President Obama's "science czar," Paul Holdren, once floated the idea of forced abortions, "compulsory sterilization," and the creation of a "Planetary Regime" that would oversee human population levels and control all natural resources as a means of protecting the planet -- controversial ideas his critics say should have been brought up in his Senate confirmation hearings.
He was confirmed with little fanfare on March 19 as director of the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy, a 50-person directorate that advises the president on scientific affairs, focusing on energy independence and global warming.
But many of Holdren's radical ideas on population control were not brought up at his confirmation hearings; it appears that the senators who scrutinized him had no knowledge of the contents of a textbook he co-authored in 1977, "Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment," a copy of which was obtained by FOXNews.com.
The 1,000-page course book, which was co-written with environmental activists Paul and Anne Ehrlich, discusses and in one passage seems to advocate totalitarian measures to curb population growth, which it says could cause an environmental catastrophe.
The three authors summarize their guiding principle in a single sentence: "To provide a high quality of life for all, there must be fewer people."
Those plans include forcing single women to abort their babies or put them up for adoption; implanting sterilizing capsules in people when they reach puberty; and spiking water reserves and staple foods with a chemical that would make people sterile.
To help achieve those goals, they formulate a "world government scheme" they call the Planetary Regime, which would administer the world's resources and human growth, and they discuss the development of an "armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force" to which nations would surrender part of their sovereignty.
Some of Holdren's views on population came under fire during the otherwise quiet confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, where Sen. David Vitter, R-La., asked him to revisit his past statements about environmental catastrophes that have never come to pass.
Vitter grilled Holdren during the hearing, asking him to clear up his 1986 prediction that global warming was going to kill about 1 billion people by 2020.
"You would still say," Vitter asked, "that 1 billion people lost by 2020 is still a possibility?"
"It is a possibility, and one we should work energetically to avoid," Holdren replied.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here's the funny part... a HUGE global warming advocate...who is, like most of them, off their rocker. Intellect that is only rivaled by that of the common garden tool.
This is the guy that is over science for our country? Why does this TOTALLY NOT surprise me that Obama put him there...
REASONS WHY THIS DOESNT SURPRISE ME
1. complete dependence on the government to solve every problem - even solar ones
2. fear mongering
3. paranoid thoughts of global destruction (without any proof at all)
4. control of body, mind, and soul of all citizens without fear of revolution
I guess next, he would want a one world religion and get us to be imprinted with bar codes.... This guy is bad news. Amazing the press didnt do their job (AGAIN).
~M
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 23
Remember, like minded people find their own level, and these are definitely lower than water can flow. EVERYONE should have a pit in their stomach and want to throw up!
wow.
~M
David Vitter is great. I've met him a few times and been to several of his town hall meetings both in person and his teleconferences.
Seriously...637! wow. Afraid of the truth I guess.
~M
As you can read in RF's excellent comment above, when you cherry pick comments and pieces of any piece of literature out of its literal and historical context, you only make yourself look silly. And if you have done enough reading in science, you will know that often times when a scientist approaches a problem, they try to offer a range of solutions to that problem, at times leaning favorably towards one or the other, at times simply presenting them as possibilities.
I would direct you to a recent issue of The Atlantic, a well-respected, long-time publication that brings together current and historical thinking and literature, on various topics. This particular article is on what come futurists and scientists and engineers are proposing as possible solutions to global warming. Some may seem very outlandish to you. Some may seem feasible. Scientists really don't care what you personally think of their ideas - many are not out to win the judges votes on American Idol, or a featured spot on CNN. They are visionaries and thinkers - and a couple of decades from now, people may look back and see them as pioneers, or see their ideas as silly. But, the point is that we have these types of people thinking about problems and coming up with a host of solutions from which leaders can choose.
~M
Here is the issue. You say Holdren is not a nut job? He STILL believes that 1 billion people have a good chance of dying by 2020 because of global warming.
Who says that? Seriously...wow. It shows his intellect. It shows where his mind is, which is a weak place at best.
He is a reactionary. I dont like those types in government positions that affect national policy.
~M
I'm curious. Do you know how many people on this planet die yearly due to lack of water, food, and adequate sanitation? And that these commodities necessary to sustain human life are already being increasingly impacted by the climate change we have seen just over the past couple of years? Droughts, famines, erratic weather patterns contributing to more violent storm systems and flooding? Erosion of arable land due to these storms and droughts? People right now across the globe are starting to migrate just to reach food and water.
You can stay in your protective bubble of denial, spend your time complaining about the cost of emission standards and lightbulbs. I am very glad that there are serious, intelligent people right now dedicating their lives to finding solutions - solutions that may not be bound to anyone's religious beliefs, or confined to any government's particular philosophy or structure. In the coming decades, we are going to be forced to look at this problem globally without cultural preconceptions. And let's hope that we can do so without prejudices and selfishness.
Lack of food is not because there isnt enough food...it is because of tyrannical governments not letting their people have food.
Water...i will give you on a small part. The earth changes and we have to adapt. It has been that way for billions of years. We have to use our technology to bring water to places that are lacking it.
~M
~M