner, CNN founder and donor to United Nations’ population control programs of more than a billion dollars, stated his advocacy:

“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”

The basis of depopulation is unfounded, based on nothing but opinion and conjecture, yet it is a common theme that continuously repeats itself throughout the agendas at the highest levels of political and social structures.

The January 26 piece, entitled "Scientists - 'Look, One-Third Of The Human Race Has to Die for Civilization to Be Sustainable, So How Do We Want to Do This?" reads in part:

Saying there’s no way around it at this point, a coalition of scientists announced Thursday that one-third of the world population must die to prevent wide-scale depletion of the planet’s resources and that humankind needs to figure out immediately how it wants to go about killing off more than 2 billion members of its species.

[...] “I’m just going to level with you - the earth’s carrying capacity will no longer be able to keep up with population growth, and civilization will end unless large swaths of human beings are killed, so the question is: How do we want to do this?”

Cambridge University ecologist Dr. Edwin Peters said.

“Do we want to give everyone a number and implement a death lottery system? Incinerate the nation’s children? Kill off an entire race of people? Give everyone a shotgun and let them sort it out themselves?”


Keep The World Poisoned Indefinitely!

Eugenicists and the global elite have long advocated for draconian population reductions over the past several centuries.


For example, Thomas Malthus argued that the population growth, by the poor, inevitably outstrips food production and leads to a massive retaliation from Mother Nature (i.e., Malthusian Controls).


His infamous “Malthusian Controls” which are taught to every first year sociology student, has become a cornerstone belief for many modern day globalists who advocate population control by any means necessary.


This radical and dangerous idea promotes the unproven notion that the poor deserve to die because there are too many of them for the Earth to adequately support.


Malthus believed that higher wages and welfare should be withheld from the great unwashed because he believed that these two factors would allow the poor to survive and exponentially breed, thus compounding the overpopulation problem.

Under the guise of population control, and through the precise science of incrementalism, eugenics has been able to passively and globally achieve its goal with little or no physical force to the masses.


Step by step, simply through the process of,

  • introducing junk science

  • political manipulation

  • compartmentalization of public officials,

...we have witnessed the gradual advancement of,

It is the perfect plan to destroy human health, create zero population growth and reap the profits in the process.



Why Overpopulation is a Myth

Overpopulation is a radical and dangerous myth promoted by elite and international societies.


The unproven notion, as Malthus believed, that higher wages and welfare should be withheld from the great unwashed because he believed that these two factors would allow the poor to survive and exponentially breed, thus compounding the overpopulation problem.





Overpopulation is a misnomer, a problem that exists only in dramatically erroneous theories that are not mathematically based and it is simply one of the most flawed concepts right up there with global warming.

Overpopulation theories are based on myths not science or accurate statistical correlations or causation principle. These myths are radical and dangerous in nature to the human species and are currently aggressively promoted by elite and international societies.

Overpopulation cannot exist in a close system designed to maintain homeostatic balance.


This is what Mother Earth does for us. She balances our entire planet with all the resources required to maintain the status quo. Should that population exceed the necessary resources, the earth will naturally purge as all macro-ecosystems do.

Peak populations, peak resources, peak oil, peak food, peak water are all invented fabrications by world governments who are always trying to convince the masses that we are running out of something and need to do something to correct it. This is simply not true, never has been and never will be.

When it comes to human or non-human studies, not one ethological population study nor cross-cultural or ethnographic data on more universal patterns has ever successfully used comparators to establish overpopulation theories as fact, especially considering the unique nature of human culture.


Instead, western social ‘folk’ assumptions about what constituted population problems are often based on resource justifications reflecting cultural ideas about what population growth really is and how it evolves.

"Overpopulation panic" seems to overlook issues such as inequality and bad infrastructure as the real problems, and it sees people as just consumers and not producers.


There are actually many reasons to celebrate 7 billion. This milestone proves how ingenious we are, that we're better at keeping more people alive longer now than ever before, and we have more brains to create and develop more useful technologies and innovations to accommodate a growing population. Yes, there are still problems of starvation and lower standards of living for many on the planet, but neither history nor mathematical logic bears out the conclusion that population pessimists reached of resource scarcity.


Where there are these problems, we need to go about creating more for everyone rather than curbing our numbers. In the Victorian times, the world's population was a small fraction of what it is now, yet there was still poverty.


What changed and improved our lives in the West was not going down from 1 billion to less, but improving sanitation infrastructure, healthcare, our general standards of living, and taking advantage of scientific breakthroughs.


We should see humanity as a solution and not the problem.

The extent to which the junk science which serves as the basis for overpopulation theories and especially peak resources concepts are held captive by government ideologies (biases) and ethnocentrism especially with regard to the culturally perceived relationships of monetary systems cannot be overstated.


Simply put,

people are not the problem, but our systems of government and democracy are.

The earth recycles itself every X thousands of years and human intervention has never been needed.


We have always survived and always will.