It's already too late to save humanity... our mass extinction is inescapable, says prominent scientist... population out of control

Friday, June 19, 2015
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Tags: human extinction, Professor Frank Fenner, population control

---

(NaturalNews) Professor Frank Fenner says humanity is finished. It's already too late to save ourselves from the suicidal future we've created where the ecosystem can no longer support human life. "We're going to become extinct," the scientist says. "Whatever we do now is too late." (SOURCE)

Frank Fenner, now 95 years old, is a fellow of the Australian Academy of Science and of the Royal Society. He's published "hundreds of scientific papers and written or co-written 22 books," says The Australian, which prints these words from an interview with Fenner:

We'll undergo the same fate as the people on Easter Island... Climate change is just at the very beginning ... The human species is likely to go the same way as many of the species that we've seen disappear. Homo sapiens will become extinct, perhaps within 100 years ... It's an irreversible situation. I think it's too late. I try not to express that because people are trying to do something, but they keep putting it off.

The really scary thing is not that Fenner believes humanity is headed for extinction. Rather, the bigger threat to us all is what the globalists might attempt to do in an effort to change course.

Hint: It involves a planet with six billion fewer people than live on it today.

Too many people, not enough food, water and other resources

Fenner's argument is founded on the idea that the population is already too large to stop the mass extinction. It is "unbridled consumption" that's going to lead humanity to inadvertent mass suicide, he says.

Fenner is no Sarah Connor, however. He's not a psych ward patient; he's an esteemed scientist and a world-renowned expert in pox viruses. On the extinction of the human species, he explains "Mitigation would slow things down a bit, but there are too many people here already."

Fascinatingly, Fenner's view may help explain why there is such sudden desperation on the part of globalists to depopulate the planet by eliminating six billion people. As I explained in this Natural News article, even the Pope seems to be on board with radical depopulation as necessary to "save the planet."

The optimists say we should eliminate six billion people

Now here's where this goes Twilight Zone: When it comes to the future of humanity, the pessimists like Fenner say it's already too late. There's nothing we can do to stop the mass extinction, so we might as well not bother trying. Just let the population explode while we all sit back, cash our retirement checks and watch the whole world fall into ruin like Collapsifornia. (No food? No water? No pollinators? No worries! We've got record biotech share prices keeping us in the green!)

It is the optimists who say we might have a chance for a sustainable species if we immediately commit global genocide by killing off six billion people. Yes, you read that correctly: The OPTIMISTS believe we need to murder six billion people as soon as possible in order to have a shot at saving the future of our species.

Mass murder of the majority of humans, in other words, is the GOOD news in these discussions. The bad news is that even these desperate measure might not save us, we're told.

The collision of consumption and depletion

What we're all really witnessing here is the violent collision of two global trends: CONSUMPTION and DEPLETION.

Consumption is what the corporations want everybody to increase. They want more people to buy more stuff, throw away more stuff and replace it with yet even more stuff, some of which you stuff into your own face so that you become diabetic and need to buy more medical stuff. Corporations only profit when people consume, after all, so almost every message that's pushed in our modern society is engineered around an agenda to promote mass consumption for the purpose of boosting corporate profits. (Regardless of what happens to the environment as a result.)

Depletion is what happens when the planet's citizens use up all the finite resources: hydrocarbons (fossil fuels), fresh water (aquifers), topsoil, clear-cutting forests for GMO soybean production, strip-mining rare earth metals to build guilt-supported wind farms for "green" energy, destroying natural marine ecosystems, and so on.

When consumption collides with depletion, guess what happens? Extinction. Easter Island 2.0, in other words, but on a planetary scale. (Read books by Jared Diamond for background on the collapse of civilizations...)

There is no such thing as unlimited growth that's also sustainable

Nearly all the economic models underpinning human civilization are based on the fraudulent concept of limitless growth and expansion. But the very idea is a fraud. Our planet is finite, obviously, or else it would occupy the entire universe (and then some).

Because the Earth is finite, it's resources are also finite at any given moment. While things like fossil fuels and freshwater aquifers can be recharged over time, that time scale vastly exceeds the relatively short window of human time in which they are being exhausted. (A given water aquifer, for example, might be pumped dry by human agriculture in 50 years, while it could take 500 years to recharge.)

The real question is where are we now on the consumption vs. depletion curve?

Nearly everyone in business and industry says there's nothing to worry about. Keep consuming! As Jay Leno used to say when pimping for Doritos, "Eat all you want, we'll make more!"

That's all great until the day the water runs out, the crops shrivel up, the pollinators vanish and the food supply implodes. "As the population keeps growing to seven, eight or nine billion, there will be a lot more wars over food," says Professor Fenner. Along with those wars, we'll also see wars over water, honeybees, seeds and perhaps even atmospheric oxygen.

These wars, Fenner seems convinced, will ultimately be fruitless because even the victors are doomed as the ecological destruction set in motion by shortsighted human beings plays out, devastating the planet's ability to sustain human life. When the ecosystem collapses, after all, the collapse of human life must follow.

The reason Fenner can utter these things, by the way, is because he's long retired. Nobody can threaten to derail his academic career or halt his pension. He's not vying for a Nobel Prize or a coveted professorship at Politically Correct University. So he's uttering what he sees as truthful yet dire: Humanity is already doomed, and "green living" is a cruel joke that won't make any difference at all in the long run, he's convinced.

Let's hope Fenner is wrong. But even if he is, that doesn't mean the power-hungry globalists running our world won't try to murder six billion people anyway... especially if it means, in their minds, "saving humanity's future from ecological collapse."

Michelle Obama, by the way, has just announced that America's school lunch program will start serving free soylent green burgers to everyone!

Solutions? Probably not any that you're willing to actually pursue

With all this in mind, what can YOU do to help reverse humanity's apparent course towards self-extinction?

Forget about all the wimpy "green living tips" you'll find in dumbed-down newsstand magazines. Sorting your trash into three different recycling bins won't make a lick of difference in the long run. And no, your government-mandated low-flush toilet doesn't make you "environmentally conscious." The very fact that you're buying fruit in the winter that's shipped from South America is a total contradiction of core environmental principles. (I always laugh out loud at people juicing celery in January, thinking they're "saving the planet" by eating a plant-based diet trucked in via diesel-guzzling rigs from Mexico. Hilarious...)

If you really want to contribute in a meaningful way to a sustainable world, you need to stop driving a vehicle, stop buying food at the grocery store, abandon the very idea of a green lawn, grow most of your own food and live in a tiny mud hut with no electricity or running water. Eat seasonally-grown foods grown no more than 250 miles from your home, in other words. Otherwise, even the way you eat is a daily assault on the planet.

Have I achieved all this? Not by a long shot. I still eat fresh organic produce grown in Chile. I still drive a gas-guzzling vehicle. I still use electricity produced by coal. But I'm way ahead of most on several fronts, including living 100% on my own rainwater, growing an increasing percentage of my own food, raising my own free-range chickens and experimenting with gravity-fed irrigation systems for long-term food sustainability. I also have long abandoned any accumulation of brand-conscious products, fashion-oriented clothes or anything that isn't in some way practical and useful. (My wardrobe is the most boring collection of grease-stained Wrangler ranch pants you've ever seen.)

Even with that, I wouldn't dare consider my own lifestyle to be "self-sustaining." That's a long ways off. The American Indians lived in a way that's sustainable. But the way you and I both live today is far from it. Anybody who's really "green" wouldn't even be on the internet reading this.