1.1 Back around 1977, I heard a radio broadcast with a woman professor teaching that rape was not about sex; it was really about anger, domination, or political power. I remember saying, for the first time in my life, "People are stupid". Perhaps this was my first conscious step into what I would decades later call Aletheism.
1.2 It would not be the last time I would be forced to this conclusion, but in this case the evidence was so massively piled against the idea, that I could only label someone who uttered it as intensely stupid. I am not a genius by any standard; I have no degree in anything: but anyone who says "rape is not sexual" cannot see the obvious evidence. Now I recognize the signs of ideological infection; back then I simply labeled such educated idiots as they deserved.
1.3 I must say that this essay is motivated not only by my hatred of falsehood and love for the truth, but by concern for women and girls. If they believe nonsense about a crime that afflicts probably 1 out of 4 of them, then for their well being they need to know the reality and not Feminist or other ideology.
1.4 First of all, if rape is not about sex, why do men not simply use their fists? Why get an erection? In fact, a man needs to see erotic imagery in order to become erect []; in this initial phase, rape is necessarily sexual.
1.5 Secondly, and following this, if women or men claim there is no power involved in sex, they are plain ignorant, or more likely, lying. Power, whether the woman's manipulation or the man's domination, has always played a part in sexual relations. This also occurs in the rest of the animal kingdom []. In many species, often including humans, social hierarchies are established partially by sexual dominance or pure connivance.
1.6 Third, where do women (Feminists) get off re-defining male sexuality? It is our drive, not theirs, Women do not really have a sex drive anyway; men do. Women have occasional bursts of estrus; men are in heat all the time. Some of us are extremely tired of women telling us how we are or should be. In fact, passionate but gentle lovemaking is one end of our sexual spectrum; the other is forcible rape. Men, not women, are the experts in male sexuality.
1.7 Now let us look at some hard data:
In the USA, females aged 12-34 years are at the highest risk for assault sex []. Risk of assault sex is highest in the late teens; girls 16-19 are four times more likely to be raped than other women. (2000 NCVS). This makes biological as well as common sense; the first category of females closely fits fertility span.
1.8 The second category is the "jailbait" age group. Men will risk their lives to copulate with them; that is why they are called "jailbait". These girls/ women are in their reproductive prime, and men are inordinately drawn to them by the reproductive imperative.
1.9 Whether we like it or not: rapists are selecting breeding partners. Possibly, as among chimpanzees, human males dominate out-of-season females to prepare them to accept their sexual dominance when the females do become estrous [].
2.0 As for the rapists: their average age is 31 years []. Given that males reach puberty at 11, and begin social sexuality (as opposed to masturbation) at about 15, the age range of most rapists should be about 15 to 45. In actual data, 54.6% of rapists are between 18 and 29 years of age, while 28.6% are 30 to 39 []. Thus, over 80% of rapists are in approximately the previously predicted age range. Younger men are more likely to rape simply because they have more sexual and aggressive drive.
2.1 As I mentioned above, I write this essay not only because I hate lies, but because I love women. They need the best information if they are to avoid becoming victims. So I find myself busting myths and taking unpopular positions. It does not matter; Truth matters, especially where people's lives are concerned.
2.2 The common canard that "rape victims can be young or old, attractive or not..." flies in the face of common sense and the evidence I already presented. Think: use your brain instead of your ideology-saturated emotions. If rape is mainly about power and hence, is not really a sex crime, then is robbery not a crime of greed? Is murder really about poor self esteem, rather than rage and hatred?
2.3 Men are visual hunters, whether of prey or sex partners. In almost every case, we need to see someone or something "sexy", or else we cannot be aroused. Sexual relief for men is not a matter of "scratching an itch", as I am told it is with women; ironically, it is the male who requires at least a visual relationship to accomplish erection and ejaculation.
2.4 Now, the term "sexy" can certainly include power. For example: men who prefer their lovers to be bound to the bed or otherwise restrained, those who like to manually women down, and those who prefer petite women or the "damsel in distress." There are even men who like to chase their lovers or pretend rape. The consensual "gang bang" practice, which by the way some women do enjoy, depends on at least simulated male dominance. All of this underscores the reality that sex is intertwined with power.
2.5 In fact, if it were not for male aggressive sexuality, the human race would have disappeared. If women decided not to have sex, the human race would continue. However, if men decided to abstain, there would be no babies at all.
2.6 Male aggressiveness is so common that authorities estimate that in the United States, a man rapes a woman about every 2 minutes; and yet that 60% of rapes go unreported []. Male-dominant sexuality is so common that in effect we are all children of rape.
2.7 When we combine a healthy, civilized man with a young, nubile woman, we create a powerful and y attraction. Imagine the attraction between the same woman and a man who does not have civilized restraint. We know too well the repugnant result.
2.8 Incidentally, if anyone imagines that I am "being soft on men", or "blaming the victim": I believe a rapist, given DNA or other solid evidence against him, should be castrated. This would accomplish two ends: elimination of recidivism, and possible deterrence to other would-be rapists. Serial rapists caught after having assaulted several women, and again after solid evidence is presented, should be summarily executed.
2.9 When I was attacked and beaten by three young black males (April 2007), they obviously took pleasure in the assault. They chose me because I was white and weak and alone. They were violence-predators. Rapists are sex predators, who take what they want without asking. Their victims are largely selected for beauty and vulnerability
3.0 Now that the realities have been presented, and (I hope) accepted, there are several things a woman can do to avoid rape. First, let everyone know that you are able to defend yourself. Look tough, act tough. Second, in outdoor situations, do not wear sexy clothes. Rapists do select for perceived fertility, and fashion is largely an attempt to look young. So cover your charms.
3.1 However, whether the would-be rapist is an aquaintance or stranger, and more than any clothing or behavior, there is one item that will protect a woman from violence of any kind. It is the handgun. When I received my concealed carry license (CCW) in 2009, only 18% of such licenses were issued to women. Why? Do women suppose that knights in shining armor will materialize to protect them, or that their boyfriend is a saint? Men are not saints; like women we are animals, with animal desires.
3.2 There is nothing like a handgun to make a lone woman equal to a man. Men will always be bigger and stronger than women, but with a handgun, a woman can conquer many men. No amount of martial arts training is worth one well-placed bullet. It is very strange that women's advocates are not preaching guns for women, since firearms are a prime way to empowerment.
3.3 I would recommend that any woman reading this essay, research handgun training and laws in your area. If you live in one of the restrictive states, such as Massachusetts, your choices and ability to receive this (US Constitutionally guaranteed) protection may be limited. However, even if you have to jump through legal hoops to get a license, a handgun is your second best defense.
3.4 Your first and best defense against rape is the presence of an honorable man with a commanding presence. Most men will not challenge him. Rapists usually will not attack a woman guarded by another man. If they do, they will be sorry.
3.5 In a civilized society, men learn to control our impulses, or to indulge them in non-harmful ways. We should regard rapists as sexual predators. Those who take sex against a woman's will put themselves on a par with robbers or murderers. We should treat them as we would other predatory animals.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Sunday, October 30, 2011
YBM
Aletheic Process
DATA:
DOJ 2011
2.3 M people in prison
2.1 M men
208,300 women: 9%
Black men: 35.4%
White men: 32.9%
Hispanic men: 17.9%
US Ethnic Population
Black:men: ~6%
White men: ~33%
Hispanic men: ~8%
Prisoners per US Ethnic Population
Black men: 35.4/ 6 = 5.9
White men 32.9/ 40 = 0.82
Hispanic men 17.9/ 7 = 2.6
Data Analysis: Ratios
Black men to White men: 5.9/ 0.82 = 7.2
Black men to Hispanic men: 5.9/ 2.6 = 2.3
Hispanic men to White men: 2.6/ 0.82 = 3.2
In other words, based on their percent of the total US population, Black men are 7 times more likely to be in prison than White men. They are about 2 times as likely to be in prison as Hispanic men. Hispanic men are about 3 times as likely to be in prison as White men.
One obvious explanation is based on the relatively low percentage of women (of any ethnicity) in prison. Women have approximately 10% of the testosterone of men [], and this is close to their portion in the prison population (9%).
DATA:
DOJ 2011
2.3 M people in prison
2.1 M men
208,300 women: 9%
Black men: 35.4%
White men: 32.9%
Hispanic men: 17.9%
US Ethnic Population
Black:men: ~6%
White men: ~33%
Hispanic men: ~8%
Prisoners per US Ethnic Population
Black men: 35.4/ 6 = 5.9
White men 32.9/ 40 = 0.82
Hispanic men 17.9/ 7 = 2.6
Data Analysis: Ratios
Black men to White men: 5.9/ 0.82 = 7.2
Black men to Hispanic men: 5.9/ 2.6 = 2.3
Hispanic men to White men: 2.6/ 0.82 = 3.2
In other words, based on their percent of the total US population, Black men are 7 times more likely to be in prison than White men. They are about 2 times as likely to be in prison as Hispanic men. Hispanic men are about 3 times as likely to be in prison as White men.
One obvious explanation is based on the relatively low percentage of women (of any ethnicity) in prison. Women have approximately 10% of the testosterone of men [], and this is close to their portion in the prison population (9%).
Friday, October 28, 2011
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Aletheism, the Religion of Truth (TM)
Aletheism, the Religion of Truth (TM)
Original Article/ Concept by John E. Billings,
10/27/2011; cf. also Dr. Kerry Spackman, "Aletheist.com"
from the Greek, aletheia: n. truth, transparency, clarity
Aletheism is the search for, obedience to, and defense of, Truth. Truth is defined as the most reasonable conclusion from the best available evidence. The concept of Aletheism was developed independently during the year 2011, by John E. Billings and Dr. Kerry Spackman (q.v.).
Aletheism is the search for, obedience to, and defense of, Truth. Truth is defined as the most reasonable conclusion from the best available evidence. The concept of Aletheism was developed independently during the year 2011, by John E. Billings and Dr. Kerry Spackman (q.v.).
With the trademark (TM), Aletheism represents the organized Religion of Truth (TM). This concept of Alethesim was developed by John E. Billings during October, 2011.
The Four Principles of Aletheism are discussed below.
The Four Principles of Aletheism are discussed below.
1.0 Data Locuta Est, Causa Finita Est. “When the Evidence has Spoken, the Case is Closed.” This is the core of Aletheism: when sufficient evidence is presented, the problem is solved, the idea is proven true or false, and the matter is settled. Data, evidence, and facts are sacred in Aletheism.
1.1 Aletheists always welcome new evidence, because it will either confirm their understanding, or correct them toward the Truth. Therefore, Aletheism can rightly be called the Religion of Truth (TM), simply because it is based solely, squarely and securely on the best available evidence. Aletheists are the most fortunate of people, for they have found the path to Truth.
2.0 All ideologies, including faith-based religions and political systems, are false. Ideologies are systems of beliefs, based on opinions, traditions, or imagination. They have little connection to reality, and often try to suppress it. In some cases, such as the magnificent female scientist of antiquity, Hypatia (q.v.), ideologists will martyr those who follow Truth.
2.1 Ideologies also include any so-called “science” and skepticism which deny a priori that there may be metaphysical realities, simply because humans cannot yet examine them. This is just mystophobia (the irrational fear of the unknown or paranormal), and not true science.
2.2. Whether god-affirming (Christianity, Islam, etc) or god-denying (Atheism), ideologies are belief systems, based on opinions and not on evidence. Thus they cannot lead the seeker to Truth. Aletheism is the way to approach Truth, because it is based on factual evidence.
2.3 Ideology is backward thinking; it begins with a concept or doctrine (often erroneously called a "theory"), and either denies, suppresses, or manipulates any evidence to the contrary in order to maintain the ideological structure. The ideology takes more importance than any evidence, the well-being of others, or even the host's own life. Thus ideologies behave like mental parasites, and cause humanity inestimable harm.
2.4 Aletheism is free of ideological parasites, whether they be religious, political, or traditional. Aletheistic thinking begins with data: the best available evidence. It then reasons from that evidence to the most logical conclusion. Thus Aletheism is correct, forward thinking.
2.5 Aletheism does produce valid theories in the scientific sense. There are two levels of conclusions: those which are approximately 90% verifiable, and those which are 100% verifiable. Conclusions verified by about 90% of the evidence can be called "beyond reasonable doubt" (BRD); the 10% remaining evidence may be error or anomaly. These ~90% conclusions work well enough in one's daily living.
2.6 On the other hand, Aletheistic conclusions verified by 100% of the evidence have the force of true, scientific theories. They have survived rigorous examination as well as critical debate. The least evidence against the conclusion, causes it to be re-examined and either altered to fit the data, or entirely rejected. In this case, the Aletheistic process of gathering evidence, reasoning upon it, and concluding from it, must begin again.
3.0. Ideoclasm is the doorway to Aletheism. Ideoclasm simply means smashing the aspiring Aletheist's beliefs, including especially religious and political beliefs, on the solid rock of evidence. The ideoclastic process must be totally honest and transparent; in fact, one of the definitions of "aletheia" is transparency.
3.1 Aspirants to Aletheism must humbly accept the smashing of their beliefs; they must sustain the loss of most of them, if they are to become Aletheists. Ideoclasm is a lifelong process, and the Aletheist should challenge his or her beliefs daily.
4.0 Truth is found in the observation and experience of Nature. The great astronomer Carl Sagan said,
"A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the universe as revealed by modern science, might draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths. Sooner or later, such a religion will emerge." (Pale Blue Dot, 1994)
3.1 Aletheism represents this emergence; the Religion of Truth (TM) is based on the evidence and investigation of the wonders of Nature. In Aletheism, science gives birth to spirituality.
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Casper the Friendly-?
1.1 I would like to share a series of events, or if you will, a set of data, which I have found inexplicable by purely physical means. Last week, my wife came home and almost immediately said, Why did you throw the teddy bears on the floor? I was at the computer across the room; I looked and said, I didn't move them.
1.2 I thought no more about this until I moved away from the computer, and my wife, who was standing near me, looked at the wall and said, Where did those come from? She was visibly shaken. The wall, about 0.5 m from the floor, and for about 0.75 m across, was covered with purple crayon marks. They were light strokes, mostly vertical or slanted either right or left. I closely examined them, and found two tiny (<1mm) pieces of what appeared to be crayon wax on one of the marks. When I shone a light across the marks, they indeed reflected as wax. The overall layout, an oblong with no observable pattern, was exactly what a 1- 1.5 year-old child would produce. However, we have neither crayons nor child. I immediately took video of the marks.
1.3 Of course I went to the apartment management and asked if a maintenance person had been in our apartment while we were out. They looked at their records and said, No. I described the crayon marks, and the management said that although the apartment had been painted for us, the marks might be "bleed-through" from previous tenant. However, this could not be the case, because the marks appeared suddenly, only in that one area, and as I said, had bits of wax adhering.
1.4 Moreover, I had bought my wife a bouquet of roses, and the vase was standing between the sofa on which she had put the teddy bears, and the wall on which the marks appeared. All of this raised several questions.
1.5 Even if a maintenance person had visited, why would they bring a toddler? If anyone came in, why would they bring a toddler, let it play with the teddy bears, mark on the walls, and not clean afterwards? Most of all, why would a toddler ignore the fully-blooming roses between the wall and sofa? Any child would play with them, and probably upset the vase as well.
1.6 I was still straining for a non-metaphysical explanation, but the concept of someone entering our apartment, allowing a toddler to play and scribble on the wall, while it ignored a bright bouquet, and all without any other signs of disturbance, was very perplexing. But there would be more.
1.7 A few nights later, as we drove away from the apartment, the radio suddenly came on. The music was soft and pleasant. My wife turned it off, then fiddled with the switch to see if we could have bumped it accidentally. No, the switch was inset. The only non-metaphysical explanation was an electrical problem in my very new car, which had no such problems before.
1.8 Then, a few nights ago, my wife was sleeping on the sofa. There was a board, which had been the shelf of a coffee table, leaning against the wall above her head. She awoke to the sound of knocking: a pattern of three knocks, with variable intervals. Knock, knock, knock. She got up, and almost awakened me; but I was sleeping soundly, and she did not want to disturb me (I have trouble sleeping). My wife counted her fingers, then checked the kitchen clock: it was about 02:00.
1.9 My wife was frightened. She moved from the sofa to the bed, and although the knocking continued, she eventually fell asleep. After I awoke, I adjured her to awaken me if anything unusual ever happened again. She has continued to be afraid, but although my skin prickles, I want video of anything unusual.
2.0 Finally, or thus far, three days ago, my wife was sitting at the computer, and saw a photograph of me fluttering. At first she thought her eyes were playing tricks. But then two days ago, she saw the same movement. There have been no seismic tremors, nothing but the photograph moved. The window was closed and there was no appreciable air movement. Yet the photograph moved.
2.1 These are the data, the evidence of something I cannot physically explain. Perhaps you can help. Thank you.
1.2 I thought no more about this until I moved away from the computer, and my wife, who was standing near me, looked at the wall and said, Where did those come from? She was visibly shaken. The wall, about 0.5 m from the floor, and for about 0.75 m across, was covered with purple crayon marks. They were light strokes, mostly vertical or slanted either right or left. I closely examined them, and found two tiny (<1mm) pieces of what appeared to be crayon wax on one of the marks. When I shone a light across the marks, they indeed reflected as wax. The overall layout, an oblong with no observable pattern, was exactly what a 1- 1.5 year-old child would produce. However, we have neither crayons nor child. I immediately took video of the marks.
1.3 Of course I went to the apartment management and asked if a maintenance person had been in our apartment while we were out. They looked at their records and said, No. I described the crayon marks, and the management said that although the apartment had been painted for us, the marks might be "bleed-through" from previous tenant. However, this could not be the case, because the marks appeared suddenly, only in that one area, and as I said, had bits of wax adhering.
1.4 Moreover, I had bought my wife a bouquet of roses, and the vase was standing between the sofa on which she had put the teddy bears, and the wall on which the marks appeared. All of this raised several questions.
1.5 Even if a maintenance person had visited, why would they bring a toddler? If anyone came in, why would they bring a toddler, let it play with the teddy bears, mark on the walls, and not clean afterwards? Most of all, why would a toddler ignore the fully-blooming roses between the wall and sofa? Any child would play with them, and probably upset the vase as well.
1.6 I was still straining for a non-metaphysical explanation, but the concept of someone entering our apartment, allowing a toddler to play and scribble on the wall, while it ignored a bright bouquet, and all without any other signs of disturbance, was very perplexing. But there would be more.
1.7 A few nights later, as we drove away from the apartment, the radio suddenly came on. The music was soft and pleasant. My wife turned it off, then fiddled with the switch to see if we could have bumped it accidentally. No, the switch was inset. The only non-metaphysical explanation was an electrical problem in my very new car, which had no such problems before.
1.8 Then, a few nights ago, my wife was sleeping on the sofa. There was a board, which had been the shelf of a coffee table, leaning against the wall above her head. She awoke to the sound of knocking: a pattern of three knocks, with variable intervals. Knock, knock, knock. She got up, and almost awakened me; but I was sleeping soundly, and she did not want to disturb me (I have trouble sleeping). My wife counted her fingers, then checked the kitchen clock: it was about 02:00.
1.9 My wife was frightened. She moved from the sofa to the bed, and although the knocking continued, she eventually fell asleep. After I awoke, I adjured her to awaken me if anything unusual ever happened again. She has continued to be afraid, but although my skin prickles, I want video of anything unusual.
2.0 Finally, or thus far, three days ago, my wife was sitting at the computer, and saw a photograph of me fluttering. At first she thought her eyes were playing tricks. But then two days ago, she saw the same movement. There have been no seismic tremors, nothing but the photograph moved. The window was closed and there was no appreciable air movement. Yet the photograph moved.
2.1 These are the data, the evidence of something I cannot physically explain. Perhaps you can help. Thank you.
Friday, October 21, 2011
Why I am doing this.
1. I love truth with a passion, and hate lies with a fury.
2. I hate all religions because they are lies, and because of what they do to people.
3. I love to be the center of attention, and a teacher, and a leader, all of which I deserve.
4. I want lots of women to want me. Especially very young ones.
All these things I will do, and have. And I will kill any bully I meet.
2. I hate all religions because they are lies, and because of what they do to people.
3. I love to be the center of attention, and a teacher, and a leader, all of which I deserve.
4. I want lots of women to want me. Especially very young ones.
All these things I will do, and have. And I will kill any bully I meet.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Principles of Aletheism
Aletheism, the Religion of TruthTM
from the Greek, aletheia: truth, honesty, transparency
An Aletheist is one who seeks, obeys, and defends the Truth
10/21/11
10/21/11
Principles of Aletheism
1.1
1. Data Locuta Est, Causa Finita Est. "The Evidence has Spoken, the Case is Closed." In Aletheism, data (factual evidence) is sacred. All beliefs, opinions, and doctrines must be subjected to the evidence. Everything Aletheists believe and do derives from and depends upon the latest and most reliable evidence.
1.2
2. All ideologies, including faith-based religions and political systems, are false, because they are based on opinions, traditions, or imagination. Aletheism is the way to approach Truth, because it is based squarely and solely on factual evidence.
1.3 Ideology is backward thinking; it begins with a concept or doctrine (often erroneously called a "theory"). It either denies, suppresses, or manipulates any evidence to the contrary in order to maintain the ideological structure.
Conclusion (dogma, belief, etc) <- Evidence
1.4 The ideology takes more importance than any evidence, the well-being of others, or even the host's own life. Thus ideologies behave like mental parasites, and cause humanity inestimable harm.
1.5 Aletheism is free of ideological parasites, whether they be religious, political, or traditional. Aletheistic thinking begins with the best available evidence. It then reasons from that evidence to the most logical conclusion. Thus Aletheism is correct, forward thinking.
Evidence -> Conclusion (reasonable idea, theory, etc.)
1.6 Aletheism does produce valid theories in the scientific sense. There are two levels of conclusions: those which are approximately 90% verifiable, and those which are 100% verifiable. Conclusions verified by about 90% of the evidence may be called "beyond reasonable doubt" (BRD); the 10% remaining evidence may be error or anomaly. These ~90% conclusions work well enough for most of our daily living.
1. 7 On the other hand, Aletheistic conclusions verified by 100% of the evidence have the force of true, scientific theories. They have survived rigorous examination as well as critical debate. Even one piece of evidence against the theory will require it to be re-examined and either altered to fit the data, or entirely rejected. In this case, the Aletheistic process of gathering evidence, reasoning upon it, and concluding from it, must begin again.
1.8
3. Ideoclasm is the doorway to Aletheism. Ideoclasm simply means smashing one's most closely held beliefs with the hammer of hard evidence. The ideoclastic process must be totally honest and transparent; one of the definitions of aletheia is transparency.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Vermin
1.1 While confronting the depredations of Muslims upon civilization, I have become very angry. Actually, my emotion toward people who assault [], rape [], gang rape [], rob [], and murder [], as a matter of course, as a weapon of war against the civilized people of the world, has made me more than angry. I have graduated to fury; this is the only word I can find in English to describe how I feel when I see yet another slaughtered baby or rape-ravaged woman, or man writhing as mongrels of Mohammed saw his head off, to the hateful howl of "Allahu akbar!".
1.2 Please spare me the "but other people do these things..." cultural argument; it is maggot-ridden rotten meat and you know it. First of all, other people besides Muslims committing evil, does not make Muslims better. You may as well assert that killer bees are better than killer sharks: an argument not worthy of human intelligence. Secondly, Muslims do commit more violent crime, in especially vicious ways, than any other group of people.[] Finally, Muslims are spreading everywhere, literally everywhere in the world, and carrying their cult of death into the heart of every civilized nation.
1.3 Indeed, Muslims may also be guilty of cannibalism on a grotesquely grand scale, for they consume entire cultures. Islamic history is not only soaked with the blood of innumerable innocents, but gory with spilled and spoiled entrails of entire civilizations. Muslims have no civilization of their own; like army ants, they cluster in a bivouac for a time, then resume their relentless march, violating and devouring as they go.
1.4 Please shut your mouth around the argument that Muslims are poor, hungry, oppressed, or angry at those horrible colonialist Europeans- that is, enraged when someone tried to bring them into the civilized world. Muslims slaughter not only us kuffar (infidels), but other Muslims also [], as well as "heretics" such as Baha'ists []. They torture their women from birth, mutilating their genitals and violating their bodies and minds with "marriages" that are more akin to sexual slavery. Although boys seem to be immune to dishonor killings, even they are exposed to mutilation [] and molestation [] in the womderful Religion of Peace.
1.5 The incessant, insensate raging of the Moorish hordes against every good thing ever produced by civilized people, from bikinis to Buddhist temples, sometimes brings me to outrage almost like that of the berserkers []. As I indicated above, such outrage long maintained could be very unhealthy for me. The knowledge that many of my compatriots are just as outraged, does not make my condition any better.
1.6 So in meditating today, I asked, "Why do these Muslim barbarians infuriate me? Would I be as inflamed at predatory or pestiferous beasts, for example mosquitoes, venomous spiders, or rats?" The answer was a surprising "No". Despite dealing with fire ants, tropical centipedes, and infestations of rats, I had.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Why I am an Aletheist
Why I am an Aletheist
10/11/2011
Aletheist: from the Greek, aletheia: n, truth, transparency, confidence. An Aletheist seeks and defends TRUTH. - Dr. Kerry Spackman, http://www.aletheist.com
1.1 Why would I not be an Aletheist? Since Aletheism is devotion to truth (the most reasonable conclusion from the best available evidence), it is is clean of all ideological contamination and bondage to religion, politics, etc.; therefore Aletheism sets me free. what else would I be, but a devotee of truth?
1.2 A more interesting question would be, Why should I be anything other than an Aletheist? Should I believe in something that I cannot show with plain evidence and reason? Should I subject myself to superstitions from bygone centuries? Should I ignore the evidence of nature in favor of some unnatural program of shame and self-denial? Should I even ignore nature entirely, and hope for some divine deus ex machina to save the Earth that I have had part in ruining? No.
1.3 I will not again pretend that answers to modern life can be found in any book from the Bronze Age. I will not pretend that there is a benevolent Father (or Mother) caring for me, when all the evidence says otherwise. I will also not deny that god(s) exist(s), because I cannot conclusively prove this is so. I am sure, as I said, that God cares naught for me, nor for anyone I have thus far encountered.Therefore if God indeed exists, he/she is ineffective upon human life, and thus effectively non-existent. There may as well be no God, as one who does nothing.
1.4 I will not ever again be bound by the “Word of God” that is manifestly the very imperfect word of men. It is much easier to make sense of a Harry Potter novel than the Bible or the Qur’an. Harry Potter is also much more congenial, and does not threaten me with the sword of Islam or the hellfire of Christianity.
1.5 I will not worship cows with the Hindus either, nor chant mumbo-jumbo with the shamans whose “Earth wisdom”is so popular with urban white people. Most of them get their only exposure to the aboriginal world through National Geographic television, from the comfort of an easy chair. Nor will I indulge myself in angels, fairies, phantoms, ghosties or gheesties of any kind. I do not deny these entities may exist in some form: only that there is no evidence for them, and anyway they are of even less effect than God.
1.6 Buddhism has attracted me in the past, primarily because it is based in human experience (dukkha, suffering) rather than some supposed Revelation of Divine Will. But I can and do meditate without the religious trappings of Buddhism, and anyway have my doubts about reincarnation. So with all due respect, I eschew Buddhism also.
1.7 If I seem tough on religion, it is only because I have suffered it, as the whole human race has suffered it, much too long already. How far could the human race have developed, and how many grievous problems solved, it we had not religion commanding this and prohibiting that? Even without knowing the atrocities of religion, the question of human development without dogma should by itself cause us to look askance at any religious truth claim.
1.8 The human race really needs to grow up. It is time to put away all the goddies and ghosties and turn our attention to that which we can surely know, and that which is marvelous: the revealed truth of Nature.
10/11/2011
Aletheist: from the Greek, aletheia: n, truth, transparency, confidence. An Aletheist seeks and defends TRUTH. - Dr. Kerry Spackman, http://www.aletheist.com
1.1 Why would I not be an Aletheist? Since Aletheism is devotion to truth (the most reasonable conclusion from the best available evidence), it is is clean of all ideological contamination and bondage to religion, politics, etc.; therefore Aletheism sets me free. what else would I be, but a devotee of truth?
1.2 A more interesting question would be, Why should I be anything other than an Aletheist? Should I believe in something that I cannot show with plain evidence and reason? Should I subject myself to superstitions from bygone centuries? Should I ignore the evidence of nature in favor of some unnatural program of shame and self-denial? Should I even ignore nature entirely, and hope for some divine deus ex machina to save the Earth that I have had part in ruining? No.
1.3 I will not again pretend that answers to modern life can be found in any book from the Bronze Age. I will not pretend that there is a benevolent Father (or Mother) caring for me, when all the evidence says otherwise. I will also not deny that god(s) exist(s), because I cannot conclusively prove this is so. I am sure, as I said, that God cares naught for me, nor for anyone I have thus far encountered.Therefore if God indeed exists, he/she is ineffective upon human life, and thus effectively non-existent. There may as well be no God, as one who does nothing.
1.4 I will not ever again be bound by the “Word of God” that is manifestly the very imperfect word of men. It is much easier to make sense of a Harry Potter novel than the Bible or the Qur’an. Harry Potter is also much more congenial, and does not threaten me with the sword of Islam or the hellfire of Christianity.
1.5 I will not worship cows with the Hindus either, nor chant mumbo-jumbo with the shamans whose “Earth wisdom”is so popular with urban white people. Most of them get their only exposure to the aboriginal world through National Geographic television, from the comfort of an easy chair. Nor will I indulge myself in angels, fairies, phantoms, ghosties or gheesties of any kind. I do not deny these entities may exist in some form: only that there is no evidence for them, and anyway they are of even less effect than God.
1.6 Buddhism has attracted me in the past, primarily because it is based in human experience (dukkha, suffering) rather than some supposed Revelation of Divine Will. But I can and do meditate without the religious trappings of Buddhism, and anyway have my doubts about reincarnation. So with all due respect, I eschew Buddhism also.
1.7 If I seem tough on religion, it is only because I have suffered it, as the whole human race has suffered it, much too long already. How far could the human race have developed, and how many grievous problems solved, it we had not religion commanding this and prohibiting that? Even without knowing the atrocities of religion, the question of human development without dogma should by itself cause us to look askance at any religious truth claim.
1.8 The human race really needs to grow up. It is time to put away all the goddies and ghosties and turn our attention to that which we can surely know, and that which is marvelous: the revealed truth of Nature.
Why I am an Aletheist
Why I am an Aletheist
10/11/2011
Aletheist: from the Greek, aletheia: n, truth, transparency, confidence. An Aletheist seeks and defends TRUTH. - Dr. Kerry Spackman, http://www.aletheist.com/
1.1 Why would I not be an Aletheist? Since Aletheism is devotion to the truth (the most reasonable conclusion from the available evidence), it is is clean of all ideological contamination and bondage to religion, politics, etc.; therefore Aletheism sets me free. what else would I be, but a devotee of truth?
1.2
10/11/2011
Aletheist: from the Greek, aletheia: n, truth, transparency, confidence. An Aletheist seeks and defends TRUTH. - Dr. Kerry Spackman, http://www.aletheist.com/
1.1 Why would I not be an Aletheist? Since Aletheism is devotion to the truth (the most reasonable conclusion from the available evidence), it is is clean of all ideological contamination and bondage to religion, politics, etc.; therefore Aletheism sets me free. what else would I be, but a devotee of truth?
1.2
Westboro Baptists -True Christians
.1 The Westboro Baptist Church, headed by Fred Phelps, who preaches "God hates fags" and similar misanthropic messages, has been harshly criticized by other Christians. Some have even denied that Westboro Baptists, because of their hateful statements and such activities as protesting at solders' funerals, are not Christians at all.
1.2 I have no authority to judge who is or is not Christian. Judgment belongs to the Lord. However, I know what the church of Christ taught me, and will use that reasoning here.
1.3 So: if the Westboro church is not Christian, what about your church? In other words, if Westboro is not really Christian because they are wrong in their attitude toward homosexuals, then all Baptists may not be Christians because they are wrong in their "once saved, always saved" attitude.
1.4 Jesus plainly said to the Laodicean church, the entire church, "I will spew you out of my mouth".There are many other references to show that once saved is not always saved, but the simplest proof is that Christians have a relationship with God, and relationships have obligations on both sides. Salvation is God's obligation, and obedience is ours. "Once saved, always saved" is false, and I can find false things in almost any church.
1.5 But if hating Gays really means you are not a Christian, what if you hate Africans enough to enslave them? If practicing slavery means you are not a Christian, then the entire antebellum South was not Christian. Also, some Christians in the Bible practiced slavery, since Paul told masters not to be harsh with their slaves.
1.6 What if you hate not only homosexuals, but also witches, and even burn them alive? If people who burn homosexuals and witches cannot be Christians, then the entire medieval church was not Christian. Most of us today would agree that a person who hates Jews cannot be a Christian. But if antisemites cannot be Christians, then most of Christian history is full of non-Christians.
1.7 Therefore whether we like them or not, the Westboro people are indeed Christians. Rather than condemn them, it may be better simply to refute their behavior from the Bible itself.
1.8 Now it is true that in the Old Testament, God called homosexuality "an abomination". It is also true that the Sodomites wanted to "know" the young men in Lot's house. The word "know" does mean to have sex, because Lot then offers his daughters, that the men could "know" them. There are, of course, sleazy and specious arguments against the meaning of these verses, but they still say plainly what they say.
1.9 Also the apostle Paul, speaking to the Roman church, left no doubt when he referred to men "burning in their lust for one another...and receiving the due penalty in their bodies". I know that some people try to fudge this verse also, but again the meaning is plain. It is up to Christians to accept what the Bible says.
2.0 For all their hateful speech, at least the Westboro Baptists accept what the Bible does say about homosexuality itself. This is true, even though they miss entirely the gospel of Grace. God does want Gays killed; he wants them to “repent and believe in the Lord”.
2.1 Since homosexuality is an immutable trait, manifesting very early in a person's life, it is likely that people are born with this orientation. Given this, Gays are not very likely to respond well to Old Testament-style preaching , as they might to genuine concern and kindness. And stop waving signs at them.
2.2 Perhaps the Westboro people would also be interested to know that as Christians they are under the New Testament, not the Old, and that no one in the New Testament uses hateful, abusive language as they do. In the spirit and practice of the New Testament, following Jesus and the apostles, sinners (such as homosexuals) should be gently taught the Gospel in the hope that they will "believe unto salvation". The overarching principles of New Testament teachings are not hatred and condemnation, but love and forgiveness through the grace of God.
2.3 However, even if Westboro is guilty of ignoring the main message of the Bible, at least they do not fly airplanes into Gay bars while shouting, "Jesus is great!" At least they do not blow themselves up at military funerals. In fact I am not familiar with any church that practices terrorism. But I digress.
2.4 In sum, Westboro Baptists, despite their awful intolerance and disrespectful behavior, are certainly obedient Christians. They believe the Bible is God's Word and they obey exactly the parts of it they like.
*See also "The Evolution of Religion".
1.2 I have no authority to judge who is or is not Christian. Judgment belongs to the Lord. However, I know what the church of Christ taught me, and will use that reasoning here.
1.3 So: if the Westboro church is not Christian, what about your church? In other words, if Westboro is not really Christian because they are wrong in their attitude toward homosexuals, then all Baptists may not be Christians because they are wrong in their "once saved, always saved" attitude.
1.4 Jesus plainly said to the Laodicean church, the entire church, "I will spew you out of my mouth".There are many other references to show that once saved is not always saved, but the simplest proof is that Christians have a relationship with God, and relationships have obligations on both sides. Salvation is God's obligation, and obedience is ours. "Once saved, always saved" is false, and I can find false things in almost any church.
1.5 But if hating Gays really means you are not a Christian, what if you hate Africans enough to enslave them? If practicing slavery means you are not a Christian, then the entire antebellum South was not Christian. Also, some Christians in the Bible practiced slavery, since Paul told masters not to be harsh with their slaves.
1.6 What if you hate not only homosexuals, but also witches, and even burn them alive? If people who burn homosexuals and witches cannot be Christians, then the entire medieval church was not Christian. Most of us today would agree that a person who hates Jews cannot be a Christian. But if antisemites cannot be Christians, then most of Christian history is full of non-Christians.
1.7 Therefore whether we like them or not, the Westboro people are indeed Christians. Rather than condemn them, it may be better simply to refute their behavior from the Bible itself.
1.8 Now it is true that in the Old Testament, God called homosexuality "an abomination". It is also true that the Sodomites wanted to "know" the young men in Lot's house. The word "know" does mean to have sex, because Lot then offers his daughters, that the men could "know" them. There are, of course, sleazy and specious arguments against the meaning of these verses, but they still say plainly what they say.
1.9 Also the apostle Paul, speaking to the Roman church, left no doubt when he referred to men "burning in their lust for one another...and receiving the due penalty in their bodies". I know that some people try to fudge this verse also, but again the meaning is plain. It is up to Christians to accept what the Bible says.
2.0 For all their hateful speech, at least the Westboro Baptists accept what the Bible does say about homosexuality itself. This is true, even though they miss entirely the gospel of Grace. God does want Gays killed; he wants them to “repent and believe in the Lord”.
2.1 Since homosexuality is an immutable trait, manifesting very early in a person's life, it is likely that people are born with this orientation. Given this, Gays are not very likely to respond well to Old Testament-style preaching , as they might to genuine concern and kindness. And stop waving signs at them.
2.2 Perhaps the Westboro people would also be interested to know that as Christians they are under the New Testament, not the Old, and that no one in the New Testament uses hateful, abusive language as they do. In the spirit and practice of the New Testament, following Jesus and the apostles, sinners (such as homosexuals) should be gently taught the Gospel in the hope that they will "believe unto salvation". The overarching principles of New Testament teachings are not hatred and condemnation, but love and forgiveness through the grace of God.
2.3 However, even if Westboro is guilty of ignoring the main message of the Bible, at least they do not fly airplanes into Gay bars while shouting, "Jesus is great!" At least they do not blow themselves up at military funerals. In fact I am not familiar with any church that practices terrorism. But I digress.
2.4 In sum, Westboro Baptists, despite their awful intolerance and disrespectful behavior, are certainly obedient Christians. They believe the Bible is God's Word and they obey exactly the parts of it they like.
*See also "The Evolution of Religion".
Why Would Anyone Follow a Child Molester?
Why Would Anyone Follow a Child Molester?
1. Mohammed had sex with nine year-old Aisha. The Islamic scriptures speak with one voice. Aisha was a child of six when Mohammed married her, and nine when he “consummated” their marriage [1].
2. This is child molesting (also possibly pedophilia), and in a civilized nation it is a serious crime. [2]
3. Muslims are taught that Mohammed is the Prophet, the ideal man, and that they should follow his example.
4. Therefore, by necessary inference [3], Muslims believe that having sex with prepubescent (or peripubescent) children is normal and good [4].
QED
[1] Partial list of Islamic scriptures re: Aisha’s age at “consummation" Source: WikiIslam; emphases mine JEB
Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) Sahih Bukhari 8:73:151
“My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down...while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old..” Tabari IX:131
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he (sic) was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. Sahih Muslim 8:3311
Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." Sahih Bukhari 7:62:65
"Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old." (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years."). "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old." Abu-Dawud 2:2116
Note: Muslims may try to argue from other scriptures that Aisha was in fact much older than nine. But what about all the scriptures I quoted- and there are many others- if all of these scriptures are false, how can Muslims trust any of their scriptures?
[2] See for example USAM Chapter 9-75.000.
[3] Necessary inference: If I teach you to follow Jesus, and you find that he said “Let the little children come unto me, and do not forbid them”, this necessarily implies that you should be kind to little children. Conversely, being kind to little children is a necessary inference.
[4] Muslims cannot repudiate Mohammed’s molestation of Aisha unless they renounce (or “reinterpret”) the scriptures about him, and embrace human values. If they deny Mohammed’s good example, Muslims must deny his entire life, and thus literally stick their necks out as heretics to other Muslims; the only alterative is to be lie about their beliefs and deny their knowledge of the truth. Mohammed’s molestation of ‘Aisha is a shibboleth.
J E Billings
9/1/11
1. Mohammed had sex with nine year-old Aisha. The Islamic scriptures speak with one voice. Aisha was a child of six when Mohammed married her, and nine when he “consummated” their marriage [1].
2. This is child molesting (also possibly pedophilia), and in a civilized nation it is a serious crime. [2]
3. Muslims are taught that Mohammed is the Prophet, the ideal man, and that they should follow his example.
4. Therefore, by necessary inference [3], Muslims believe that having sex with prepubescent (or peripubescent) children is normal and good [4].
QED
[1] Partial list of Islamic scriptures re: Aisha’s age at “consummation" Source: WikiIslam; emphases mine JEB
Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) Sahih Bukhari 8:73:151
“My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down...while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old..” Tabari IX:131
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he (sic) was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. Sahih Muslim 8:3311
Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." Sahih Bukhari 7:62:65
"Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old." (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years."). "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old." Abu-Dawud 2:2116
Note: Muslims may try to argue from other scriptures that Aisha was in fact much older than nine. But what about all the scriptures I quoted- and there are many others- if all of these scriptures are false, how can Muslims trust any of their scriptures?
[2] See for example USAM Chapter 9-75.000.
[3] Necessary inference: If I teach you to follow Jesus, and you find that he said “Let the little children come unto me, and do not forbid them”, this necessarily implies that you should be kind to little children. Conversely, being kind to little children is a necessary inference.
[4] Muslims cannot repudiate Mohammed’s molestation of Aisha unless they renounce (or “reinterpret”) the scriptures about him, and embrace human values. If they deny Mohammed’s good example, Muslims must deny his entire life, and thus literally stick their necks out as heretics to other Muslims; the only alterative is to be lie about their beliefs and deny their knowledge of the truth. Mohammed’s molestation of ‘Aisha is a shibboleth.
J E Billings
9/1/11
The Cross Against the Crescent
The Cross Against the Crescent
1.1 As I considered the impending celebrations and protests around 9/11/2011, the tenth anniversary of the most devastating Islamic terrorist attack on my nation, I suddenly saw a new and strange image. In the South, I had worshiped at several churches, and visited many more. Every one of them had an American flag, either on a flagpole outside or set on the left side of the auditorium stage. I have not visited a New England church yet, but expect to see the same display of loyalty to the United States and our Constitution. Such were the pictures in my mind.
1.2 Yet at that moment, I realized that of all the mosques I had seen, whether in person or in images, I had never seen our flag displayed. I went online, and assiduously studied images of mosques all around the US. The Stars and Stripes were nowhere to be found, not on a pole, neither inside, not anywhere. The mosques stood boldly, squarely, set like fortresses, minarets towering above their surroundings. There was not a US flag among them.
1.3 The implication rang like a bell. Even if a church, or a Jewish temple, had no US flag on its property, it would not sound an alarm. Neither Christianity nor Judaism was involved in attacking this nation on 9/11. The assault was intrinsically Islamic, complete with the takfir, “Allahu akbar!” Since then, we have seen numerous Islamic attacks in America.
1.4 We have witnessed the massacre of 13 people and the wounding of 29 others at Fort Hood, Texas, by one Major Nidal Hasan. Like the 9/11 Islamokaze killers, Hasan shouted, “Allahu akbar!" We have witnessed too many (when even one would be too many) women and girls killed for an inherently abusive sense of “honor” (which somehow applies only to females).
1.5 This heartbreaking list includes Amina and Sarah Said, whose father, Yaser Said, molested them when they were young. When as teens they showed interest in non-Muslim life and non-Muslim boys, Said brutally shot them both to death. 1/1/2008. Then after this crime against womanhood, like a true soldier of Allah, he ran away into hiding. As of this writing, Yaser Said is still at large.
1.6 Compared to people who practice such barbarity, neither Christian nor Jew needs to display outward signs of loyalty. Neither Christian nor Jew is inclined to execute his daughters, much less for the sake of “honor”. Such behavior is extremely unwelcome in any civilized nation, and must be met with steely resistance.
1.7 Now concerning loyalty: the US was and is a Christian nation [1]; and Israel, nation of the Jews, is both our ally and the light of the Middle East. Neither Christians nor Jews need to show the American flag on their houses of worship to prove adherence to civilized standards of behavior or national identity, although the display of colors is always welcome.
1.8 Muslims are another story. Although they have been in America, often in small or dispersed populations, since at least the 17th century, they have as a group never assimilated to American values or customs. Indeed, as their numbers have grown in the last century (due to immigration, reproduction, and conversion), Muslims have grown farther apart from the spirit and practice of being American. The outrage of “honor” killings and domestic terrorism are only two of many evidences that Islam seeks to separate itself from Western society.
1.9 Muslim separation arises from the Qur’an as well as the Hadith and Sunna, which teach a world view as opposed to ours, as the barren surface of the moon is to the lush richness of Earth. It is indeed as though the majority of Muslims came from another planet, or at least another age.
2.0 Americans and Europeans who cling to utopian multicultural ideology, are aggravating this separation. They encourage Muslims, or people of other nationalities, simply to remain as they came off the boat; or even to remake America in their own image. For example, today’s Boston Globe had a front-page article about Muslims in America. An image of smiling young women with colorful hijabs wrapped around their heads led into the article, which said under its title,
“It was hard to be a Muslim child after 9/11, and it stayed hard for a while. But edges softened and the children have grown up, defining for themselves an American way.”
(By Lisa Wangsness, Globe Staff, 9/8/11; italics mine, JEB)
2.1 Those last six words stuck out at me like the flag-less fortress of a mosque. “Defining for themselves an American way”? At first I thought it was a stylistic error, but in context with the celebration of 9/11, in which Americans ought to unite for our nation and against especially Islamic terrorism, the meaning was unmistakable: followers of Mohammed do not need to assimilate to American values; they can define America for themselves.
2.2 I beg to differ. As an observer of the agonies of Europe with their “immigrants” or “Asians”, I am acutely aware that Muslim immigrants, as a group and with some exceptions, intend not only to avoid assimilation to our values, but instead to assimilate us to theirs. Whereas other immigrants from the Jews to the Japanese have learned to accept American or European ways (while keeping their own customs in “Germantowns” and “Little Italies”), Mohammedans will have no such peaceful entry to civilized society. In fact, they strive for a universal caliphate, in which all nations submit to Allah and obey shari’a law: quite simply, they want to take over the world.
2.3 Since its inception, Islam has been waging jihad, holy war, on other cultures. From the conquest of Mecca in 630; to over a thousand years of medieval aggression against the Byzantine Empire in the West, as well as against China in the East; to the Siege of Vienna in 1683, to the ancient racial hatred and continued war and atrocities in Sudan; to the mass destruction of the World Trade Center almost ten years ago; to the massacre of school children in Beslan in 2004; to the 7/7/05 bombings in London, and to this very day in the news:
“Berlin police on Thursday searched a mosque in the capital after arresting two suspects on charges of acquiring chemicals for a bomb attack in a raid in Kreuzberg and Neukoelln districts.” (Freedom Current, 9/8/11).
From its first moments to this moment, for almost 1400 years, Islam has waged war against the civilized world.
2.4 I know too well that Christianity has also perpetrated foul crimes; indeed some of them have been as barbaric as any Islamic jihad. I know also that other religions and ideologies have caused bloodshed and grief. I am sure that somewhere, sometime, even the peaceful followers of Buddha have waged war against someone. But with Islam there are three differences.
2.5 First of all, jihad is an integral part of the Islamic ideological system. The example of Mohammed, who was essentially a glorified warlord, with the Qur’an and other scriptures, make it explicitly clear that Mohammedans are commanded to fight the infidel until “the only worship is Allah’s” [2].
2.6 Therefore the Islamic call to the infidel nations is now as it always has been: We are first offered a chance to convert to Islam; if not, we may pay the jizya or poll tax and become dhimmis, second class citizens in an Islamicized nation; if we refuse this, we will face the howling hordes of Mohammed in battle.
2.7 The oft-heard apology that only a minority of Muslims are terrorists or “extremists” (whatever that means), would be laughable if it were not so deadly wrong. In fact, the “extremists” are the most faithful to the letter of the word of Allah. They are true disciples of their master, Mohammed, and they walk in all his bloody footsteps.
2.8 Imagine that a Bible-believing church, true disciples of Christ (Acts 11.26), had a mandate to take over the world not by the Gospel but by force. Their mission was not to “make disciples of all nations” (Matt 28.19), but to “bring all nations into submission to God”. Now imagine that the church had branches in practically every nation, and that many of the disciples were more than willing to die for their master. Add modern weapons, including in some cases nuclear arms, and you have Islam in the year 2011.
2.9 The second difference with Islam is that, over the past 1400 years, the Islamic lust for land, loot, and other things has not abated. It is as though Islam, unlike Judaism or Christianity, became developmentally delayed in the Dark Ages. Again, obedience to the word of Allah and the example of the Prophet still drive the disciple of Mohammed. There are whispered voices of reform, of assimilation to civilized values, but as yet they are few and far between. Even as I write, the Mohammedan mountain of bloody bodies and ruined nations rises higher.
3.0 Third, and perhaps most disturbing: Islam wages war against every culture it contacts. I am not familiar with any race or religion within its reach that has not felt the bite of the scimitar. When they are not busy killing one another over religious issues, Mohammedans wage jihad against the infidels. “Allahu akbar!”, “God is great!” is less a word of praise than a cry of war.
3.1 Given that Europe, if it survives its current multicultural madness, will raise itself and fight mightily against the Islamic jihad; and given that resistance movements in that once-proud continent have the Cross of Christ as part of their symbols, it becomes ever clearer that the present war is a continuation of an ancient struggle: the Cross against the Crescent.
3.2 The nation with the highest percentage of Christians, particularly evangelical Protestants and other activist denominations, is the United States of America. According to the Pew Forum, in 2007, 79.4% of Americans self-identified as Christians, and of those, 26.3 % were evangelicals. Compared to these numbers, the entire Islamic population of the US, from nominal Muslims to fiery disciples of Mohammed, was only 0.6%.
3.3 Yet from this miniscule number have come the Hasans, the Somali gangsters, and the despicable “honor” killers. The civilized people of America, as well as of Europe, Australia, and of nations all over the world, have to face this threat with a will of steel.
3.4 The Cross of Christ is rising against the Crescent of Mohammed. All free people, whether Christian or Jew or Atheist (and yes, reformed Muslim also), must gather to drive out the army of Islam; for if the Crescent should prevail over the Cross, the unbeliever will die a worse death than the believer. Christians and Jews could at least live as dhimmis; no such provision exists for Atheists, nor for pagans, whom the Qur’an calls mushrikun. We must all put our differences aside to stop the juggernaut of jihad.
3.5 As I complete this writing, I again imagine the stark fortress of the mosque. The Prime Minister of Turkey, Recep Erdogan, once said, “Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers." (Daniel Pipes, re: BBC News, 2002) For the Mohammedan, the very house of worship is a symbol of war. For anyone still caught in the multicultural misconception that Islam is a “religion of peace," this declaration should awaken the soundest sleeper.
3.6 Personally, I wish the disciples of Mohammed were truly peaceful, or at least would confine themselves to hateful words like those of the Westboro Batpist Church. Even those who preach, “God hates (fill in the blank)”, at least do not bomb Gay bars or open fire at military funerals. Even though their message is false, because based entirely on the Old Testament law, with not a grain of the Gospel: still I would rather have millions of Westboro people around, than have American women gang-raped because they were “indecently dressed”.
3.7 I will stand shoulder to shoulder with anyone, of any persuasion, who opposes the Islamic jihad, shari’a law, and that world-class criminal, Mohammed. We can and will deal with our differences in civil debate, when the Cross has at last crushed the Crescent. We must ensure that we have remaining to us and to our children, a civilization which allows us the freedom to debate our heads off. For if we fail in this, the disciples of Mohammed will take off those heads.
John E. Billings
9/10/11
Notes:
[1] Yes (and despite what I once believed), the United States are a Christian nation. In the Declaration of Independence, the Founders said “..(people) are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights...”. Again, in the closing words, “...for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on Divine Providence...” These words would have been understood by any person then living as references to their common Christian heritage. Whether they were of one sect or another, whether Deist or, like Thomas Paine, freethinkers, our Founders understood that their new nation was firmly founded on Christian principles.
[2] Following are a few verses from the Qur‘an, permitting or commanding jihad against unbelievers:
9.005 So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
9.029 Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.
9.073 O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination.
25.052 So do not follow the unbelievers, and strive against them a mighty striving with it.
48.029 Mohammed is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another.
Coda:
If these verses do not prove that Mohammedans wage war against infidels according to the Qur’an, and the example of their prophet, what proof would be needed? Why do Mohammedan clerics quote these verses, and others like them, when inciting jihad? If these verses, and the behavior of Mohammedans in obedience to them, do not prove that Islam is at war with Western civilization, would another 9/11 (God forbid) make the point? May we led into all truth
1.1 As I considered the impending celebrations and protests around 9/11/2011, the tenth anniversary of the most devastating Islamic terrorist attack on my nation, I suddenly saw a new and strange image. In the South, I had worshiped at several churches, and visited many more. Every one of them had an American flag, either on a flagpole outside or set on the left side of the auditorium stage. I have not visited a New England church yet, but expect to see the same display of loyalty to the United States and our Constitution. Such were the pictures in my mind.
1.2 Yet at that moment, I realized that of all the mosques I had seen, whether in person or in images, I had never seen our flag displayed. I went online, and assiduously studied images of mosques all around the US. The Stars and Stripes were nowhere to be found, not on a pole, neither inside, not anywhere. The mosques stood boldly, squarely, set like fortresses, minarets towering above their surroundings. There was not a US flag among them.
1.3 The implication rang like a bell. Even if a church, or a Jewish temple, had no US flag on its property, it would not sound an alarm. Neither Christianity nor Judaism was involved in attacking this nation on 9/11. The assault was intrinsically Islamic, complete with the takfir, “Allahu akbar!” Since then, we have seen numerous Islamic attacks in America.
1.4 We have witnessed the massacre of 13 people and the wounding of 29 others at Fort Hood, Texas, by one Major Nidal Hasan. Like the 9/11 Islamokaze killers, Hasan shouted, “Allahu akbar!" We have witnessed too many (when even one would be too many) women and girls killed for an inherently abusive sense of “honor” (which somehow applies only to females).
1.5 This heartbreaking list includes Amina and Sarah Said, whose father, Yaser Said, molested them when they were young. When as teens they showed interest in non-Muslim life and non-Muslim boys, Said brutally shot them both to death. 1/1/2008. Then after this crime against womanhood, like a true soldier of Allah, he ran away into hiding. As of this writing, Yaser Said is still at large.
1.6 Compared to people who practice such barbarity, neither Christian nor Jew needs to display outward signs of loyalty. Neither Christian nor Jew is inclined to execute his daughters, much less for the sake of “honor”. Such behavior is extremely unwelcome in any civilized nation, and must be met with steely resistance.
1.7 Now concerning loyalty: the US was and is a Christian nation [1]; and Israel, nation of the Jews, is both our ally and the light of the Middle East. Neither Christians nor Jews need to show the American flag on their houses of worship to prove adherence to civilized standards of behavior or national identity, although the display of colors is always welcome.
1.8 Muslims are another story. Although they have been in America, often in small or dispersed populations, since at least the 17th century, they have as a group never assimilated to American values or customs. Indeed, as their numbers have grown in the last century (due to immigration, reproduction, and conversion), Muslims have grown farther apart from the spirit and practice of being American. The outrage of “honor” killings and domestic terrorism are only two of many evidences that Islam seeks to separate itself from Western society.
1.9 Muslim separation arises from the Qur’an as well as the Hadith and Sunna, which teach a world view as opposed to ours, as the barren surface of the moon is to the lush richness of Earth. It is indeed as though the majority of Muslims came from another planet, or at least another age.
2.0 Americans and Europeans who cling to utopian multicultural ideology, are aggravating this separation. They encourage Muslims, or people of other nationalities, simply to remain as they came off the boat; or even to remake America in their own image. For example, today’s Boston Globe had a front-page article about Muslims in America. An image of smiling young women with colorful hijabs wrapped around their heads led into the article, which said under its title,
“It was hard to be a Muslim child after 9/11, and it stayed hard for a while. But edges softened and the children have grown up, defining for themselves an American way.”
(By Lisa Wangsness, Globe Staff, 9/8/11; italics mine, JEB)
2.1 Those last six words stuck out at me like the flag-less fortress of a mosque. “Defining for themselves an American way”? At first I thought it was a stylistic error, but in context with the celebration of 9/11, in which Americans ought to unite for our nation and against especially Islamic terrorism, the meaning was unmistakable: followers of Mohammed do not need to assimilate to American values; they can define America for themselves.
2.2 I beg to differ. As an observer of the agonies of Europe with their “immigrants” or “Asians”, I am acutely aware that Muslim immigrants, as a group and with some exceptions, intend not only to avoid assimilation to our values, but instead to assimilate us to theirs. Whereas other immigrants from the Jews to the Japanese have learned to accept American or European ways (while keeping their own customs in “Germantowns” and “Little Italies”), Mohammedans will have no such peaceful entry to civilized society. In fact, they strive for a universal caliphate, in which all nations submit to Allah and obey shari’a law: quite simply, they want to take over the world.
2.3 Since its inception, Islam has been waging jihad, holy war, on other cultures. From the conquest of Mecca in 630; to over a thousand years of medieval aggression against the Byzantine Empire in the West, as well as against China in the East; to the Siege of Vienna in 1683, to the ancient racial hatred and continued war and atrocities in Sudan; to the mass destruction of the World Trade Center almost ten years ago; to the massacre of school children in Beslan in 2004; to the 7/7/05 bombings in London, and to this very day in the news:
“Berlin police on Thursday searched a mosque in the capital after arresting two suspects on charges of acquiring chemicals for a bomb attack in a raid in Kreuzberg and Neukoelln districts.” (Freedom Current, 9/8/11).
From its first moments to this moment, for almost 1400 years, Islam has waged war against the civilized world.
2.4 I know too well that Christianity has also perpetrated foul crimes; indeed some of them have been as barbaric as any Islamic jihad. I know also that other religions and ideologies have caused bloodshed and grief. I am sure that somewhere, sometime, even the peaceful followers of Buddha have waged war against someone. But with Islam there are three differences.
2.5 First of all, jihad is an integral part of the Islamic ideological system. The example of Mohammed, who was essentially a glorified warlord, with the Qur’an and other scriptures, make it explicitly clear that Mohammedans are commanded to fight the infidel until “the only worship is Allah’s” [2].
2.6 Therefore the Islamic call to the infidel nations is now as it always has been: We are first offered a chance to convert to Islam; if not, we may pay the jizya or poll tax and become dhimmis, second class citizens in an Islamicized nation; if we refuse this, we will face the howling hordes of Mohammed in battle.
2.7 The oft-heard apology that only a minority of Muslims are terrorists or “extremists” (whatever that means), would be laughable if it were not so deadly wrong. In fact, the “extremists” are the most faithful to the letter of the word of Allah. They are true disciples of their master, Mohammed, and they walk in all his bloody footsteps.
2.8 Imagine that a Bible-believing church, true disciples of Christ (Acts 11.26), had a mandate to take over the world not by the Gospel but by force. Their mission was not to “make disciples of all nations” (Matt 28.19), but to “bring all nations into submission to God”. Now imagine that the church had branches in practically every nation, and that many of the disciples were more than willing to die for their master. Add modern weapons, including in some cases nuclear arms, and you have Islam in the year 2011.
2.9 The second difference with Islam is that, over the past 1400 years, the Islamic lust for land, loot, and other things has not abated. It is as though Islam, unlike Judaism or Christianity, became developmentally delayed in the Dark Ages. Again, obedience to the word of Allah and the example of the Prophet still drive the disciple of Mohammed. There are whispered voices of reform, of assimilation to civilized values, but as yet they are few and far between. Even as I write, the Mohammedan mountain of bloody bodies and ruined nations rises higher.
3.0 Third, and perhaps most disturbing: Islam wages war against every culture it contacts. I am not familiar with any race or religion within its reach that has not felt the bite of the scimitar. When they are not busy killing one another over religious issues, Mohammedans wage jihad against the infidels. “Allahu akbar!”, “God is great!” is less a word of praise than a cry of war.
3.1 Given that Europe, if it survives its current multicultural madness, will raise itself and fight mightily against the Islamic jihad; and given that resistance movements in that once-proud continent have the Cross of Christ as part of their symbols, it becomes ever clearer that the present war is a continuation of an ancient struggle: the Cross against the Crescent.
3.2 The nation with the highest percentage of Christians, particularly evangelical Protestants and other activist denominations, is the United States of America. According to the Pew Forum, in 2007, 79.4% of Americans self-identified as Christians, and of those, 26.3 % were evangelicals. Compared to these numbers, the entire Islamic population of the US, from nominal Muslims to fiery disciples of Mohammed, was only 0.6%.
3.3 Yet from this miniscule number have come the Hasans, the Somali gangsters, and the despicable “honor” killers. The civilized people of America, as well as of Europe, Australia, and of nations all over the world, have to face this threat with a will of steel.
3.4 The Cross of Christ is rising against the Crescent of Mohammed. All free people, whether Christian or Jew or Atheist (and yes, reformed Muslim also), must gather to drive out the army of Islam; for if the Crescent should prevail over the Cross, the unbeliever will die a worse death than the believer. Christians and Jews could at least live as dhimmis; no such provision exists for Atheists, nor for pagans, whom the Qur’an calls mushrikun. We must all put our differences aside to stop the juggernaut of jihad.
3.5 As I complete this writing, I again imagine the stark fortress of the mosque. The Prime Minister of Turkey, Recep Erdogan, once said, “Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers." (Daniel Pipes, re: BBC News, 2002) For the Mohammedan, the very house of worship is a symbol of war. For anyone still caught in the multicultural misconception that Islam is a “religion of peace," this declaration should awaken the soundest sleeper.
3.6 Personally, I wish the disciples of Mohammed were truly peaceful, or at least would confine themselves to hateful words like those of the Westboro Batpist Church. Even those who preach, “God hates (fill in the blank)”, at least do not bomb Gay bars or open fire at military funerals. Even though their message is false, because based entirely on the Old Testament law, with not a grain of the Gospel: still I would rather have millions of Westboro people around, than have American women gang-raped because they were “indecently dressed”.
3.7 I will stand shoulder to shoulder with anyone, of any persuasion, who opposes the Islamic jihad, shari’a law, and that world-class criminal, Mohammed. We can and will deal with our differences in civil debate, when the Cross has at last crushed the Crescent. We must ensure that we have remaining to us and to our children, a civilization which allows us the freedom to debate our heads off. For if we fail in this, the disciples of Mohammed will take off those heads.
John E. Billings
9/10/11
Notes:
[1] Yes (and despite what I once believed), the United States are a Christian nation. In the Declaration of Independence, the Founders said “..(people) are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights...”. Again, in the closing words, “...for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on Divine Providence...” These words would have been understood by any person then living as references to their common Christian heritage. Whether they were of one sect or another, whether Deist or, like Thomas Paine, freethinkers, our Founders understood that their new nation was firmly founded on Christian principles.
[2] Following are a few verses from the Qur‘an, permitting or commanding jihad against unbelievers:
9.005 So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
9.029 Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.
9.073 O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination.
25.052 So do not follow the unbelievers, and strive against them a mighty striving with it.
48.029 Mohammed is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another.
Coda:
If these verses do not prove that Mohammedans wage war against infidels according to the Qur’an, and the example of their prophet, what proof would be needed? Why do Mohammedan clerics quote these verses, and others like them, when inciting jihad? If these verses, and the behavior of Mohammedans in obedience to them, do not prove that Islam is at war with Western civilization, would another 9/11 (God forbid) make the point? May we led into all truth
The Common Decimator
The Common Decimator
8/2011
At the date of this writing, the world population is 6,908,800,000+, or approximately 7 billion people (US Census Bureau). The population will reach 9 billion about 2040, or 30 years from now.
To begin to grasp what this means, let a dime represent one person. If a dime is about 1 millimeter thick, and we stack 1000 dimes, we have 1000 millimeters, or 1 meter. Thus 1 meter represents 1000 people. If we stack 1000 of these meters atop each other, we have 1,000,000 millimeters, which equals 1 kilometer.
If we again stack 1000 of these kilometer stacks atop each other, we have 1,000,000,000 millimeters, which would represent 1 billion people. Now stack eight more of these billion-millimeter stacks atop each other, and we have the projected population of the world in 2040. It is a super-stack of 9,000,000,000 millimeters, or 9 kilometers.
This is slightly taller than Mount Everest. It is over 7 kilometers deeper than the Grand Canyon. It rises to the cruising altitude of a passenger jetliner. The stack of shiny little dimes, each representing one person, will reach up to a jetliner making its contrail in the sky. This is the world population, 30 years from now.
I am not sure what that world would be like, but I believe it will not come to pass. There are limits to growth of any organism's population. We will very soon reach our limit. Perhaps, in the long view of history, we will be seen to have already past it.
This concept of the limits to growth was first published by an Englishman, the Reverend Thomas Malthus (1766-1834). Malthus was skilled in political economy and demography. He wrote An Essay on the Principle of Population (six editions, 1798-1826). According to Malthus, "The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man". In other words, there is only so much Earth.
This limitation of the Earth over the increasing needs of human population implied that at some point, humanity would begin to experience scarcity of food and other supplies. Said Malthus, "The power of population is so superior to the power of the earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race." Some of Malthus' critics coined the sardonic term, "Malthusian catastrophe". They believed that
improvements in science and technology would provide food and other supplies indefinitely.
It has been 213 years since Malthus published his theory. Let us look at the world of today, and see if Malthusian predictions are valid. We should first note that Malthus did not know about our environmental conditions. For instance, he could not have predicted the effects of air and water pollution, the worldwide dependency on petroleum, large-scale deforestation, and global warming. Now let us look at some facts.
Fish stocks:
According to the scientific journal Nature, stocks of large predatory fish, such as cod, tuna, and various sharks, have been depleted by 90% since 1950. Where there were one hundred bluefin tuna, now there are ten. Where there were ten swordfish, now there is one. In the past sixty years, the alpha predators of the sea have been literally decimated. With increasing demand for swordfish, tuna, and other fish over the next few decades, what will remain?
Sylvia Earle says, "We will never get back to what we had in the oceans 50 years ago, but we still have a small window of opportunity to save the last few big fish before they are exterminated." Consider that phrase, never get back. According to Earle, due to the increasing demands of human population, the seemingly endless supplies of fish are gone forever.
Some fisheries have already collapsed. In 1497, the explorer John Cabot reported that schools of cod, Gadus morhua, near Newfoundland were so thick that they virtually blocked his ship. The northern cod fishery on the Grand Banks increased over the next 400 years, until by the mid-1950's, 254,000 tonnes of cod were being caught annually. In the 1960's, large new factory-fishing ships from Canada, the United States, Europe and as far away as Asia began to take their toll of fish from the Grand Banks.
Seeing their catches of cod decline, Canada and the United States banished the foreign fishing fleets to 200 nautical miles off the coast. However, in order to increase catches, Canada soon introduced the great stern-trawlers. These "draggers" scoured the bottom of the sea with nets the size of football fields. They took not only whole schools of cod, but destroyed other species and the benthic (sea bottom) ecosystems as well. The extent of "collateral damage" to benthic species has never been documented, but the effect on cod stocks became evident within a decade.
In 1968, the cod fishery peaked at 822,960 tonnes. By 1975, despite the use of sonar and other new technology, the catch had fallen to less than 304,814 tonnes. In the following years, catches continued to decline. Then, in 1992, the fishery suddenly collapsed. Nets came up empty, and fishermen demanded that the government do something.
After much debate, in 1993 the Canadian government imposed an indefinite moratorium on fishing the Grand Banks. This put 40,000 people out of work in five Canadian provinces, and required several billion dollars in relief to coastal communities. Recently, there have been some signs that cod are increasing in numbers. Yet as of this date, the northern cod fishery has not recovered.
Immature Maine lobsters, Homarus americanus, are one of the cod's favorite foods. Without cod predation, the lobster has increased in numbers, such that the price of lobster has held steady or actually decreased. That is why we see tanks of lobsters in grocery stores all over the USA.
A pattern of fishing has emerged. When people decimate one species, they target another. Often this species has increased due to the removal of its predator. For example, in the Chesapeake Bay, sharks have been virtually fished out. Sharks were a major predator of bullfish, or cownose rays, Rhinoptera bonasus. The loss of sharks resulted in cownose rays increasing to great schools and wreaking havoc on the oyster banks.
In place of sharks, and to relieve pressure on the oysters, the fishing industry has now targeted cownose rays. They are being marketed under the more pleasant name of Chesapeake rays. The ray's flesh looks more like beef than fish. What will happen if people develop a taste for Chesapeake rays, and the demand begins to rise as with cod? Perhaps we will soon be eating "Chesapeake worms".
The ability of fishing to satisfy human demand has reached its limit, according to the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). The IFPRI recommends that fish farming and better fishing management, will be necessary to continue to meet the demand. However, fish farming has its environmental price as well.
In southeast Asia, fish and especially shrimp farming has resulted in the destruction of large areas of mangrove forest. Besides destroying complex ecosystems, the loss of mangroves endangers human occupation of the coast. The mangrove forests, like wetlands elsewhere, protect the coastline during storms.
The concentration of fish in aquaculture pens results in the spread of diseases and parasites, which in turn requires the use of antibiotics and other chemicals. Fish droppings and uneaten feed accumulate around the pens, polluting the water and making it unfit for natural populations of organisms. When the water becomes too filthy to use, the farmers simply move on to another area, creating a cycle of habitat destruction and pollution.
Fish farming is also very inefficient. For instance, 1.1 kilograms of feed are needed to produce 0.5 kilograms of salmon; 11.8 kilograms of feed produce only 0.5 kilograms of bluefin tuna. The feed consists of varied seafood such as squid, blue mackerel, and sand eel (San Francisco Chronicle). Thus huge amounts of smaller fish are needed to supply the fish farming (and land animal) industries. Fish caught and ground into feed currently amount to 37%, over one third, of all global seafood.
The human response to overfishing is first to use more efficient technology to get more fish. Then, when the fish stock collapses, fish out another species, or else begin aquaculture at great cost to the environment. Perhaps we should fish directly from the bottom of the food chain. A future advertisement might read, "Good for whales, good for you. Have some delicious plankton stew!"
In 1954, The Inexhaustible Sea was published by Daniel Hawthorne and Francis Minot. In those days, the vast expanses of ocean must have seemed indeed an inexhaustible source of food. Only fifty years later, it has become clear that the human race's increasingly voracious appetite for seafood cannot be supported forever. Whether fish are wild-caught or farmed, there is really no such thing as a sustainable fishery. The inexhaustible sea is becoming exhausted.
Deforestation:
Half the world's tropical forests have been cleared or degraded (Forestry Dept, FAO). Rainforests once covered 14% of Earth's surface, but now cover only 6%. Today, 6.1 square kilometers of rainforest are destroyed by cutting, clearing, burning, and bulldozing, every second. This amounts to a forested area twice the size of Florida being lost every year. Scientists believe that the world's rainforests may be completely destroyed within 40 years.
In particular, the Amazon Basin contains over half of the world's remaining rainforest. Currently, forest covers an area of about 5.5 billion square kilometers. This is the size of the United States east of the Mississippi.
As the vast Amazon rainforest removes the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, from the air, it produces over 20% of the Earth's oxygen. For this reason, the Amazon rainforest has been called the Lungs of the Earth. Yet since 1960, when logging and slash-and-burn agriculture began to be widely practiced, 20% of the Amazon rainforest has been destroyed. According to the World Wildlife Fund, half of Amazonia will be deforested by 2030. Already, Amazonian lands cleared of forest are visible from outer space.
As population pressures increase in Brasil and other nations of Amazonia, all unprotected rainforest may be cut or burned in this century. It is difficult to quantify the loss of animal and plant species, habitat, food resources, and fresh air, should the Lungs of the Earth be completely deforested. Imagine losing 20% of your breath.
Logging and agriculture are also destroying rainforests elsewhere in the world. In Central America, 40% of the rainforests have been cleared in the past 40 years. According to the FAO, since the early 1900's, 77.2% of west African forest has been destroyed, and the remnants are often degraded. Nigeria in particular lost 55.7% of its forests between 2000 and 2005. In Madagascar, only 34% of the original rainforest remained in 1985.
Indonesia has the most extensive rainforests in Asia, but they are rapidly being cleared for timber and farming. In the 1960's, 82% of the country was covered by rainforest; by 1995, the forested land had been reduced to 53%, and today only 49% of Indonesia is forested. Much of this forest is second-growth and degraded.
Forests in temperate zones, although they do not receive as much media attention as the tropics, are receiving the attention of the timber, agriculture, and other industries. In the USA, about 90% of the original old-growth (virgin) forest has been cleared since 1600. Most of the remaining old-growth forests in the lower 48 states are on public lands, and in the Pacific Northwest, about 80% of this is slated for logging. Of course, forests have grown back (secondary forest) in some areas, but the demise of old-growth forest and its replacement with tree farms have destroyed entire ecosystems, and led to the extinction of species such as the magnificent Ivory-Billed Woodpecker.
Alaska is the last of the states with large tracts of virtually untouched old-growth forest. Even so, in what is now the Tongass National Forest, about 50% of the largest trees were cut before logging was restricted. Then in 2009, President Obama permitted Pacific Log and Lumber to clear-cut up to 1.5 square kilometers of this unique temperate rainforest.
In Europe, since prehistoric times, people have been cutting down old-growth forests. Many areas, such as the British Isles, have lost their old-growth forests completely. They now have a mixture of secondary growth, pastureland, and farms. In Eastern Europe, the boreal forest or taiga still covers much of its original land. However, China has virtually deforested itself, and now imports timber from the Russian taiga. Forests everywhere are being decimated by an increasing human population.
"Once there were Billions":
As I mentioned above, the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker became extinct primarily due to the loss of old-growth forests in which it nested. It was gone before we knew it. There are several ways anthropogenic (human-caused) extinction may occur: through habitat destruction, the introduction of exotic and competitive species, and direct predation (hunting).
Following are a few of the species which have been lost due to human activities, with the probable causes, location, and date of their extinction, last reliable sighting, or last captive specimen.
Mammals:
Yangtze River Dolphin or Baiji, Lipotes vexillifer, China, hunting, by-catching with fish, habitat destruction, 1997. This is the first known extinction of cetacean.
Japanese Sea Lion, Zalophus japonicus, Japan, hunting, killing by fishermen, 1951.
Tasmanian Wolf, Tasmania, killing as pests,1930.
Sea Mink, Neovison macrodon, Northeastern US, fur hunting ,1860.
Arabian Gazelle, Gazella arabica, Farasan Islands, Saudi Arabia, hunting, 1825.
Birds:
Dodo, Raphus cucullatus, Mauritius Island, introduced predators, habitat destruction, circa 1693.
Great Auk, Pinguinus impennis, North Atlantic, hunting, introduced predators, 1852.
Carolina Parakeet, Conuropsis carolinensis, Southeastern US, hunting, killing as pests, habitat destruction, Cincinnati Zoo, US, 1918.
Laughing Owl, Sceloglaux albifacies, New Zealand, hunting, habitat destruction, introduced predators,1914.
Passenger Pigeon, Ectopistes migratorius, North America, hunting. When Europeans arrived in North America, there may have been 3 billion to 5 billion Passenger Pigeons; in the early 19th century, their flocks would sometimes darken the sky. When a demand for Passenger Pigeon meat developed, the great flocks were hunted to extinction. The last Passenger Pigeon died in the Cincinnati Zoo, US, 1914.
Reptiles and Amphibians:
Rodrigues giant day gecko, Phelsuma gigas, Rodrigues Island, Mascarenes, habitat destruction, introduced predators, 1842.
Domed Mauritius giant tortoise, Cylindraspis triserrata, Mauritius Island, hunting and introduced predators, circa 1795.
Round Island Burrowing Boa, Bolyeria multocarinata, Round Island, near Madagascar, habitat destruction by introduced pests, 1975.
Golden Toad, Incilius periglenes, Northern Costa Rica, habitat destruction, global warming (?), 1989.
Hula Painted Frog, Discoglossus nigriventer, Lake Hula, Northern Israel, habitat destruction, 1955.
Fishes:
Thicktail Chub, Gila crassicauda, Great Central Valley, California, US, habitat destruction and introduced predators, 1957.
Lake Titicaca Orestias, Orestias cuvieri, Lake Titicaca, Bolivia-Peru, introduced Lake Trout, circa 1945.
Houting, Coregonus oxyrinchus, rivers in Western Europe, overfishing and pollution, 1940.
Utah Lake sculpin, Cottus echinatus, Utah Lake, Utah, US, drought and pollution, circa 1935.
Ash Meadows killifish, Empetrichthys merriami, Ash Meadows, Nevada, US, habitat destruction and introduced predators, circa 1955.
Plants:
Woolly-stalked Begonia, Begonia eiromischa, Penang Island, Malasia, habitat destruction, circa 1898.
Tree Cyanea, Cyanea arborea, Maui, Hawaii, habitat destruction, 1928.
Saint Helena Olive, Nesiota elliptica, St. Helena Island, habitat destruction, 2003.
Giffard's cyanea, Cyanea giffardii, Island of Hawaii, habitat destruction, 1917 (?)
Bennett's Seaweed, Vanvoorstia bennettiana, Parramatta River, New South Wales, Australia, habitat destruction and pollution, 1886.
This list could go on for many pages. It could list mollusks, insects, and other lower animals that have become extinct due to human activities. It could list even more species that are threatened or endangered, but not yet extinct.
In fact, so many species are being lost that some scientists refer to the modern period as the Sixth Great Extinction. The previous major extinctions were: First, circa 440 million years ago (mya). 25% of families were lost (a family may consist of hundreds of species); Second, circa 370 mya, 19% of families lost; Third, circa 245 mya, 54% of families lost; Fourth, circa 210 mya, 23% of families lost; and the Fifth, circa 65 mya, 17% of families lost. These five earlier extinctions were all caused by a change in the physical environment, such as natural warming or cooling of the globe, tectonic and volcanic action, or impact by a large meteorite.
This new mass extinction is being caused by one species, Homo sapiens. Scientists place the Sixth Great Extinction as starting approximately the time humans began intensively hunting, about 100,000 years ago. Then, around 10,000 years ago, humans invented agriculture, and the extinctions increased dramatically.
Currently, we are losing species at a rate of three per hour. Scientists estimate that 50% of the Earth's remaining species will be extinct by the end of this century.
Primary causes are exhaustive hunting, fishing, and other forms of predation; introduction of exotic predators or competitors; habitat destruction and pollution.
The Brown Tree Snake, Boiga irregularis, probably arrived on the island of Guam in shipments of cargo, shortly after WWII (circa 1945). Because the island lacked native snakes or other predators, the birds of Guam had no adaptations to protect themselves from this menace. The snakes began to proliferate, preying on birds, frogs, and other small animals. Today, 60% of the native bird species have been killed off. The forests of Guam are quiet.
Global Warming/ climate change:
Overall, the globe is warming, and 97% of climate scientists agree that humans are at least adding to the trend. There is really no scientific controversy about this. There are local cold areas and weather fluctuations, but the overall trend is to a warmer global climate.
The only controversy comes from people who do not want to face facts: who prefer, for ideological reasons, to deny the obvious. Denying that the global temperature is rising, that humans are at least partially responsible, or that warming is already causing changes in the environment, is like denying that humans evolved from lower life forms*.
Before discussing anything else, let us pause for a moment and remember the Carteret Islands and their people. Off the coast of Papua New Guinea, the Carterets formed an atoll, a ring of coral keys surrounding a sunken volcano. The people of the Carteret Islands, approximately 2500 altogether, were subsistence farmers and fishermen. They had an unique culture tied to the islands they had called home for over 400 years.
Then the sea started rising over the coral atoll. At first, only a few beaches were covered, but gradually the flooding became more severe. Carteret islanders had to use canoes to navigate what were once forests and banana groves. Especially low-lying inhabited areas were inundated, and people began to move to the highest ground available.
Finally, in 2003, Papua New Guinea authorized the evacuation of Carteret islanders to Bouganville island. By 2007, the relocation was complete. The people of Carteret had lost their islands, their homes, and their way of life. Even their cemeteries were immersed.
The Carteret islanders are the first known people to be relocated due to rising sea levels. They have been called the world's first environmental refugees.
We should really have expected global warming, with all its associated changes in weather and habitats. We are putting back into the air, carbon which was sequestered during warm and humid periods of Earth's history. Moreover, we are releasing the carbon (as carbon dioxide) at an extremely high rate, compared to the rate at which it was transformed into coal and oil. Such a sudden release of greenhouse gases would result in much greater reflection of heat back to Earth, with a subsequent warming of the atmosphere. Given the current conditions, it would be surprising if global warming did not occur. Nonetheless, we do need evidence to support this hypothesis.
Exhibit A: Glaciers
The condition of glaciers is an important source of evidence for global warming. Increase in a glacier's mass is called accumulation; loss of mass is ablation. The most important factor in
determining the condition of a glacier is mass balance. This is the difference between accumulation and ablation. Thus, if a glacier's mass balance increases, the glacier is advancing; if it decreases, the glacier is retreating.
Although some glaciers in western Norway, Iceland, and New Zealand have shown an increase in mass balance, this is likely the result of local weather changes. Overall, the worldwide glacier mass balance is rapidly decreasing.
Between 1961 and 1997, or 36 years, the world's glaciers lost 3709 cubic kilometers of ice. This is equivalent to a cube 15.5 kilometers on each side. Imagine an ice cube 15.5 kilometers high, a mountain of ice almost twice the height of Mount Everest and 8.6 times the depth of the Grand Canyon. That is the global glacier loss as of 1997, 14 years ago.
The glaciers are still receding. In Glacier National Park (Montana, US), there are now 26 named glaciers, whereas there were 150 glaciers in 1850. This is a loss of 83%, and many of the existing glaciers are shrunken remnants. Perhaps the park needs a new name.
The Columbia Glacier in Prince William Sound is melting into the ocean at a rate of 24.4 meters per day. In Greenland, many glaciers are receding by several miles each year. In Bolivia, the Chacaltaya mountain range glacier has lost so much ice that a former ski resort, once the highest in the world at 5300 meters, is barren much of the year. The once-magnificent Chacaltaya Glacier, which covered 1600 square meters in the 1950's, may completely disappear by 2015.
Satellites monitored by NASA (National AeroSpace Administration) have shown that glaciers in Greenland are disappearing into the sea twice as fast as they were 10 years ago, and that the rate of glacial loss is increasing.
Exhibit B: Permafrost:
Another indicator of global warming is the condition of permanently frozen ground, or permafrost. Within the Arctic Circle, and at very high altitudes, the ground normally does not thaw out, even in mid-summer. However, many areas in the Northern Hemisphere have begun to show loss of permafrost.
Buildings in Fairbanks, Alaska have begun slumping or tilting as their foundations sink into the newly-soft soil. Northern Canada and Siberia, as well as high-altitude areas such as the Alps and Tibet, also report permafrost thaw.
Loss of permafrost, besides undermining buildings, can cause roads to sag and pipelines to crack. All structures built on the previously-stable permafrost are at risk. In addition, thawing permafrost can cause landslides as on Ellesmere Island in Canada. In high-altitude areas, rock slides become more common. One example occurred in 2003, when Alpine climbers were stranded on the mountain after a huge section of the Matterhorn broke free and fell.
Permafrost has been thawing, and will continue to thaw.
Exhibit C: Animal Migrations and Range Extensions
Let me begin with a personal story, anecdotal evidence if you will. I lived in northeast Florida from 1989 to 2010. In those 21 years, I saw several changes in animal and plant behavior. First of all, in 1989 I never saw a gecko. This makes sense, because all the geckos in Florida are exotics, brought accidentally or intentionally from warm climates such as the Mediterranean and the Caribbean.
Geckos do not withstand freezing weather, and thus were barred from Florida north of Orlando. Yet by the early 2000's, I began seeing these "ghost lizards", as I called them, swiftly moving across outdoor walls in the night. By 2010, as I prepared to leave, the ghostly geckos were a common sight. It is good to have them, perhaps, as they prey on insects, but I cannot help wondering if they are competing with a native predator.
Then there were the bananas. Many people in northeast Florida keep banana plants (for they are not true trees) as exotic decorations. Like the geckos, bananas are not native to Florida, although they grow almost everywhere in the peninsula. However, when the first freezing weather hits, they turn brown and die back to their roots. Thus, they do not grow throughout the year. This is significant because bananas must grow steadily for two or three years, before they bear fruit.
When I arrived in Florida, fruiting bananas were exceedingly rare; usually they grew in very sheltered locations. Then as the 1990's became the new millenium, I noticed increasing numbers of bananas not turning entirely brown, but remaining green through the winter. The banana plants were growing year-long, and began increasingly to produce fruit.
Finally, there is the blue land crab, Cardisoma guanhumi. Standard references give its range as the Caribbean and no further north than Vero Beach, Florida. I remember large colonies of them in 1978, at the University of Miami, near the southern end of the peninsula.
Then, in 2009, while visiting St. Augustine, a friend pointed out to me some holes in the grass near the shore. These burrows were from 3 to about 10 centimeters in diameter. I became excited, remembering the crabs near U of M. But we waited quietly until one and then another crab began to appear.
They were indeed blue land crabs. There were males and females, small and large; evidently they had been breeding. I later found another colony nearby, which proved that the crabs had established themselves far northward of their previous range. In fact, St. Augustine is 255 kilometers up the coast from Vero Beach.
I realize that these are anecdotes and not reliable studies. Therefore, let us look at some of the evidence gained from scientific research on animal migrations.
In 2009, the National Audubon Society studied the 305 species of birds which winter in the United States. Based on analysis of 40 years of observations, 60% of the bird species had moved their winter ranges northward an average of 56.3 kilometers. The highly adaptable birds most likely to visit bird feeders had a northward movement of over 70% . Of grassland bird species, 38% had moved northward from their previous winter range.
A study reported in the journal Science, in 2011, showed that 2000 species of animals, including mammals, birds, insects, and many plants also, are moving northward from their previous ranges, at an average rate of 4.6 meters per day. Mountain-dwelling species are moving more slowly upward, at about 1.2 meters per year. All these animals and plants are moving to cooler climates, or to higher altitudes, but how far can they move?
Stanford University biologist, Terry Roots, notes that the American pika, Ochotona princeps, a small rabbit-like creature, has been studied in Yellowstone National Park for more than a century. In 1900, according to Roots, the pika's range extended only to 2377 meters in altitude, but in 2004 they were seen at 2895 meters, an increase of 18%. What happens when the pika, or any of the thousands of animals and plants which are moving northward or upward, run out of room? And what of species such as reptiles and amphibians, that cannot migrate at all?
One species that already cannot move further north, is the polar bear, Ursus maritimus. Due to the longer, ice-free summers, polar bears in Russia have been stranded on land. Since polar bears hunt for the most part on sea ice, the reduction in ice has resulted in a 22% drop in the population in Western Hudson Bay, Manitoba, Canada, since the early 1980's.
According to United States Geological Survey, reduction in Arctic sea ice may kill off 66% of the entire world population of polar bears within 50 years. The remaining bears will be widely distributed, making reproduction more difficult, and further reducing the population. Polar bears are rapidly running out of ice.
According to the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
approximately half of 36 fish stocks in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean have been shifting northward or into deeper water over the last 40 years. Some fish stocks are disappearing from American waters, while others are moving from more southerly waters, into the New England fishery areas.
Janet Nye, a researcher at the NOAA Fisheries Science Center in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, and lead author of the study, followed fish survey data from 1968 to 2007. According to Nye, fish as diverse as Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua, winter flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus, and spiny dogfish, Squalus acanthius, have been moving to cooler waters. Not only are these species moving away from their historic ranges; southern species such as Atlantic croaker, Micropogonius undulatus, are now being caught in New England waters.
On the European side of the Atlantic, species previously confined to the southern seas have also begun to appear. The sharpnose shark, Rhizoprionodon terraenovae, blue marlin, Makaira nigricans, and big-eyed tunny, Thunnus obesus, are a few of the fishes that have made their way north into waters off the British Isles.
Plankton and invertebrates have also begun to migrate northward. The slipper lobster, Scyllarides latus, normally native to the Mediterranean, is being caught with increasing frequency in British waters.
At the other end of the Earth, the king crab, Paralomis birsteini, has been found in large numbers, marching up the Antarctic slope. According to James McClintock, a professor of polar and marine biology at the University of Alabama, these crabs have not lived in the shallow regions of the Antarctic Ocean for hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of years. Yet they are moving in like an occupying army.
Scientists are concerned that these migrating species may disrupt or destroy marine ecosystems. The king crab, for instance, preys on practically everything it can catch. Antarctic creatures such as clams and snails have never had to adapt to shell-crushing predators; their shells are soft and the crabs could decimated them.
All of these migrations and range extensions, if carried out over centuries, would allow other species in the areas to adapt. Yet because of the rapid rate of migration, collisions between predators and prey, or competitors for food and other resources, can be expected to cause ecological damage and the extinction of many species. Some creatures, like the polar bear, may have already reached their limit.
The ultimate question is: when will we reach our limit? Already, resources in .....nations are under stress, and .....people are suffering.
The availability of fresh water for drinking, agriculture, and other uses, is rapidly becoming a global problem. There are differing degrees of water shortage. "Water stress" means that there are 1500 cubic meters of water available per person, per year; "water scarcity" means less than 1000 cubic meters per year.
During the 20th century,according to the World Health Organization, the world's population increased from about 1.4 billion to over 6 billion, about 400%. However, our use of fresh water has increased 900%. Currently, 2.8 billion people live in areas of high water stress, and 1.2 billion are actually suffering water scarcity. By 2030 over 3.9 billion people, or about half the world population, may face water scarcity.
Already, in China for example, 60% of cities are water-stressed. The once-mighty Yellow River now has only 10% of its natural flow, and the demand for water still increases. In 2006, India used about 829 billion cubic meters per year. This is approximately the size of Lake Erie. By 2050, the demand will double to 1658 billion or 1.7 trillion cubic meters, far exceeding the 1.4 trillion cubic meter supply.
In Africa, lack of water will afflict over 25 nations by 2025; 13 nations already are suffering either stress or scarcity of water. The once-majestic Nile River now carries little water to the sea. By 2050, the three nations through which the Nile runs, Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan, may come into conflict over the remaining water. There is also a potential water war in southern Africa, between Botswana, Namibia, and Angola. The Cuito River supplies all three nations, but these nations have already experienced conflict for other causes, and water stress would likely plunge the area into war.
In 2007, at least 11% of the population of Europe experienced some degree of water shortage. In the United States, water shortages exist also, primarily in the western and southwestern states. As population increases toward the 10 billion mark, water stress and scarcity will afflict large areas of the globe. This could result in mass migration toward relatively well-watered northern lands, such as Europe, Canada and the United States, which would greatly increase the existing immigrant pressures in those nations.
The House of War:
The current immigration to northern nations, especially in Europe, has been primarily from nations dominated by Islam. According to Islamic political theory, there are two worlds: the house of Islam, or dar al-Islam; and the rest of the world, dar al-Harb: the house of war. When someone says that Islam is a religion of peace, they speak the truth, because when a nation falls under Islam, it is at peace with the directives of shari'a, the code of Islamic law. It is pacified into dar al-Islam.
Historically, Islam has always extended over the world; rarely has it receded. In 1970, according to the Islamic Strategy Conference, Chicago, there were 100,000 Muslims in the US. In 2008, there were 9,000,000. This is an increase of 8900%. Where there was one Muslim, now there are nine. By 2040, there will be 50,000,000 Muslims in the US. This is an increase of 9000%. Where there are now nine Muslims, within 30 years there will be 89.
The population of the US in 2008 was 304.5 million. If the Muslim population was 9 million, the US was 3% Muslim. In 2040, the total US population will be 377.4 million. If the Muslim population increases to 50 million, the US will be 13% Muslim. This would present a very different America than we live in today.
Taking western Europe as an example, the approximate percentages of Muslims follow:
United Kingdom: 2.8
France: 10.0
Netherlands: 5.4
Belgium: 3.4
Germany: 3.7
Sweden: 3.1
Denmark: 3.0
Norway: 1.0
Spain: 1.2
Switzerland 3.1
8/2011
At the date of this writing, the world population is 6,908,800,000+, or approximately 7 billion people (US Census Bureau). The population will reach 9 billion about 2040, or 30 years from now.
To begin to grasp what this means, let a dime represent one person. If a dime is about 1 millimeter thick, and we stack 1000 dimes, we have 1000 millimeters, or 1 meter. Thus 1 meter represents 1000 people. If we stack 1000 of these meters atop each other, we have 1,000,000 millimeters, which equals 1 kilometer.
If we again stack 1000 of these kilometer stacks atop each other, we have 1,000,000,000 millimeters, which would represent 1 billion people. Now stack eight more of these billion-millimeter stacks atop each other, and we have the projected population of the world in 2040. It is a super-stack of 9,000,000,000 millimeters, or 9 kilometers.
This is slightly taller than Mount Everest. It is over 7 kilometers deeper than the Grand Canyon. It rises to the cruising altitude of a passenger jetliner. The stack of shiny little dimes, each representing one person, will reach up to a jetliner making its contrail in the sky. This is the world population, 30 years from now.
I am not sure what that world would be like, but I believe it will not come to pass. There are limits to growth of any organism's population. We will very soon reach our limit. Perhaps, in the long view of history, we will be seen to have already past it.
This concept of the limits to growth was first published by an Englishman, the Reverend Thomas Malthus (1766-1834). Malthus was skilled in political economy and demography. He wrote An Essay on the Principle of Population (six editions, 1798-1826). According to Malthus, "The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man". In other words, there is only so much Earth.
This limitation of the Earth over the increasing needs of human population implied that at some point, humanity would begin to experience scarcity of food and other supplies. Said Malthus, "The power of population is so superior to the power of the earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race." Some of Malthus' critics coined the sardonic term, "Malthusian catastrophe". They believed that
improvements in science and technology would provide food and other supplies indefinitely.
It has been 213 years since Malthus published his theory. Let us look at the world of today, and see if Malthusian predictions are valid. We should first note that Malthus did not know about our environmental conditions. For instance, he could not have predicted the effects of air and water pollution, the worldwide dependency on petroleum, large-scale deforestation, and global warming. Now let us look at some facts.
Fish stocks:
According to the scientific journal Nature, stocks of large predatory fish, such as cod, tuna, and various sharks, have been depleted by 90% since 1950. Where there were one hundred bluefin tuna, now there are ten. Where there were ten swordfish, now there is one. In the past sixty years, the alpha predators of the sea have been literally decimated. With increasing demand for swordfish, tuna, and other fish over the next few decades, what will remain?
Sylvia Earle says, "We will never get back to what we had in the oceans 50 years ago, but we still have a small window of opportunity to save the last few big fish before they are exterminated." Consider that phrase, never get back. According to Earle, due to the increasing demands of human population, the seemingly endless supplies of fish are gone forever.
Some fisheries have already collapsed. In 1497, the explorer John Cabot reported that schools of cod, Gadus morhua, near Newfoundland were so thick that they virtually blocked his ship. The northern cod fishery on the Grand Banks increased over the next 400 years, until by the mid-1950's, 254,000 tonnes of cod were being caught annually. In the 1960's, large new factory-fishing ships from Canada, the United States, Europe and as far away as Asia began to take their toll of fish from the Grand Banks.
Seeing their catches of cod decline, Canada and the United States banished the foreign fishing fleets to 200 nautical miles off the coast. However, in order to increase catches, Canada soon introduced the great stern-trawlers. These "draggers" scoured the bottom of the sea with nets the size of football fields. They took not only whole schools of cod, but destroyed other species and the benthic (sea bottom) ecosystems as well. The extent of "collateral damage" to benthic species has never been documented, but the effect on cod stocks became evident within a decade.
In 1968, the cod fishery peaked at 822,960 tonnes. By 1975, despite the use of sonar and other new technology, the catch had fallen to less than 304,814 tonnes. In the following years, catches continued to decline. Then, in 1992, the fishery suddenly collapsed. Nets came up empty, and fishermen demanded that the government do something.
After much debate, in 1993 the Canadian government imposed an indefinite moratorium on fishing the Grand Banks. This put 40,000 people out of work in five Canadian provinces, and required several billion dollars in relief to coastal communities. Recently, there have been some signs that cod are increasing in numbers. Yet as of this date, the northern cod fishery has not recovered.
Immature Maine lobsters, Homarus americanus, are one of the cod's favorite foods. Without cod predation, the lobster has increased in numbers, such that the price of lobster has held steady or actually decreased. That is why we see tanks of lobsters in grocery stores all over the USA.
A pattern of fishing has emerged. When people decimate one species, they target another. Often this species has increased due to the removal of its predator. For example, in the Chesapeake Bay, sharks have been virtually fished out. Sharks were a major predator of bullfish, or cownose rays, Rhinoptera bonasus. The loss of sharks resulted in cownose rays increasing to great schools and wreaking havoc on the oyster banks.
In place of sharks, and to relieve pressure on the oysters, the fishing industry has now targeted cownose rays. They are being marketed under the more pleasant name of Chesapeake rays. The ray's flesh looks more like beef than fish. What will happen if people develop a taste for Chesapeake rays, and the demand begins to rise as with cod? Perhaps we will soon be eating "Chesapeake worms".
The ability of fishing to satisfy human demand has reached its limit, according to the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). The IFPRI recommends that fish farming and better fishing management, will be necessary to continue to meet the demand. However, fish farming has its environmental price as well.
In southeast Asia, fish and especially shrimp farming has resulted in the destruction of large areas of mangrove forest. Besides destroying complex ecosystems, the loss of mangroves endangers human occupation of the coast. The mangrove forests, like wetlands elsewhere, protect the coastline during storms.
The concentration of fish in aquaculture pens results in the spread of diseases and parasites, which in turn requires the use of antibiotics and other chemicals. Fish droppings and uneaten feed accumulate around the pens, polluting the water and making it unfit for natural populations of organisms. When the water becomes too filthy to use, the farmers simply move on to another area, creating a cycle of habitat destruction and pollution.
Fish farming is also very inefficient. For instance, 1.1 kilograms of feed are needed to produce 0.5 kilograms of salmon; 11.8 kilograms of feed produce only 0.5 kilograms of bluefin tuna. The feed consists of varied seafood such as squid, blue mackerel, and sand eel (San Francisco Chronicle). Thus huge amounts of smaller fish are needed to supply the fish farming (and land animal) industries. Fish caught and ground into feed currently amount to 37%, over one third, of all global seafood.
The human response to overfishing is first to use more efficient technology to get more fish. Then, when the fish stock collapses, fish out another species, or else begin aquaculture at great cost to the environment. Perhaps we should fish directly from the bottom of the food chain. A future advertisement might read, "Good for whales, good for you. Have some delicious plankton stew!"
In 1954, The Inexhaustible Sea was published by Daniel Hawthorne and Francis Minot. In those days, the vast expanses of ocean must have seemed indeed an inexhaustible source of food. Only fifty years later, it has become clear that the human race's increasingly voracious appetite for seafood cannot be supported forever. Whether fish are wild-caught or farmed, there is really no such thing as a sustainable fishery. The inexhaustible sea is becoming exhausted.
Deforestation:
Half the world's tropical forests have been cleared or degraded (Forestry Dept, FAO). Rainforests once covered 14% of Earth's surface, but now cover only 6%. Today, 6.1 square kilometers of rainforest are destroyed by cutting, clearing, burning, and bulldozing, every second. This amounts to a forested area twice the size of Florida being lost every year. Scientists believe that the world's rainforests may be completely destroyed within 40 years.
In particular, the Amazon Basin contains over half of the world's remaining rainforest. Currently, forest covers an area of about 5.5 billion square kilometers. This is the size of the United States east of the Mississippi.
As the vast Amazon rainforest removes the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, from the air, it produces over 20% of the Earth's oxygen. For this reason, the Amazon rainforest has been called the Lungs of the Earth. Yet since 1960, when logging and slash-and-burn agriculture began to be widely practiced, 20% of the Amazon rainforest has been destroyed. According to the World Wildlife Fund, half of Amazonia will be deforested by 2030. Already, Amazonian lands cleared of forest are visible from outer space.
As population pressures increase in Brasil and other nations of Amazonia, all unprotected rainforest may be cut or burned in this century. It is difficult to quantify the loss of animal and plant species, habitat, food resources, and fresh air, should the Lungs of the Earth be completely deforested. Imagine losing 20% of your breath.
Logging and agriculture are also destroying rainforests elsewhere in the world. In Central America, 40% of the rainforests have been cleared in the past 40 years. According to the FAO, since the early 1900's, 77.2% of west African forest has been destroyed, and the remnants are often degraded. Nigeria in particular lost 55.7% of its forests between 2000 and 2005. In Madagascar, only 34% of the original rainforest remained in 1985.
Indonesia has the most extensive rainforests in Asia, but they are rapidly being cleared for timber and farming. In the 1960's, 82% of the country was covered by rainforest; by 1995, the forested land had been reduced to 53%, and today only 49% of Indonesia is forested. Much of this forest is second-growth and degraded.
Forests in temperate zones, although they do not receive as much media attention as the tropics, are receiving the attention of the timber, agriculture, and other industries. In the USA, about 90% of the original old-growth (virgin) forest has been cleared since 1600. Most of the remaining old-growth forests in the lower 48 states are on public lands, and in the Pacific Northwest, about 80% of this is slated for logging. Of course, forests have grown back (secondary forest) in some areas, but the demise of old-growth forest and its replacement with tree farms have destroyed entire ecosystems, and led to the extinction of species such as the magnificent Ivory-Billed Woodpecker.
Alaska is the last of the states with large tracts of virtually untouched old-growth forest. Even so, in what is now the Tongass National Forest, about 50% of the largest trees were cut before logging was restricted. Then in 2009, President Obama permitted Pacific Log and Lumber to clear-cut up to 1.5 square kilometers of this unique temperate rainforest.
In Europe, since prehistoric times, people have been cutting down old-growth forests. Many areas, such as the British Isles, have lost their old-growth forests completely. They now have a mixture of secondary growth, pastureland, and farms. In Eastern Europe, the boreal forest or taiga still covers much of its original land. However, China has virtually deforested itself, and now imports timber from the Russian taiga. Forests everywhere are being decimated by an increasing human population.
"Once there were Billions":
As I mentioned above, the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker became extinct primarily due to the loss of old-growth forests in which it nested. It was gone before we knew it. There are several ways anthropogenic (human-caused) extinction may occur: through habitat destruction, the introduction of exotic and competitive species, and direct predation (hunting).
Following are a few of the species which have been lost due to human activities, with the probable causes, location, and date of their extinction, last reliable sighting, or last captive specimen.
Mammals:
Yangtze River Dolphin or Baiji, Lipotes vexillifer, China, hunting, by-catching with fish, habitat destruction, 1997. This is the first known extinction of cetacean.
Japanese Sea Lion, Zalophus japonicus, Japan, hunting, killing by fishermen, 1951.
Tasmanian Wolf, Tasmania, killing as pests,1930.
Sea Mink, Neovison macrodon, Northeastern US, fur hunting ,1860.
Arabian Gazelle, Gazella arabica, Farasan Islands, Saudi Arabia, hunting, 1825.
Birds:
Dodo, Raphus cucullatus, Mauritius Island, introduced predators, habitat destruction, circa 1693.
Great Auk, Pinguinus impennis, North Atlantic, hunting, introduced predators, 1852.
Carolina Parakeet, Conuropsis carolinensis, Southeastern US, hunting, killing as pests, habitat destruction, Cincinnati Zoo, US, 1918.
Laughing Owl, Sceloglaux albifacies, New Zealand, hunting, habitat destruction, introduced predators,1914.
Passenger Pigeon, Ectopistes migratorius, North America, hunting. When Europeans arrived in North America, there may have been 3 billion to 5 billion Passenger Pigeons; in the early 19th century, their flocks would sometimes darken the sky. When a demand for Passenger Pigeon meat developed, the great flocks were hunted to extinction. The last Passenger Pigeon died in the Cincinnati Zoo, US, 1914.
Reptiles and Amphibians:
Rodrigues giant day gecko, Phelsuma gigas, Rodrigues Island, Mascarenes, habitat destruction, introduced predators, 1842.
Domed Mauritius giant tortoise, Cylindraspis triserrata, Mauritius Island, hunting and introduced predators, circa 1795.
Round Island Burrowing Boa, Bolyeria multocarinata, Round Island, near Madagascar, habitat destruction by introduced pests, 1975.
Golden Toad, Incilius periglenes, Northern Costa Rica, habitat destruction, global warming (?), 1989.
Hula Painted Frog, Discoglossus nigriventer, Lake Hula, Northern Israel, habitat destruction, 1955.
Fishes:
Thicktail Chub, Gila crassicauda, Great Central Valley, California, US, habitat destruction and introduced predators, 1957.
Lake Titicaca Orestias, Orestias cuvieri, Lake Titicaca, Bolivia-Peru, introduced Lake Trout, circa 1945.
Houting, Coregonus oxyrinchus, rivers in Western Europe, overfishing and pollution, 1940.
Utah Lake sculpin, Cottus echinatus, Utah Lake, Utah, US, drought and pollution, circa 1935.
Ash Meadows killifish, Empetrichthys merriami, Ash Meadows, Nevada, US, habitat destruction and introduced predators, circa 1955.
Plants:
Woolly-stalked Begonia, Begonia eiromischa, Penang Island, Malasia, habitat destruction, circa 1898.
Tree Cyanea, Cyanea arborea, Maui, Hawaii, habitat destruction, 1928.
Saint Helena Olive, Nesiota elliptica, St. Helena Island, habitat destruction, 2003.
Giffard's cyanea, Cyanea giffardii, Island of Hawaii, habitat destruction, 1917 (?)
Bennett's Seaweed, Vanvoorstia bennettiana, Parramatta River, New South Wales, Australia, habitat destruction and pollution, 1886.
This list could go on for many pages. It could list mollusks, insects, and other lower animals that have become extinct due to human activities. It could list even more species that are threatened or endangered, but not yet extinct.
In fact, so many species are being lost that some scientists refer to the modern period as the Sixth Great Extinction. The previous major extinctions were: First, circa 440 million years ago (mya). 25% of families were lost (a family may consist of hundreds of species); Second, circa 370 mya, 19% of families lost; Third, circa 245 mya, 54% of families lost; Fourth, circa 210 mya, 23% of families lost; and the Fifth, circa 65 mya, 17% of families lost. These five earlier extinctions were all caused by a change in the physical environment, such as natural warming or cooling of the globe, tectonic and volcanic action, or impact by a large meteorite.
This new mass extinction is being caused by one species, Homo sapiens. Scientists place the Sixth Great Extinction as starting approximately the time humans began intensively hunting, about 100,000 years ago. Then, around 10,000 years ago, humans invented agriculture, and the extinctions increased dramatically.
Currently, we are losing species at a rate of three per hour. Scientists estimate that 50% of the Earth's remaining species will be extinct by the end of this century.
Primary causes are exhaustive hunting, fishing, and other forms of predation; introduction of exotic predators or competitors; habitat destruction and pollution.
The Brown Tree Snake, Boiga irregularis, probably arrived on the island of Guam in shipments of cargo, shortly after WWII (circa 1945). Because the island lacked native snakes or other predators, the birds of Guam had no adaptations to protect themselves from this menace. The snakes began to proliferate, preying on birds, frogs, and other small animals. Today, 60% of the native bird species have been killed off. The forests of Guam are quiet.
Global Warming/ climate change:
Overall, the globe is warming, and 97% of climate scientists agree that humans are at least adding to the trend. There is really no scientific controversy about this. There are local cold areas and weather fluctuations, but the overall trend is to a warmer global climate.
The only controversy comes from people who do not want to face facts: who prefer, for ideological reasons, to deny the obvious. Denying that the global temperature is rising, that humans are at least partially responsible, or that warming is already causing changes in the environment, is like denying that humans evolved from lower life forms*.
Before discussing anything else, let us pause for a moment and remember the Carteret Islands and their people. Off the coast of Papua New Guinea, the Carterets formed an atoll, a ring of coral keys surrounding a sunken volcano. The people of the Carteret Islands, approximately 2500 altogether, were subsistence farmers and fishermen. They had an unique culture tied to the islands they had called home for over 400 years.
Then the sea started rising over the coral atoll. At first, only a few beaches were covered, but gradually the flooding became more severe. Carteret islanders had to use canoes to navigate what were once forests and banana groves. Especially low-lying inhabited areas were inundated, and people began to move to the highest ground available.
Finally, in 2003, Papua New Guinea authorized the evacuation of Carteret islanders to Bouganville island. By 2007, the relocation was complete. The people of Carteret had lost their islands, their homes, and their way of life. Even their cemeteries were immersed.
The Carteret islanders are the first known people to be relocated due to rising sea levels. They have been called the world's first environmental refugees.
We should really have expected global warming, with all its associated changes in weather and habitats. We are putting back into the air, carbon which was sequestered during warm and humid periods of Earth's history. Moreover, we are releasing the carbon (as carbon dioxide) at an extremely high rate, compared to the rate at which it was transformed into coal and oil. Such a sudden release of greenhouse gases would result in much greater reflection of heat back to Earth, with a subsequent warming of the atmosphere. Given the current conditions, it would be surprising if global warming did not occur. Nonetheless, we do need evidence to support this hypothesis.
Exhibit A: Glaciers
The condition of glaciers is an important source of evidence for global warming. Increase in a glacier's mass is called accumulation; loss of mass is ablation. The most important factor in
determining the condition of a glacier is mass balance. This is the difference between accumulation and ablation. Thus, if a glacier's mass balance increases, the glacier is advancing; if it decreases, the glacier is retreating.
Although some glaciers in western Norway, Iceland, and New Zealand have shown an increase in mass balance, this is likely the result of local weather changes. Overall, the worldwide glacier mass balance is rapidly decreasing.
Between 1961 and 1997, or 36 years, the world's glaciers lost 3709 cubic kilometers of ice. This is equivalent to a cube 15.5 kilometers on each side. Imagine an ice cube 15.5 kilometers high, a mountain of ice almost twice the height of Mount Everest and 8.6 times the depth of the Grand Canyon. That is the global glacier loss as of 1997, 14 years ago.
The glaciers are still receding. In Glacier National Park (Montana, US), there are now 26 named glaciers, whereas there were 150 glaciers in 1850. This is a loss of 83%, and many of the existing glaciers are shrunken remnants. Perhaps the park needs a new name.
The Columbia Glacier in Prince William Sound is melting into the ocean at a rate of 24.4 meters per day. In Greenland, many glaciers are receding by several miles each year. In Bolivia, the Chacaltaya mountain range glacier has lost so much ice that a former ski resort, once the highest in the world at 5300 meters, is barren much of the year. The once-magnificent Chacaltaya Glacier, which covered 1600 square meters in the 1950's, may completely disappear by 2015.
Satellites monitored by NASA (National AeroSpace Administration) have shown that glaciers in Greenland are disappearing into the sea twice as fast as they were 10 years ago, and that the rate of glacial loss is increasing.
Exhibit B: Permafrost:
Another indicator of global warming is the condition of permanently frozen ground, or permafrost. Within the Arctic Circle, and at very high altitudes, the ground normally does not thaw out, even in mid-summer. However, many areas in the Northern Hemisphere have begun to show loss of permafrost.
Buildings in Fairbanks, Alaska have begun slumping or tilting as their foundations sink into the newly-soft soil. Northern Canada and Siberia, as well as high-altitude areas such as the Alps and Tibet, also report permafrost thaw.
Loss of permafrost, besides undermining buildings, can cause roads to sag and pipelines to crack. All structures built on the previously-stable permafrost are at risk. In addition, thawing permafrost can cause landslides as on Ellesmere Island in Canada. In high-altitude areas, rock slides become more common. One example occurred in 2003, when Alpine climbers were stranded on the mountain after a huge section of the Matterhorn broke free and fell.
Permafrost has been thawing, and will continue to thaw.
Exhibit C: Animal Migrations and Range Extensions
Let me begin with a personal story, anecdotal evidence if you will. I lived in northeast Florida from 1989 to 2010. In those 21 years, I saw several changes in animal and plant behavior. First of all, in 1989 I never saw a gecko. This makes sense, because all the geckos in Florida are exotics, brought accidentally or intentionally from warm climates such as the Mediterranean and the Caribbean.
Geckos do not withstand freezing weather, and thus were barred from Florida north of Orlando. Yet by the early 2000's, I began seeing these "ghost lizards", as I called them, swiftly moving across outdoor walls in the night. By 2010, as I prepared to leave, the ghostly geckos were a common sight. It is good to have them, perhaps, as they prey on insects, but I cannot help wondering if they are competing with a native predator.
Then there were the bananas. Many people in northeast Florida keep banana plants (for they are not true trees) as exotic decorations. Like the geckos, bananas are not native to Florida, although they grow almost everywhere in the peninsula. However, when the first freezing weather hits, they turn brown and die back to their roots. Thus, they do not grow throughout the year. This is significant because bananas must grow steadily for two or three years, before they bear fruit.
When I arrived in Florida, fruiting bananas were exceedingly rare; usually they grew in very sheltered locations. Then as the 1990's became the new millenium, I noticed increasing numbers of bananas not turning entirely brown, but remaining green through the winter. The banana plants were growing year-long, and began increasingly to produce fruit.
Finally, there is the blue land crab, Cardisoma guanhumi. Standard references give its range as the Caribbean and no further north than Vero Beach, Florida. I remember large colonies of them in 1978, at the University of Miami, near the southern end of the peninsula.
Then, in 2009, while visiting St. Augustine, a friend pointed out to me some holes in the grass near the shore. These burrows were from 3 to about 10 centimeters in diameter. I became excited, remembering the crabs near U of M. But we waited quietly until one and then another crab began to appear.
They were indeed blue land crabs. There were males and females, small and large; evidently they had been breeding. I later found another colony nearby, which proved that the crabs had established themselves far northward of their previous range. In fact, St. Augustine is 255 kilometers up the coast from Vero Beach.
I realize that these are anecdotes and not reliable studies. Therefore, let us look at some of the evidence gained from scientific research on animal migrations.
In 2009, the National Audubon Society studied the 305 species of birds which winter in the United States. Based on analysis of 40 years of observations, 60% of the bird species had moved their winter ranges northward an average of 56.3 kilometers. The highly adaptable birds most likely to visit bird feeders had a northward movement of over 70% . Of grassland bird species, 38% had moved northward from their previous winter range.
A study reported in the journal Science, in 2011, showed that 2000 species of animals, including mammals, birds, insects, and many plants also, are moving northward from their previous ranges, at an average rate of 4.6 meters per day. Mountain-dwelling species are moving more slowly upward, at about 1.2 meters per year. All these animals and plants are moving to cooler climates, or to higher altitudes, but how far can they move?
Stanford University biologist, Terry Roots, notes that the American pika, Ochotona princeps, a small rabbit-like creature, has been studied in Yellowstone National Park for more than a century. In 1900, according to Roots, the pika's range extended only to 2377 meters in altitude, but in 2004 they were seen at 2895 meters, an increase of 18%. What happens when the pika, or any of the thousands of animals and plants which are moving northward or upward, run out of room? And what of species such as reptiles and amphibians, that cannot migrate at all?
One species that already cannot move further north, is the polar bear, Ursus maritimus. Due to the longer, ice-free summers, polar bears in Russia have been stranded on land. Since polar bears hunt for the most part on sea ice, the reduction in ice has resulted in a 22% drop in the population in Western Hudson Bay, Manitoba, Canada, since the early 1980's.
According to United States Geological Survey, reduction in Arctic sea ice may kill off 66% of the entire world population of polar bears within 50 years. The remaining bears will be widely distributed, making reproduction more difficult, and further reducing the population. Polar bears are rapidly running out of ice.
According to the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
approximately half of 36 fish stocks in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean have been shifting northward or into deeper water over the last 40 years. Some fish stocks are disappearing from American waters, while others are moving from more southerly waters, into the New England fishery areas.
Janet Nye, a researcher at the NOAA Fisheries Science Center in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, and lead author of the study, followed fish survey data from 1968 to 2007. According to Nye, fish as diverse as Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua, winter flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus, and spiny dogfish, Squalus acanthius, have been moving to cooler waters. Not only are these species moving away from their historic ranges; southern species such as Atlantic croaker, Micropogonius undulatus, are now being caught in New England waters.
On the European side of the Atlantic, species previously confined to the southern seas have also begun to appear. The sharpnose shark, Rhizoprionodon terraenovae, blue marlin, Makaira nigricans, and big-eyed tunny, Thunnus obesus, are a few of the fishes that have made their way north into waters off the British Isles.
Plankton and invertebrates have also begun to migrate northward. The slipper lobster, Scyllarides latus, normally native to the Mediterranean, is being caught with increasing frequency in British waters.
At the other end of the Earth, the king crab, Paralomis birsteini, has been found in large numbers, marching up the Antarctic slope. According to James McClintock, a professor of polar and marine biology at the University of Alabama, these crabs have not lived in the shallow regions of the Antarctic Ocean for hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of years. Yet they are moving in like an occupying army.
Scientists are concerned that these migrating species may disrupt or destroy marine ecosystems. The king crab, for instance, preys on practically everything it can catch. Antarctic creatures such as clams and snails have never had to adapt to shell-crushing predators; their shells are soft and the crabs could decimated them.
All of these migrations and range extensions, if carried out over centuries, would allow other species in the areas to adapt. Yet because of the rapid rate of migration, collisions between predators and prey, or competitors for food and other resources, can be expected to cause ecological damage and the extinction of many species. Some creatures, like the polar bear, may have already reached their limit.
The ultimate question is: when will we reach our limit? Already, resources in .....nations are under stress, and .....people are suffering.
The availability of fresh water for drinking, agriculture, and other uses, is rapidly becoming a global problem. There are differing degrees of water shortage. "Water stress" means that there are 1500 cubic meters of water available per person, per year; "water scarcity" means less than 1000 cubic meters per year.
During the 20th century,according to the World Health Organization, the world's population increased from about 1.4 billion to over 6 billion, about 400%. However, our use of fresh water has increased 900%. Currently, 2.8 billion people live in areas of high water stress, and 1.2 billion are actually suffering water scarcity. By 2030 over 3.9 billion people, or about half the world population, may face water scarcity.
Already, in China for example, 60% of cities are water-stressed. The once-mighty Yellow River now has only 10% of its natural flow, and the demand for water still increases. In 2006, India used about 829 billion cubic meters per year. This is approximately the size of Lake Erie. By 2050, the demand will double to 1658 billion or 1.7 trillion cubic meters, far exceeding the 1.4 trillion cubic meter supply.
In Africa, lack of water will afflict over 25 nations by 2025; 13 nations already are suffering either stress or scarcity of water. The once-majestic Nile River now carries little water to the sea. By 2050, the three nations through which the Nile runs, Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan, may come into conflict over the remaining water. There is also a potential water war in southern Africa, between Botswana, Namibia, and Angola. The Cuito River supplies all three nations, but these nations have already experienced conflict for other causes, and water stress would likely plunge the area into war.
In 2007, at least 11% of the population of Europe experienced some degree of water shortage. In the United States, water shortages exist also, primarily in the western and southwestern states. As population increases toward the 10 billion mark, water stress and scarcity will afflict large areas of the globe. This could result in mass migration toward relatively well-watered northern lands, such as Europe, Canada and the United States, which would greatly increase the existing immigrant pressures in those nations.
The House of War:
The current immigration to northern nations, especially in Europe, has been primarily from nations dominated by Islam. According to Islamic political theory, there are two worlds: the house of Islam, or dar al-Islam; and the rest of the world, dar al-Harb: the house of war. When someone says that Islam is a religion of peace, they speak the truth, because when a nation falls under Islam, it is at peace with the directives of shari'a, the code of Islamic law. It is pacified into dar al-Islam.
Historically, Islam has always extended over the world; rarely has it receded. In 1970, according to the Islamic Strategy Conference, Chicago, there were 100,000 Muslims in the US. In 2008, there were 9,000,000. This is an increase of 8900%. Where there was one Muslim, now there are nine. By 2040, there will be 50,000,000 Muslims in the US. This is an increase of 9000%. Where there are now nine Muslims, within 30 years there will be 89.
The population of the US in 2008 was 304.5 million. If the Muslim population was 9 million, the US was 3% Muslim. In 2040, the total US population will be 377.4 million. If the Muslim population increases to 50 million, the US will be 13% Muslim. This would present a very different America than we live in today.
Taking western Europe as an example, the approximate percentages of Muslims follow:
United Kingdom: 2.8
France: 10.0
Netherlands: 5.4
Belgium: 3.4
Germany: 3.7
Sweden: 3.1
Denmark: 3.0
Norway: 1.0
Spain: 1.2
Switzerland 3.1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)