Saving the Planet

A nutball scientist from the University of Texas recently stated that the only thing that can save this planet from doom is a reduction in human population by 90%. He freely stated that he welcomes ebola and the bird flu as catalysts for this change. Ebola and the bird flu, as you may know, are extremely lethal viruses that lead to very painful deaths. Apparently the speech in which the scientist made these views known was very well received by the audience. (I could post forever on this warped view of planet over people that extreme environmentalists are able to justify in their meat deprived minds...but that's a post for another day.)

Whenever I hear something like this, my first reaction is: who decides who gets to live and who dies? Will this professor and his faithful crowd of fanatics be first in line to volunteer to save their planet? Doubtful. The people who are advocates of these points of view automatically assume they will be part of the chosen few who live. But what makes them more valuable than the next person? How can they be sure that loosening ebola and bird flu on the population wouldn't result in their own demise? Would a world populated by these ghouls really be a better place?

Eliminating 90% of the human population would be a tragedy of epic proportions. Unfortunately, there is a segment of the population who would welcome such a mass die-off of the species. These sick individuals, I'm sure, are advocates of some of the legitimized policies of death (abortion, euthanasia, etc.) that kill millions each year. That a lot of blood to have on one's hands, and there's clearly a bloodlust for more. Sad.