English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2007/20070506180903.aspx

“We are killing our host the planet Earth,” he claimed and called for a population drop to less than 1 billion.

Watson had called humans a disease before and he wasn’t sorry. “I was once severely criticized for describing human beings as being the ‘AIDS of the Earth.’ I make no apologies for that statement,”


Link to original article:

http://www.seashepherd.org/editorials/editorial_070504_1.html

2007-07-19 14:21:21 · 8 answers · asked by Jason A 3 in Politics & Government Politics

From the Al Gore crowd:

“No human community should be larger than 20,000 people and separated from other communities by wilderness areas.” New York, London, Paris, Moscow are all too big. Then again, so are Moose Jaw, Timbuktu and even Annapolis, Md.

2007-07-19 14:25:58 · update #1

8 answers

In the US
Remove all forms of life support after, 20 days regardless of age.
Limit medical intervention based on % of outcome.
Limit medical intervention $$'s to sustain life, family would not have right to object. This was one of Hillary's things in her failed health plan.
Research creation of natural desasters and attept to humanly create a few.

2007-07-20 02:00:11 · answer #1 · answered by bluebird 5 · 0 0

Wow. Humans are the AIDS of the earth?

Well, do a favor Watson and do your part to rid the earth of a disease.

I'll do it after you. Promise. ;)

2007-07-19 14:27:03 · answer #2 · answered by asshat.mcpoop 4 · 0 0

Abortion on demand and sex education programs for 5 year olds.

It will take a while but eventually the goal will be reached.

2007-07-19 14:30:00 · answer #3 · answered by GIVRO 3 · 1 0

Gee and you have people talkin gabout neocons wanting new world order.... I guess Al Gore is more of a neocon than the neocons.

2007-07-19 14:33:11 · answer #4 · answered by sociald 7 · 2 0

I think we are doing a good job with war, and not sending aid to countries that need it. That is what you voted for right?

2007-07-19 14:27:18 · answer #5 · answered by Sam and I 3 · 0 1

Do not try to represent the views of an extreme minority as the views of every environmentalist.

2007-07-19 15:02:16 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

They don't have a clue. There is not even a solid majority of REAL scientists who support the theory of global warming. In fact, 17,000 of them have signed a petition which disputes the data utilized to attempt to prove it. It is a farce.

2007-07-19 14:26:13 · answer #7 · answered by The Real America 4 · 5 2

organized religion always costs many lives.

2007-07-19 14:25:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers