Bill Gates – ‘We Can Lower the Population Through Vaccines’

Posted by phunkychic666 on March 2, 2010

Two short excerpts from a recently filmed TED presentation (Feb 2010) by none other than Bill “Microsoft” Gates.

At the heart of Gates’ address lies the central Global Warming dogma, which dictates that Co2 emitted by human beings are the primary culprit for the unwanted heating of the globe. Since this artificial alleged human-induced heating effect allegedly stands to devastate the planet if left unabated, Global Warming dogma proponents therefore argue that human Co2 emissions must be drastically reduced. As Gates casually addresses the issue, he goes on to state that one way to accomplish this goal is to reduce the global human population.

He postulates the central equation, giving an estimation of the humanly emitted C02 load per year, to be:

Co2 = P times S times E times C

Where P stands for the population number, S the average number of services per person, E the average amount of energy units per service, and C the average Co2 emitted load per unit of service, per year; Co2 stands for the projected total humanly emitted carbon-dioxide load by the entire population per year.

In the first clip you will hear him state in plain language that he considers VACCINES to be desirable to bring down the population number P and so reduce Co2. You will also casually hear him promoting HEALTH CARE and REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES, to accomplish that same C02 reducing goal.

Here are Bill Gates’ verbatim words:
“The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”

Hence Gates shows to consider vaccines desirable for the purpose of curbing population numbers. What kind of properties can thus reasonably be deduced, vaccines are to have according to Gates? Basically all the properties that impede people to either have children, or rear them. In other words, Gates implicitly advocates a definition of his favorite kind of vaccine to be able to induce infertility, sterility and (early onset) senility (autism) alike. Note that Gates does not mention a word on the much touted purported intention of vaccines: to offer protection against relevant diseases and therefore as such, precisely prolong life. Quite the humanitarian huh?

In the second excerpt you hear Gates explain what he considers to be the single most important thing that he would choose to see become a reality in the future time span of 50 years. He again confirms his “love” for the vaccine.

Posted in: Bill Gates, Global Warming, Microsoft, Population Control, Vaccines, Video

Eclipse_Now

Tell me you did NOT just say the world has been cooling since 1998. Ha ha ha! oh now you're really embarrassing yourself.

Please do some reading around and get to know what your fellow climate DENIALISTS are saying, because even they are starting to back down on this one my poor deluded Denialist friend.

This old myth is one of the top 26 climate sceptic myths debunked by the May 2007 New Scientist article. It's not just totally retarded, but it's getting a bit tired now.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11462

1. Why does NASA show 2005 as HOTTER than 1998, and 2007 as drawn with it?
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2005/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y15UGhhRd6M

2. Sure the MET dataset shows cooling since 1998 but why do they still accept global warming? Oh, I know, they actually look at the longer term *climate* trends rather than just narrowing in on the short term Southern Oscillation index trends.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffi...

3. El Nino is returning in 2009. When one of the next few years breaks all previous temperature records, will you then admit you were wrong? Or will you wait until after the El Nino for the inevitable La Nina cooling, narrow your data in to the 3 or 4 years of cooling, and shout “WILL YOU JUST LOOK at all the COOLING since 2011!” (The sceptic equivalent of “Look, big shiny thing over there!”). One wonders whether the denialists will be so stupid as to be taken in by this tactic again.

I could make ANY story I want from the temperature record by choosing short enough trends. When are you going to look at the *15 and 20 year trends* instead of cherry-picking those *few* years that show the conclusions you want?

4. This argument is so dangerous to the cause of sceptics that even fellow sceptics are starting to warn against using it.

At the 2009 Heartland Institute conference (of global warming sceptics), well known climate denialist Dr Patrick J Michaels explained that El Nino and La Nina cycles can, in the short term at least, disguise the longer term trends and concluded:

“Make an argument that you can get killed on and you will kill us all…
If you loose credibility on this issue you lose this issue!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwnrpwctIh4

Oopps, I think you just killed Denialism.
FergalR

There is no vaccine for malaria. The population is set to go into decline because the rulers of this world are eugenicists. Don't call me darling you effing shirt-lifter shill.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Wrenja-Czaczkes/100000276829636 Wrenja Czaczkes

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
http://www.facebook.com/people/Wrenja-Czaczkes/100000276829636 Wrenja Czaczkes

marry me plz <3
valerie

he's not talking about sterlization with vaccines…you're taking it out of context.
danya

FeargalR…your comment is the truest statement on this board.
Talk about full of shill's and trolls, it's amazing how many come out of their holes to defend
baby killer Gates, and the Global Warming Sustainability Scam.
They need to read “The first global revolution” by the club of rome. It discusses how they were looking for a common enemy to make man the enemy and decided that “global warming and the like would fit the bill”. Their words, not mine.
The gates foundation is a sinister eugenicist tool, and to all you who don't think so, pull your head out of your arse and wake up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU_AZ–tg7Y

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/65628/Secre...

http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=8514
FergalR

You fuckwit. Why does NASA show 2005 as warmer? Because James Fucking Hansen – the originator of the scam – is the head of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies that does the temperature data tampering. Look at the satellite thermometer readings. They have the only trustworthy data and 30 years worth now. You're right about there being an strong El Nino right now. And it's still fucking colder than 1998. How the fuck can global warming make temperatures fall? It can't. It's a scam.

I hope the ghosts of those who died in the Holocaust haunt you for denigrating their suffering by using that word.

ExxonMobil is giving $100 million to Stanford University's Global Climate and Energy Project. The disgraced Climatic Research Unit in the UK was funded by British Petroleum and Dutch Royal Shell. Big oil funds climate catastrophism.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/13/news/companies/...
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/about/history/

The world isn't fucking warming. The science is not on your side. It's a scam. Open your fucking eyes.
FergalR

Shit, why did I even bother replying to you? You're a cut and paste shill. You're probably a fucking bot.
Eclipse_Now

Answer this simple question: is there one reputable scientific academy, WORLDWIDE, that actively contests the basic physics of Co2 and the Radiative Forcing Equation as the foundations for climate change?

Check out the wiki and all the documentation to verify it: there are a few fossil fuel associations that are NEUTRAL on the issue of global warming, (I wonder why? nudge nudge wink wink) but otherwise there is no scientific academy on the PLANET that actually CONTESTS the basic physics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion...

Mmmmm, very entertaining.

For future reference, when I quote someone I quote them using these things ” …. ” (Called quotation marks), that's not just “cut and paste”, that's called quoting.

Also, you failed to address the point: why are your SCEPTICAL HEROES even warning against using the “Cooling since 1998″ myth?

But please, do just keep swearing at everyone when you have a tanty. Make sure you wear a bib next time, because you're dribbling, but I don't think it will work with your tinfoil hat.

In the meantime, I'll anticipate your argument a few years in the future…

“Remember: There's no global warming because it's been cooling since 2011! It's been COOLING since then, don't you all see? Cooling since 2011 — we've turned a corner folks!! There's nothing to worry about… and the science is ALL on my side…. Mwaha hwa hwa hwaaaaaaaa!!!!”
Eclipse_Now

You people are soooo funny! Look, just because you forgot your meds doesn't mean the rest of us have to waste our lives reading mad bloggers on the internet. I've already wasted enough time here, and I'm not going to make a habit of stooping this low.

Play nice children… turn off your computers, go outside, and meet some *real* people for a change.
danya

Nobody asked you to read or comment on these articles. Talk about projecting your own mental health problems onto other people, I have a life thanks, and three children, and a job, and a happy relationship. I just object to un-elected people and the new priests of the global warming religion dictating highly suspicious data at me. The global warming agenda is a very clever way of wiping out the west forever, no new businesses will be able to afford the upcoming carbon taxes, therefore the business will go to China, India etc as they are “emerging economies” and will be heavily subsidised by the west. Bye bye western economy. Also, who will you be paying your new carbon tax to? Oh let me think…er….the Bankers.
Eclipse_Now

Sorry for projecting stuff onto you but the image you anti-science conspiracy theorists give off doesn't quite “smell right” over the net, if you see what I mean. I don't know you personally, but I know that you think the science behind global warming is really divided, or worse, that EVERY science academy that is FOR global warming is involved in a conspiracy… and that only those science academies that are outright against global warming are being honest.

Here's the thing.

There isn't a scientific academy on the PLANET that recognises the “truth” according to your POV.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion...

As for the various arguments the Denialist hacks have put above… they're tired old arguments that were put to bed years ago. You can see the top 28 climate myths that Denialists push listed here from 2007.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11462

The last decade was the hottest on record. I fully expect the coming decade to be even hotter. The science is extremely complicated, and every single argument the hacks put up is demolished in peer reviewed papers with extremely convincing data.

I find sites like this both boring, because the same moronic and retarded lies are perpetrated again and again and again, interesting, because I'm constantly amazed at the sheer crap people will take on board when they are too confronted and alarmed by reality, and a bit alarming: because those same people vote.

So go ahead and stick your fingers in your ears and chant “Not true, not true”, and click your ruby slippers together 3 times saying “There's no place like global warming”, but we all know the reality. You're just scared.
FergalR

“is there one reputable scientific academy, WORLDWIDE, that actively contests the basic physics of Co2 and the Radiative Forcing Equation as the foundations for climate change?”

YES, YOU COCKSUCKING ASSHOLE, THE INSTITUTE of PHYSICS. TYPING IT IN CAPS DOESN'T MAKE IT ANYMORE TRUE THAN IT IS, WHICH IT IS, BUT CAPS SEEM TO FLOAT YOUR FUCKING BOAT.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm2009...

There HAS been NO. ZERO. ZILCH warming since 1998. THE globe HAS effing COOLED since 1998. UNDERSTAND?! COOLED. There has been no statistically significant warming since 1995. THIS MEANS THE 0.12C WARMING WHICH HAS OCCURRED CAN'T BE DISTINGUISHED FROM NOISE. WE WERE PROMISED 0.2C per DECADE. WE GOT 0.08/DECADE (which may, of course, just be FUCKING NOISE). NOT EVEN FUCKING CLOSE. THEY GO IT FUCKING WRONG. I KNOW YOU SPEAK FUCKING CAPS. UNDERSTAND NOW? COCKGOBBLER.
Eclipse_Now

Hmmm, let's see now. It's a charity, not an academy of science. Learn to tell the difference.

Oh, and the little detail you completely omitted? They no where (that I have seen on the link you refer to) actually contest the *basic physics* of global warming. They are concerned about some of the FOI implications of the CRU research, not the basic science of global warming from the link you provided me with.

Thanks for wasting my time.

Now, I'll try again, in really little words you can understand.

Which scientific *academy* disputes the basic *physics* of global warming?

Oh, and for your information: 2005 beat 1998, and 2007 equalled it, and this year may well beat 2005, and I can't help the fact that you can't explain the obvious fact that the last decade was the hottest on record. I also can't help the fact that climate change is a gradual shift in trends with some chaotic natural variability, whereas you want it to be artificially linear. I'm sorry you can't deal with climate actually having smaller natural variations in the year by year cycle. It must be confusing trying to deal with science that looks at the 10, 100, thousand, and even million year trends for someone as limited as you are to the last 12 years of the temperature range. But hey, that's your choice.

(Cooling since 2011, remember? winks)
alberttheos

Bill Gates is a loving man! How dare you speak against him. He would never hurt a fly. He, in particular, cares so much about the starving children in Africa! Thank you, and I am a moron.
Tuna Ghost

I think (even though no one asked) your ideas re: the UN and eugenics would be taken more seriously if the stated motivations were more fleshed out. “Because they are asshats” hardly explains anyone's actions reliably. This is a reason why a lot of conspiracy theories are dismissed out of hand; motivations are not always expressed clearly or consistently. Greed, for instance, is a motivation for all kinds of horrors, we can all understand that. What does the UN have to gain with a widespread eugenics program?
Lookingglass

The man believed to be the richest person in the world did have a warning though – he fears developed nations may plunder their foreign aid budgets to pay for the cost of tackling climate change.
Mr Gates says this would be a mistake as aid budgets not only save lives, they also improve people’s health and, in turn, that stops population growth – a key reason, he says, for global warming.
“I just want to make sure that that funding doesn’t come by reducing the funds for Aids, drugs or vaccines, which, after all, not only do they save lives but its this improved health that actually gets a country to reduce its population growth,” he said.
“And, in the long run, for all these environmental issues, having a population that’s not growing so rapidly is what will allow us to live on a sustainable basis.
“Climate change is very important, it is an issue money should go to. It just shouldn’t come out of health aid budgets.”
Lookingglass

The man believed to be the richest person in the world did have a warning though – he fears developed nations may plunder their foreign aid budgets to pay for the cost of tackling climate change.
Mr Gates says this would be a mistake as aid budgets not only save lives, they also improve people's health and, in turn, that stops population growth – a key reason, he says, for global warming.
“I just want to make sure that that funding doesn't come by reducing the funds for Aids, drugs or vaccines, which, after all, not only do they save lives but its this improved health that actually gets a country to reduce its population growth,” he said.
“And, in the long run, for all these environmental issues, having a population that's not growing so rapidly is what will allow us to live on a sustainable basis.
“Climate change is very important, it is an issue money should go to. It just shouldn't come out of health aid budgets.”
Anonymous

I am a proud supporter of eugenics. In case anyone was wondering.
Aeveleigh21

Oh my God, I think you are sooo on the button Fergal. I live in Africa. I see the shit going down every day around me. You don’t know anything Eclipse.
Jo

Comparing the population of Chile to Canada is ludicrous, considering the size difference. Also comparing one of the most sexually uninhibited societies with one of the most sexually inhibited societies is ludicrous also. I am still laughing.

Bill Gates – ‘We Can Lower the Population Through Vaccines’

more disinformation

more disinformation