10 billion people for dinner | Nina Fedoroff | TEDxCERN


Translator: Denise RQ
Reviewer: Lena Clemente I’m here today to challenge the way we think
about food and civilization. We live in a mobile, highly-technological,
largely urban civilization; our food markets
are bursting with produce. We have an amazing global system that brings food from all over the world
to those who can buy it; and there’s the rub:
to those who can buy it. In 2008, the food prices spiked and food riots broke out
in 30 countries; governments fell. At the time, I was working
as the science advisor to the US Secretary of State,
then, Condoleezza Rice. She asked me to organize a high-level meeting
on this food price crisis. Secretary of Defense Bob Gates was there;
he understood the implications. In the ensuing years,
food prices moderated, then spiked again,
and the Arab Spring began. (Video starts) (Moderator)
Angry protesters burning tires, blocking roads, and attacking
the police with fireworks in the Algerian capital. They are protesting over the rise in food prices
and unemployment. (Arabic) We do not accept
this government because we’ve been suffering
for ten years and ten more years are coming,
and nothing will have changed. (Moderator) Anti riot squads deployed in many Algerian cities as a simmering anger
threatens massive protest in the oil and gas-rich
North African country. (Rioters) The government
is humiliating us, they’re raising the price of sugar. We have to pay the rent, the electricity, water,
sugar,and oil; we’re all poor. (Video ends) Nina Fedoroff: You all know
how that came out; and if you think
that’s a coincidence, watch this: the red lines mark when, and the flags mark
where food riots happen – a scary thought. Can the stability of governments,
indeed civilizations, ride on food? Let’s go back for a moment
and look at how civilizations started. For most of our history,
we were hunter-gatherers. We spent our days
gathering and capturing food. Then, about 10 or 20,000 years ago, we began to adapt plants and animals
better to our own deeds, and settle down to grow and herd them. That, of course, is called agriculture, and it allowed us to feed
more than ourselves and our families. We could feed scribes,
artisans, warriors, and kings. These are scenes
from a 3,000-year-old Egyptian tomb. Cities and civilizations flourished. What I’m saying is simply this:
all of human civilization emerged because we figured out
how to produce surplus food. For millennia,
civilizations rose and fell, lasting largely until the land wore out or until the neighbors invaded
having worn out their own. Even at the turn of the 18th century, Thomas Malthus told us that we were doomed to hunger and strife because our numbers inevitably grew faster
than our ability to produce food. If Malthus thought the game was over when we were just a billion people
on the face of the earth, how did we get to today’s seven billion? It was just about the time Malthus was penning his gloomy predictions that science began
to enter agriculture in earnest. Over the next two centuries, three key innovations
transformed agriculture. These were: synthetic fertilizer, genetics, and the internal
combustion engine. These three innovations set in motion
the most profound changes in human civilization ever. Plants do something quite extraordinary: they make sugar out of water, in thin air; well across the carbon dioxide in the air. We also need nitrogen, but most plants can’t use
atmospheric nitrogen. Manure contains nitrogen
in the right kinds of compounds, and of course, it’s been used
since time immemorial to fertilize crops. The problem is there
isn’t much nitrogen in manure so it takes a lot of it
to fertilize crops, and of course, you have to feed
the animals that produce the manure. About a century ago, Fritz Haber
and Carl Bosch figured out how to convert nitrogen in the atmosphere
to compounds plants can use. That’s done in huge plants
all around the world today. And then, there’s genetics. This is Nobel laureate Norman Borlaug,
the father of the Green Revolution that put the countries, the populace,
and famine-plagued Asian countries on the road out of poverty. What you might not know is that the Green Revolution
was based on mutations, genetic changes that allowed plants
to use fertilizer, nitrogen fertilizer, more efficiently,
doubling and tripling yields. Genetic modification, GM;
today, we vilify that – I’ll get back to that. Then there’s
the internal combustion engine: for most of human history, agriculture was back-breaking work
and occupied most people. The populace remained largely agrarian
even in developed countries, well into the 20th century. As machines gradually took over the task, it requires fewer and fewer people
to produce more and more food; people flow to cities, cities became
hotbeds of innovation and collaboration; technology-driven
wealth generation accelerated giving us all the machines, the gadgets,
and the comforts of modern life, even the Internet and even Twitter. What does the future hold? Was Malthus just plain wrong
because he didn’t figure out science? Are there limits to how much, how many people
the plant can provision? Will climate change help or harm? Let’s look at some trends. Population growth is slowing, but it’s not likely to stop
much short of 10 billion; probably will go higher. As technology powers country
after country out of poverty, people want to eat more meat; transitioning from a grain-based diet
to a meat-based diet requires more grain; growing more grain requires more land,
but there isn’t any more. In fact, we’re losing it faster to urbanization, salinization,
and desertification than we’re adding it. If we don’t do something different, we’ll be back to Malthus in our lifetime; well, maybe not mine,
but certainly yours and your children’s. Then there’s climate change. Our major food and feed crops
grow best at about the temperatures that you and I find comfortable. Let me draw your attention
to this very hot summer of 2003 many of you experienced it. It was only three degrees
above average for the last century, but crop yields declined by about 30%; think about that – that’s going to be
an average summer in a few decades, and a cool summer
by the end of the century. Then there’s water – the most productive agriculture
is irrigated agriculture, and the most reliable water
comes from deep underground, indeed, from fossil aquifers. These are being exhausted faster
and faster the world around. Not good trends; I think that our past successes
in our bursting food markets have led a lot of city folks into thinking
Malthus is ancient history; but Norman Borlaug knew otherwise. In his Nobel Prize speech, he said, “We may be at high tide now,
but ebb tide could soon set in if we become complacent
and relax our efforts,” and that’s just what we’ve done. We’ve contracted our investments
in agricultural research leaving the job primarily
to big agribusiness companies, and then we berated them
– think Monsanto. We’ve taken to the notion of organic food
because it’s more natural; don’t be seduced – the primary tenant
of organic farming is a prohibition on the use of synthetic fertilizer,
but manure alone can’t do the job; if we, the entire world,
went organic tomorrow, we could probably feed
half of our current population. So can we feed 10 billion people? I think we can, but we have
to think and act differently. Agriculture is a complex system
of water, energy, chemical nutrients, environment, of course, people; we have to optimize that system as a whole and make it more sustainable. Very easy to say, hard to do. Let me give you some specifics: we need to increase the yield on the land we already farm
using less water. One contribution of many
is moving high-value crops indoors. This is a very modern greenhouse
in Southern California; tomatoes are growing
on strings straight up producing five to ten times as much this
they produce in open fields, as much as 100 kilograms
per square meter per year using a tenth as much water. We can build greenhouses
in cities on rooftops, and even in the desert
with a bit of tweaking, but we won’t grow our grain under glass. Today, farmers distribute a hundred million tons
of chemical fertilizer on their fields each year. Much of it runs off to pollute
our waterways, killing them; figuring out how to deliver the nutrients
precisely when they are needed, exactly where they’re needed
is one of the challenges of the future. Here’s one system, is called fertigation, and you can see the nutrients in the water
go directly to the roots underground, but there’s much more to be done. Then there’s insecticides – we use about a billion pounds
a year globally, to kill pests like this corn earworm,
but they also kill beneficial insects. Rachel Carson, author of “Silent Spring”
that ignited the environmental movement dreamed of a time that we could do this biologically
rather than with toxic chemicals. Now we can: take this corn
– is called BT corn. similar to any other corn
except it has one extra gene in it, taken from a safe bacterium
used as a pesticide by organic farmers and put directly
into the genome of the plant. This is modern genetic modification, GM: the plant produces the bacterial protein, and it affects only the insects
that munch on the plant; insecticide use has gone down
a lot, worldwide, with the use of these plants,
with these crops, beneficial insects flourish,
and farmers’ prices come down; but there’s much, much more
that can be done. We can look forward to crops
that withstand drought, that use nitrogen more efficiently,
that tolerate heat, and they are frankly,
more nutritious for us, but contemporary
genetically modified crops are the only ones
that have gotten the GMO moniker, and that’s a fearful word. Google it, and you’ll be astounded: GMOs have been blamed
for farmer suicides in India, tumors in rats,
and every manner of human ill from autism to obesity
to infertility and cancer. Scary – fortunately, none of it is true. Indeed, after 25 years
of government research, the EU published a report, basically
summarizing the 25 years of research costing upwards of 300 million euros by saying very simply the modification
of plants by GM techniques is no more dangerous than modification
of plants by other techniques. But the GMO wars rage on
fueled by electronic gossip, by organizations
that exploit GM fears for profit; fears sell better than facts. Important work on GM crops
has been destroyed the world around like work on this golden rice,
vitamin-A-enriched rice; I myself have been picketed, verbally abused,
subject to endless hate email, and even narrowly escaped physical attack, all because I keep trying to explain the science and the sense
behind this amazing revolution. We are approaching a tipping point; we expect 10 billion people for dinner
in the not-too-distant future. How we meet their demands for food
will again reshape civilization; will we continue to ignore facts
and cling to fear-based belief systems with the glowing embers
of poverty-based social instability flare into
civilization- consuming conflagrations? Or will we be able to develop, test,
and actually use new technologies? Will we be able to realize
the knowledge civilizations to which we all aspire? Will we have the wisdom to invest in the scientific
and technological innovations that can give everyone a livelihood,
a seat at the table, and enough to eat? I believe we can. Will we? I don’t know. Thank you. (Applause)

About the author

Comments

  1. Arturo – It is unfortunately typical of organic supporters that if they cannot dispute something that does not fit their ideology, they dismiss it as propaganda or something paid for by large corporations. If it's wrong, then tell us WHY it's wrong. 

  2. Nina Fedoroff poses the most important question faced by contemporary society: will we?  I hope so!  Dr. Fedoroff eloquently describes the problem and lays solutions before us.  Will we take them up?  This is one of the best  TEDx talks I have ever viewed.  

  3. 1. Although its true that the Arab spring was linked to increased food prices, its interesting that the biased biotech advocate (with plenty of conflicts of interest) forgets to mention the profound influence of speculation as a cause of food prices. 2) GMOs are used for biofuel and livestock feed, but doesn't actually feed people. Meat eating isn't inevitable, and in fact should be discouraged because it has been linked to pollution as well as human disease. Vegetarian diets are definitively linked with reductions in cardiovascular disease. 3) Monsanto is vilified with good reason– it is an unethical parasitic corporation, this corporate creep defends. 4) Anyone who conflates genetic modification through selective breeding, seed sharing by farmers locally with genetic engineering and IPs, benefiting people like her, is lying to you. Genetic engineering is profoundly radically different–imposition of crops from the top down, crop in a box which can't possibly be optimized for local agronomic conditions. Now, having wasted 11 minutes of my life that aren't ever coming back, I am done listening to this perfect example of scum rising to the top, as the old adage goes. I am sure that the remaining 6 minutes are just more self-serving distortions and outright lies. 

  4. I found this talk totally wrong and biased. If you want to inform yoursef from another point of view have a look to this letter signed by 800 scientist explaining the bad side of GMO: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/list.php

  5. Interesting talk, and bringing us back to the roots of breeding: modifying the genome of organisms to get better characteristics for human or animal usage.  Flower colors, gluten content, nitrogen absorption, disease resistance were all traits selected for by use of radiation, colchicine application, selection on long term.  Now, fast forwarding with the usage of the science of our time, genomics! Will we have the wisdom to continue investing in this area of science?  Will we stop because of scaremongering?  

  6. Not sure how I should feel about someone trying to link food prices to riots by showing a simple graph which assumes the outcome for that is a causation as opposed to a correlation. 

  7. some background on Nina Fedoroff: http://www.panna.org/blog/engineering-food-whom This leaves me seriously questioning her FUD driven talk which was not at all presented in a scientifically objective way.

  8. I hope the Luddites who scare others with doom messages about GMOs will go away, like earlier Luddites who warned gas-lamp users of the dangers of electricity, or horse and buggy users who warned of the dangers of car engines.  History is on the side of science and technology, almost tautologically so, because science has always been able to correct technological sloppiness.

  9. What phony fake scholars. Why do these elitists have any credibility at all? She talks about Malthus, but conveniently leaves out, that Thomas Malthus was a clergyman, so his stupid population theories or reckless conjecture, were technically heresy, especially if he did not renounce his religious beliefs. Malthus was against birth control, due to his religious belief. According to Malthus, the "temporary unhappiness of abstinence" was the only moral means to control human fertility. Do those phony know-little scholars, tell you that? No? Why not? It certainly seems relevant.

    The stupid scholarly pagans, pretend that God does not exist, and then proceed to rewrite most all of our stories and history, to pretend that humans and the world exists for not much any real reason, according to their false theory/religion of evolution/atheism.

    Do not believe their anti-population lies, bases largely upon Nazi eugenics and racism, for they are based upon a fake and false pagan worldview, that really does not make much sense. And why is it, that those elitists most worried about "overpopulation" seem to be the filthy rich people who have plenty of money to fill their bellies with food that they can buy? While the poor who supposedly have just "too many" babies still believe that children are wondrous blessings of God. How is it not at least somewhat apparent, that this world was designed for, and even rigged to support a growing world population, because God loves the people who he created in his image.

  10. BT Corn has already caused resistance in the worm it is supposed to kill, leading to the use of new and more pesticides. I detest the willful blindness of these so called experts.
    There are only two ways- with nature- against nature. We won't figure this out I suspect.

  11. Equating the rise of the environmental movement with perhaps the nastiest company in the world and one of its' most insidious products would be laughable if it didn't trick so many people and cloud the truth. Monsanto- BT corn. These elitists live in bubbles of wealthy justification.

  12. Genetic Mods are her speciality, her business- she is biased and it seems she's in Monsanto's pocket as well. I was a TV journalist back when VNR's were legal, now they are not. They seem like news but were paid for by companies and there was always some "plug" for their product. This "talk" has at least 4 "plugs" for monsanto.

    http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2015/09/monsanto-professors-gmo-PR

  13. Malthus and this woman are wrong, with good intentions.  Food grows people, we are growing more food because it is a commodity for profit $$$, therefore increasing the human population and causing extinction of 200 other species a day.  We cant win the food race, producing even more food will just increase the population more.  We wouldn't have starving people to begin with if we didn't go in and artificially increase the carrying capacity of an area making people ($$$) dependant on and work harder and cheaply for more food.  There were few starving before intensive agriculture.  Daniel Quinn (author of Ishmael) and many others tried to spread this message more than 20 years ago, it seems to be catching on more and more lately tho.  The sooner we realize this, the less starving people and population problems there will be in the future.

  14. I vote for population control as sure thing vs tech innovation (maybe) in agriculture as Russian roulette?

  15. Hey guys, The best success that I have ever had was with Marks magic method (i found it on google) Without a doubt the most useful diet that I have ever tried.

  16. A long drawn out harangue about the history of animal husbandry, agrarian society, and a lot of other unnecessary bullshit. What we want to know is Zika? Did it come out of her asshole after an orgy with big black dicks or John Holmes huge white cocks?

  17. Just as not all GMO's are bad; not all GMO's are good. My gripe is that Multi National Corporations are required by law to enrich their share holders at all costs. It's the law. Without government oversight, (and quite frankly, legalized bribery in the form of lobbying) you get a alarming rises in gluten and lactose intolerance (to name only two) to foods that the human race has eaten safely for tens of thousands of years. That is curious, intolerable and unlikely to change as long a profit is the only guiding force.

  18. All is good until the corporations own food production. Allowing patents on food is wrong, but she never talked about that.
    This is GMO's propaganda, try to think deeper.

  19. Build green house sky scrapers that holds different stories of fruits and vegetables. You can do this in every city, town in the US. That will create more jobs and fresh organic fruits, veggies, rice, and other things we might need for our communitys. Don't need alot of land if your building up

  20. When Nina Fedoroff says, None of the reported problems with GMS are true. She is either lying or so totally misinformed as to eliminate any good or true comments she make about increasing crop yields through science, GMOs. The facts are these, big Agra Has bullied, anyone who stands up to them. Fack, Big Agra has sued out of business any farmer who dare refuse to use their seeds or their fertilizers, pesticides their herbicides or even sell the products grown on these farmers land to pre determined markets, with approved harvesting equipment, paid fort by the farmer himself. Well if Only One of these claims were true, and I assure you many more than these listed are true indeed. Big Agra Is Big Organised Crime…

  21. I think a more sure fire way is just do not hit 10 billion. Instead air drop millions of tons of condoms (With manuals) over all 3rd world countries.

  22. The green revolution was to produce more food and end world hunger. Why is there a higher percentage of hungry people in Africa now? How come urban gardens today can produce 4 to 11 times as much food on a yield per acre basis than chemical farms without the use of chemicals? Before the farms produced decent crops without any chemicals  but now crops can't be raised on them without massive doses of synthetic chemicals? The soil life has been depleted and much of the beneficial insects as well. Why didn't you bring those things up? 

    You say farmers apply a 100,000.000 on their fields each year much of it runs off polluting  our lakes and streams killing them. You did not mention The dead spots they created in the oceans. Nor did you mention that it is an result of the green revolution you admire. you also forgot to mention the farmers do it because the green revolution has destroyed the soils. Yet you advocate the use of more of these poisons.

    You show a government report that GMOs are as safe. But ignore the fact that 800 scientist concerned about the safety of GMOs asked governments for a ban on GMOs until further testing can be done. These are scientists are not conspiracy freaks. Governments are known to twist things and ignore anything that does not support there goals just like you have

  23. Each country needs to feed their own people …if they can't then they die…..we can't worry about the whole planet.

  24. "Food. Over 56 billion farmed animals are killed every year by humans."
    That's how many are killed. How many animals are sustained using the grain, land and water which humans could use more practically ???

  25. So you find a way to feed 10 Billion people. Then what? Next day there is 11 billion, and by midnight on that same day 12 billion.
    No. We must not allow the population to grow. We must bring it down to 2 billion and never allow it to get larger again.

  26. No need for organic foods to be labelled to tell you when they are breed with radiation induced mutagenesis, only gmo technology crops and any products that sources any ingredient derived form a gmo technology crops, and that's for the right to know, right?

  27. No honey, u DON'T hv to worry about 10 billion people for dinner, But u NEED to worry about 10 billion people FLOATING around u! 😊

  28. BS, a total boldface lie!…
    R. Buxminster Fuller (see ref below) disproved this lie mathematically in the 1970's! He correctly calculated that everyone on the face of the Earth could step into the office space of New York City as though at a party, leaving the Earth bare of humans. He worked this when the population was about half of what it is today. So if you added in the office space of say Tokyo today you could prove the same thing, that there is no over population when you compare people to land mass…
    Note: The real population problem is poor leadership, and corrupt mismanagement of our resources.

    Reference:
    "Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth." Mass Market Paperback , 1968, R. Buckminster Fuller
    Buxminster Fuller, (1895–1983) architect, engineer, geometrician, philosopher, futurist, inventor of the famous geodesic dome..

  29. 1 non vegetarian human consume natural resources of 10 vegetarian .world human population should be brought down and stabilise at 2 billion with all vegetarian so that world will have environment a century ago clean of all toxic in air ,water, and land . Also restoring population of endangered species like elephant , tiger, panda and other. Sustainable devlopment free of climate change is the challenge for human race

  30. The food riots had nothing to do with population. The riots were caused by governments- corrupt, despotic governments.

  31. If we see large picture, it is very important….people , governments won't realize until they face real issues …she is intellectual. Predicting future …I really appreciate her efforts. Thank you madem.

  32. Stalin knew how that by controling food he could reward compliance or punish discent by starving them. What is worrying is that via the UN the control of not just food but also water, energy, all consumption. If you do some research you will realize there are declining birthrates in many countries and not an exponential rise in global population.

  33. The collapse of grain production and traded foodstuffs following on -now – rapid non-linear climate change and water loss will terminate the lives of most the 10.8 billion slated for 2100. Malthus is proven right daily.

  34. im from a poor parents of greece,even that im 46 years old without children,and i have traveled to 8 countries,i make vacation to more than 20 islands,i mooved to 6 differents places of greece,and i had life there,i met more than one hundrend woman in my life,and i wondered if i had all this of experience in my life,if i had children,also maybe is a good idea to start to accept the different style of lifes,the clobal system teach still now the stereotypes,be a good family man ,be a good worker,maybe if we start to teach the people that life without children is really more exciting,andventurie,with no so many obligation and ets………

  35. 10:35 I disagree – we need to go organic and sustainable and reduce the world population to about 2 Billion people or less – we could do it in 1 generation – we need to leave some room for other species – change our culture of eternal growth to eternal sustainability and health of the planet – educate and empower women and make birth control available, support families who decide to be child-free, make one a good number – think of the incredible gift we have been given and do not destroy it with thoughtless procreation – we can be better than that

  36. 13:25 "and it affects only the insects that much on the plants" – can you think of another creature that munches on that corn? Also: "harmless bacteria"? In its original form perhaps but you have no idea what a plant that has been spliced with its genes will do. It's kind of ironic that she says GMO opposition is from people who benefit from opposing it. How about world dominance of our food supply through patents on all major crop seeds by Monsanto and others? Jeesh!

  37. GMO’s don’t affect everyone the same way. Just like not everyone has a peanut allergy, some people cannot handle genetically modified crops. So, saying there is no bad effect is naive.

  38. She started off with fear based facts. She left out the fear based facts concerning GMOs, like the whole genetically modified crop could be wiped out by one natural genetic mutation. I suppose the harder pitch would be that GMOs can provide a better quality of life for most people while shortening their life span, effectively reducing the population to a sustainable level. (except for rich people that can afford the best organic food)

  39. I love the thought of a world with 10 million people with all the wealth belonging to about 100,000 of them and no decent jobs for anyone else because of automation.
    Never mind feeding more – we need to be breeding less.
    I'm really glad I wasn't selfish enough to bring children into this world – I don't think it's going to be much of a life going forward.

  40. I am 100% for pop control. I work in an industry where I see families keeping their loved ones artificially alive. I'm not talking brain dead. They're fully alive but have to spend their days in wheelchairs and beds, hooked up to dialysis machines while being taken care of by nurses and doctors. I get they're loved ones, but how precious are our resources that we spend them carelessly on those who plainly just exist anymore? I know we get into the whole "who are you to decide who's worth life" but there has to be a line. Our world will hit capacity in 60 years give or take. We need to stop having large families, adopt more often, and set parameters on the worth of life. Science isn't going to save our world. The hard choices will.

  41. Mrs. Federoff is a very eloquent speaker. I admire how she leads the audience through her thoughts. But I am worried. I am not a specialist and have not her knowledge about genetic engineering. But its felt like she only shows one, not very objective point of view. I will definitely research a bit until I build my opinion. Because she only offers one solution.

  42. Yes all the techniques she describes buy us more time. But she, like everyone else, ignored the baseline problem. Population. It's all well and good to make things a little more efficient, but that doesn't address the problem. You yourself said "10 billion people for dinner" and even admitted that as the countries they live in develop, they will use more resources. So lets say we do make more food, more efficiently. At the same time, 3rd world countries become 2nd world, and 2nd world ones rise to 1st world. Meaning we aren't increasing consumption on a flat curve by 3 billion people. We are increasing on an exponential curve where those 3 billion people represent more accurately another 5-7 billion people in terms of total consumption. More food is good, less people is WAYYYYY better.

  43. 13:21 so this speech is not only supporting GMO foods but telling us that we've been ingesting them for some time now without realizing regardless of our diet. The seeds you buy at the store are probably from the same plants.

  44. Great. We'll get to where we can comfortably feed 10 billion people. The next question we'll be asking is…

    …how do we feed 20 billion?

  45. Population grow it is a very serious problem in Asia .
    Eventually we will need to close the continental borders.
    Europe it is closing its border
    The Americans continent should download the same.
    The American continent population should first take care of their own population . north and south of the continent .

  46. Overpopulation it is a problems softly in Asia .
    That is why China grow it is going to be a problem . once Chinese people her the money . they go around the world to buy the food AND land and naturally resisted at the expense of the local population's.
    If climate change becomes real
    Asian ate going to invade the rest of the world.

  47. The American continent it is not overpopulated. Why politicians are afraid to point where the real overpopulated countries are.
    Let's close the borders of the American continent north and south and we can do fine.

  48. we need to build the death star. there is no other way. we must leave the earth and create mobile planets and we must explore the galaxy and devour everything in site to survive.

    no animal stays in the egg it was born in and now its time to leave the planet we call home.

  49. SIMPLE SOLUTION
    THE THIRD WORLD IS OVER BREEDING FIRST WORLD ISNT

    STOP SENDING THE THIRD WORLD FOOD AND CLOSE THE BORDERS
    NATURE WILL TAKE CARE OF THE REST WE DONT HAVE TO SHOOT OR BOMB ANY ONE!

  50. breeders would gladly consign childfree and elderly to euthanasia just so they can get busy and drop calfs.

  51. malthus wasn't wrong, merely delayed. Rwanda was the first malthusian breakdown we have witnessed but no one wants to admit it.

  52. What is the point of making more food available so that the population can continue to explode? There is an inflation of human beings already devalued individual worth due to 9 billion people poisoning the planet. We are all locusts. Stop the food, stop the medicines, bring on global warming, kill off all the insects that pollinate, bring on the world wars, bring on the economic collapse, kill me if you have to, but save the planet.

  53. GMO's with the genetic pesticide produced by the plant itself causes cancer and other horrible side effects! Awsome!

  54. The only time people start whining, is when there's no more beer, spirits, alcohol or, no more drugs of any kind, by then? too late

  55. Let's start with tax benefits for people without children. Most socialists still seem to have that one wrong.

  56. PLEASE PLEASE Give this talk to a bunch of Muslims in the mid East and Catholics in south and Central America and the East Asians and especially India.

  57. I can teach my CAT to defecate in a flushable toilet in 7 days…….. India would have clean water if they CARED to defecate in latrines……… Africa needed $855 MIL from Canadian taxpayers to provide SIGNAGE asking them NOT to defecate on beaches.   SEEMS A PROBLEM TEACHING 3rd WORLD'S NOT TO S**T IN THEIR OWN DRINKING WATER.   And you WANT them to multiply?????  This woman has no hands on…..  feed your own, clothe your own and educate your own.  Soon brains wake up,  NO WELFARE is the answer.

  58. Scientific community: largely silent outside of a few low key conferences. You are COWARDS. You are afraid of religious backlash. It is time to call out the scientific community for what they are: FREAKIN’ COWARDS. You stand up there and preach to the choir instead of bringing the word to those that matter.
    COWARDS!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *