Barack Obama once said “Judge me by the people that surround me.”  I have looked at Van Jones, the Irreverend Wright, and now John Holdren.

Look at what John Holdren one of the key members of the Global Warming Movement, now Science Advisor to Barak Obama said in one of his books discussing population. 

“(…) the alternatives may be much more horrifying. As those alternatives become clearer to an increasing number of people in the 1970s, we may well find them demanding such control. A far better choice, in our view, is to begin now with milder methods of influencing family size preferences, while ensuring that the means of birth control, including abortion and sterilization, are accessible to every human being on Earth within the shortest possible time. If effective action is taken promptly perhaps the need for involuntary or repressive measures can be averted.”

Let’s look particularly at the lines, “If effective action is taken promptly perhaps the need for involuntary or repressive measures can be averted.”  He has already made the decision that population control is NECESSARY and that MANDATORY POPULATION CONTROL is more than likely going to be implemented.  For those who do not know that the words MANDATORY POPULATION CONTROL MEANS, let me give you a short lesson.

1)     Enforced Sterilization

2)     Enforced Abortion

3)     Euthanasia

Sterilization is the process of removing ones ability to have children.  It involves procedures such as vasectomy, tubal ligation, castration and hysterectomy.  I have no problem with these when done VOLUNTARILY.  I would not sanction them on an involuntary basis without a court ruling and I am not sure I can define any parameters that would have me as a juror vote to have this done.  They are generally permanent, life changing and irrevocable, the very arguments that the left will use against the death penalty. 

Holdren also writes in the book:

“The fetus given the opportunity to develop properly before birth, and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being.” 

Look at the last portion of this statement. “will ultimately develop into a human being.”   The pro-abortion movement would have us believe that a unborn child is not a human being and it’s life can be taken at the whim of the mother.  Here Holdren takes a slightly different but more extreme view.  A child AFTER birth is not a human being.  I question just where the dividing line is for him.  He does not state it but is it when the child starts to walk, talk, or is it when that child becomes productive, I.e. is contributing taxes to the state?  One could then ask the question on the other side of the coin.  When is that person no longer a human being, when the heart stops beating or is it when that person becomes a ward of the state, taking more resources than they produce?   Would it then be incumbent on the state to begin removing those worthless mouths from the ecosystem?  We begin all kinds of playing God here.  Should a child who is very unlikely to be productive be terminated at three years old when it is determined that they have some condition that will prevent productivity?  What about at ninety, eighty or maybe seventy when they are in retirement?  Maybe there should be no retirement as such – because those who have retired are using more resources without contributing.  What about long term welfare?  These use resources, they contribute nothing.  And they further load the ecosystem with more mouths to feed that are very likely to be more load on the ecosystem without being productive.  

On page 787-8 of his book, he says ”..mass sterilization of humans through drugs in the water supply is OK as long as it doesn’t harm livestock.”

God help us, this is Orwellian and this guy stands next to the President and advises him.

But let’s look at some of Holdren’s more recent thoughts.

In his first interview with the Associated Press since being confirmed in March 2009 he stated that the idea of geoengineering the climate is being discussed. One such extreme option includes shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays.

But look again. 

In October 2009 he predicted famines caused by an Ice Age!  

Want a better view of this?  Check the earth temperature trend for the last five years.  In addition to the very suspect handling of data, the recent trend is not up but down.  This is why the term Climate Change has replaced the term Global Warming.  If you want something to show you that Global Warming is a hoax, check out the audit of temperature recording sites that is being done.  Many (80%) are recording 2-5 degrees F (1-3 degrees C) above what they would have years ago due to improper placement.  An example, one has been moved from a grass field (proper placement) to an asphalt roof of a fire company.  Heat from the black surface and the building will impact this.  In some cases the actual temps have been checked and the jump has been noted when the monitor moved but nobody is looking. Another was moved to where it is impacted by HVAC system; furnace exhaust in winter and air conditioning heat in summer.  These situations are more the norm than the exception.  I challenge anyone to check on http://www.surfacestations.org/ for more information.  It’s set up by young student in California who also has this site – http://wattsupwiththat.com/2007/06/06/my-summer-project-a-national-weather-station-audit/ which shows his own audit of some sites.  He was bullied for posting items about this because it will muddy the water.  When is introducing truth muddying the water?   Another person who is looking at the stations is http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/weather_stations/ .  He notes that stations see a temperature increase when manual reading is replaced by electronic thermometers.

But let’s go further.

Holdren has been caught by the stolen e-mails.  First, I do not condone the hacking of computers or the theft of these but they are now out there and this needs to be addressed as any crime evidence would be scrutinized.

Holdren has been party to helping intimidate anyone who will challenge his Global Warming farce. 

Let’s face it; this kind of activity is not the work of a true scientist.  They strive for truth and even the seemingly out of touch has to be looked at to be sure it is not valid.  My first concerns about the validity of global warming were not raised by Rush Limbaugh but by Al Gore.   His demeanor that indicated he would not consider any other opinion was enough to make me wonder.  And Holdren raises the level on this by his willingness to suppress speech.      

He has tried to suppress by bullying others the information on the Medieval Warm Period which was warmer than now because it raised questions about Global Warming particularly in that the argument in it was today was the warmest period in history which was disproven.  Now they are using the “highest CO2 level” argument that may be as suspect.  I believe it MUST be looked at but action should not be taken till we have some better definition.

What other advisors with questionable pasts and presents does Obama have?

Other Articles by Ralph Brandt

Obama and Kennedy: BHO and JFK Aug 30, 2008

Churches That Get Government Money

Financial Help in These Trying Times

Anonymous and Irresponsible: the Radical Left

The Comparison of the Assassinations of Kennedy and Lincoln

Relationship of Church and State

An End to Complacency

I’m Going on
Compromise in the Church
Come Away My Beloved
Communion
Contradictions – Science and Religion

Christian Perspective On Hatred Feb 20, 2007