James Lovelock (picture is from his web site) has been the topic of at least three previous NewsBusters posts:
- In September 2006, Dan Gainor marveled at how the Washington Post could devote 2,400 words to Lovelock and his "Gaia Theory" -- the idea that the earth acts like a living organism.
- In October 2007, Gainor noted Lovelock's appearance in that esteemed scientific publication Rolling Stone, which called him "The Prophet of Climate Change." Lovelock claimed that global warming is irreversible, and that, as stated by writer Jeff Goodell, "the Earth's population will be culled from today's 6.6 billion to as few as 500 million."
- A March 2008 post by Jeff Poor told readers that Lovelock, in the UK Daily Mail, had apparently moved up his disaster scenario by 60 years, among other things predicting that by 2040 China would be uninhabitable.
Lovelock clearly isn't the go-to guy for cool, calm, and collected science. But given his standing with many environmentalists, his views of certain aspects of environmentalism are worthy of attention. They are profoundly negative, as recorded in the January 24 issue of New Scientist by "Gaia Vince," where Lovelock also proposes a last-ditch strategy for saving the planet and salvaging several hundred million more survivors:
(Lovelock) Most of the "green" stuff is verging on a gigantic scam. Carbon trading, with its huge government subsidies, is just what finance and industry wanted. It's not going to do a damn thing about climate change, but it'll make a lot of money for a lot of people and postpone the moment of reckoning. I am not against renewable energy, but to spoil all the decent countryside in the UK with wind farms is driving me mad. It's absolutely unnecessary, and it takes 2500 square kilometres to produce a gigawatt - that's an awful lot of countryside.
..... (Gaia Vince) So are we doomed?
(Lovelock) There is one way we could save ourselves and that is through the massive burial of charcoal. It would mean farmers turning all their agricultural waste - which contains carbon that the plants have spent the summer sequestering - into non-biodegradable charcoal, and burying it in the soil. Then you can start shifting really hefty quantities of carbon out of the system and pull the CO2 down quite fast.
..... (Gaia Vince) Would it make enough of a difference?
(Lovelock) Yes. ..... This is the one thing we can do that will make a difference, but I bet they won't do it.
(Gaia Vince) Do you think we will survive?
(Lovelock) I'm an optimistic pessimist. I think it's wrong to assume we'll survive 2 °C of warming: there are already too many people on Earth. At 4 °C we could not survive with even one-tenth of our current population. The reason is we would not find enough food, unless we synthesised it. Because of this, the cull during this century is going to be huge, up to 90 per cent. The number of people remaining at the end of the century will probably be a billion or less. It has happened before: between the ice ages there were bottlenecks when there were only 2000 people left. It's happening again.
Take that Al Gore, and Barack Obama, and John McCain, and Joe Lieberman, and .....
New Scientist says that the 90 year-old Lovelock has "a trip into space scheduled for later in the year." If this feat gets the expected press attention, it will be interesting to see how the media treats his environmental views, and whether they note the irony of "The Prophet of Climate Change" likely burning large amounts of fossil fuel to power his voyage.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Lovelock doesn't need a
January 24, 2009 - 10:46 ET by jdhawkLovelock doesn't need a trip into space, he is already a space shot. What a nut. Burying charcoal . . . I gotta hand it to this eco terrorist, that's original.
Think my using the title, eco terrorist, is too harsh? What until you get the bill for what these fools are planning. Let alone the reduction in our quality of life. And, like the banning of DDT, we here in America are inconvenienced, while millions on the planet died, plan on a similar result.
By the way, the "New Scientist" is a left wing rag claiming that it speaks for and about science. Don't be fooled.
Except there is one little
January 24, 2009 - 14:38 ET by dscottExcept there is one little itty bitty problem with the charcoal idea... in order to make it you have to burn it, releasing CO2 in the process. Here is the description of the process: http://www.velvitoil... here is another one: http://www.twinoaksf...
Oophs, did I spill the magic beans Lovelock bought from the magic vine salesman??
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
No problem
January 25, 2009 - 04:03 ET by RESTLESS 1Y'all make all the charcoal you want. You can always ship it to me. As a BBQ'n fool in Texas, I'll take all you can produce. :)
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
In Great Britain many
January 25, 2009 - 10:35 ET by ReaverIn Great Britain many scientists refer to New Scientist as the "Nude Socialist".
Doh!
January 24, 2009 - 10:53 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsI think it's wrong to assume we'll survive 2 °C of warming: there are
already too many people on Earth. At 4 °C we could not survive with
even one-tenth of our current population. The reason is we would not
find enough food,
I don't understand how warming, which would lengthen the growing season and make new areas 'farmable', will cause food shortages. What kind of twisted logic does this entail?
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
Oh, c'mon, haven't you been paying attention?
January 24, 2009 - 18:25 ET by Indiana JoeA temp increase of merely 1 degree F will flood to the Appalachians and Sierra Nevada. After a 4 degree C increase, the Rockies will be an archipelago! We're all gonna die!!!
</sarc off>
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss..." - The Who
ROFLMAO
January 24, 2009 - 11:54 ET by 10ksnookerThe hits keep coming. But he seems to underneath, still believe the AGW hoax.
Pay more intaxes to the government, so government scientitsts can fake the data and pretend to control the weather. The biggest scam ever. So how does paying taxes help the climate, no one seems to want to answer that 'magic beans' question.
As time progresses, and solar cycle 24 still lingers, the evidence is building for cold setting in. And yes, it's all the sun's fault, with a little bit of solar system and universe thrown in.
I'm an optimistic optimist.
January 24, 2009 - 12:39 ET by eaglewingz08I'm an optimistic optimist. Based upon the hundreds of years of Luddites and Malthusians being repeatedly proven wrong, I cannot see humans being catastrophically removed from the Earth anytime soon. These dire warnings are mere wishful thinking from the death cult otherwise known as social democrats.
Too true
January 25, 2009 - 10:43 ET by ReaverWhy anyone gives these enviro-doomsayers any credibility at all is a complete mystery to me. They have a long track record of being wrong every time. One of my favs to illustrate "Hundreds of millions of people will soon perish in smog disasters in New York and Los Angeles...the oceans will die of DDT poisoning by 1979...the U.S. life expectancy will drop to 42 years by 1980 due to cancer epidemics." -- Paul Ehrlich, 1969 in Ramparts.
Put up or ......
January 24, 2009 - 12:38 ET by HillbillyKingYou know, I would really like to see one of these damn eugenicists put their money where their mouth is. I can think of 3 ways off the top of my head that this is possible;
1. Kill themselves, thereby eliminating one of the "destructive" creatures from "Mother" Earth. (Too bad more don't choose this option)
2. Whack other "destructive" humans. (On second thought, thank God they don't adopt this approach. Although as long as they tried in a place like, ummmm, say an NRA convention, then maybe we should encourage such behavior.)
3. Disappear. You know, go native in the Amazon or Saskatchewan and become one with nature, and shortly there after have their citified asses ate by a Grizzly or an Anaconda. (Damn, why doesn't this happen more often, )
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Don Marquis 1878-1937
Wind farms
January 24, 2009 - 12:46 ET by nkviking75I wish they'd have figured out the folly of wind farms sooner, before they uglied-up the beautiful Iowa countryside around me. Seems like windmills are all I see on the horizon.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Yes, actually it's worse
January 24, 2009 - 14:42 ET by dscottYes, actually it's worse than described by Lovelock: http://conservablogs...
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Out of Control - Wind Power insanity in the UK
January 24, 2009 - 21:42 ET by PopularTechOut of Control - Wind Power Insanity in the UK (Video) (9min)
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is Not Pollution
I guess this means we can't
January 25, 2009 - 09:56 ET by danboI guess this means we can't use wind farms around here. (Or in Florida. Or anywhere along the gulf coast. Though, thankfully major storms are rare. We probably get a Tropical Storm - Cat 2 every 3-5 years. Then there are the bad thunder storms that come in spring. They'll be replacing these things every 3-5 years.
Who would have thought that wind farms can't handle ..... wind?
PT Thanks for the link to William Briggs Statistician. His 5 part discussion on the Yoga Brain Resperation Experiment was great. Reminded me talking with warmers.
Limited Disclosure: I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.
VERGING???!!!!
January 24, 2009 - 16:39 ET by Antisocial-ismVERGING???!!!!
Give him credit ....
January 24, 2009 - 21:12 ET by Tom Blumer.... for getting that close.