On 16 Jan 2021 at 12:43:38 GMT, "Andrew"
wrote:

On 16/01/2021 12:15, newshound wrote:
On 15/01/2021 20:03, Chris Green wrote:
David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

So how come, Covid apart, we are now pretty much all better off and
healthier than we were then.

Who is 'we' ?. There are now a couple of billion extra people who
are neither healthier or better off. The internet has allowed
terrorists and other nutcases to spread their poison more widely
and there are far more displaced people than in the 70's because
of war and poverty.

And it is now impossible for an FTB to get a mortgage to buy a
'doer upper' property and move up the property ladder. Most are now
enforced renters.

I worried quite a lot about what "the experts" were saying in the 60's
and early 70's. But, being a scientist, I am a great believer in data,
and that shows unequivocally that they were wrong. I see no reason to be
equally swayed by current predictions.

They were right about the ozone hole, caused by refridgerants and
aerosol propellants, and also about the destruction of Scandi
pine forests by S02 emissions from UK power stations.

They were wrong about 'beating Cancer', a phrase that was
bandied about back then. The Imperial Cancer Research Fund (as it
was called then) paid £1 million for a miracle new 'cure' called
Beta Interferon (also what it was called back then). Not much came of
it. They didn't even know if what they got for their million quid
was actually what they thought they were getting !.

No-one with any knowledge of the subject has *ever* talked about "curing
cancer" except as a deliberate lie to encourage ignorant people to contribute
money. It is an intrinsically silly idea. Ditto Parkinson's disease and
dementia. No doubt the marketing people would characterise the lie as an
oversimplification.

--
Roger Hayter