Dr. Doom

Here's a link to a recent article about Eric Pianka --
AKA Dr. Doom -- being investigated by the FBI as a
possible terrorist.

Dr. Doom investigated as a terrorist

I'm not sure that's the best response. But what how
should someone be treated who advocates that terrorists
use Ebola to kill off 90% of the human race?

Many of us feel that Muslim clerics who preach hatred,
violence and terrorism should be held to account for
the crimes committed by those fanatics who take them
seriously.

So isn't a man who advocates that 6 billion people die
of an extremely painful disease also be held to account?

Is his brand of hatred and violence any less horrible
because it's based on "environmentalism" rather than
religion?

The Tony Snow Show on radio tried to call Pianka
last night. According to Tony's assistant, when
he called Pianka a very gruff voice pretended
that it was not Pianka and demanded to know who
was calling, and when told, said, "I don't do
radio" and hung up.

So, what does that tell you?

When Pianka is accepting an award from friends
he's willing to explain how 90% of the human
race should die -- though he's smart enough to
have the video camera turned off first.

But he's not willing to go on a national radio
show to explain his views to the public.

He thinks he's better than you and me. We
don't deserve to know what he's teaching
to his students.

The taxpayers of Texas don't deserve to
know what their tax dollars are supporting.

I don't know the source of the funds of
the Texas science organization which gave
him the award, but I'd be pulling them if
it was me.

Here's a link to the story about his speech:

Pianka genocide

Pianka is whining that his words are being
taken out of context.

Boo hoo!

Who demanded that the video cameras be turned
off so his speech would NOT be recorded?

He did.

Now he's crying about lack of context.

But he refused to go on a radio show to
explain himself.

He's trying to say that he's warning us
about the possible consequences of
overpopulation.

That's a blatant lie.

Paul Erlich warned us about the dangers of
overpopulation in THE POPULATION BOMB in 1970.

No matter what you think of his book, you
cannot read it and think that he advocated
the death of 90% of current living people.

He strongly advocates people having much
fewer people, to preserve the quality of
life for people who are living.

But the best comparison is between Pianka
and Laurie Garrett, author of THE COMING
PLAGUE. That book is about what Pianka
claims to be warning us of -- a coming
plague.

No matter what you think of Ms. Garrett's
book -- and I have some arguments with
some parts of it -- you can't read it
and even begin to think that she
*advocates* another plague.

She WARNS us of the consequences of failing
to support strong public health systems
around the world, of overusing antibiotics,
of environmental degredation etc.

She clearly wants to save the lives of
people alive today -- and have everyone
live longer and be healthier.

She doesn't want people to die of the "coming"
plague. She's advocating changes to prevent
that.

She doesn't describe humanity as a "scourge"
or "cancer."

One thing that makes me very suspicious of
Pianka is his emphasis on killing 90% of
humanity with Ebola.

See, while I'm not a Texas scientist of the
year, I know that humanity as a whole is in
no danger from Ebola unless a terrorist
group gets hold of some and deliberately
spreads it over entire world.

1. There've been only a few known outbreaks of
Ebola. It has killed people only in Central
Africa.

It was unknown until two separate outbreaks
occurred at the same time, in 1976. One in
Zaire and one in Sudan.

There is no connection and nobody knows why
these happened at the same time.

The viruses are both Ebola but different
strains.

The next outbreak didn't occur until 20 years
later in Kikwit Zaire.

It is true that a third form of Ebola was found
in monkeys from The Philippines in a storage
facility for monkeys bound for scientific
experiments, in Reston Virgina in the early
1990s. This was the subject of Richard Preston's
book THE HOT ZONE. However, no people died or even
got sick. Monkeys, yes. People no.

2. Despite media sensationalism, we know Ebola
is not highly contagious. The outbreaks in Africa
spread mostly through:

a. Burial customs which had bodies of the dead
cleaned outside AND inside by female relatives,
so they were highly explosed to virus.

b. Unsanitary practices at local hospitals where
victims were treated. This included medical care
personnel not practicing barrier nursing, so
they caught virus from blood and other body
fluids. It also included the extensive reuse
of needles, due to shortages.

When burial was done without contact with dead
bodies and barrier nursing was instituted, the
transmission of Ebola quickly died down.

Although it's still possible that Ebola could be
carried to other countries through infected
people, and that it could be spread to some
unfortunate people, it's not at all likely that
it would cause a widespread epidemic.

You stand a much greater chance of being struck
by lightning than of dying of Ebola.

That's probably true even of residents of The
Congo or whatever name Zaire is going by when
you read this. And certainly even they have
much more to fear from malaria and many other
diseases than from Ebola.

3. Nobody has found the natural reservoir of
Ebola. So the only way to get hold of some is
to steal it from the CDC or another laboratory
keeping it in storage. That would hopefully
be very hard to accomplish.

Therefore, there is absolutely no danger of
even .001 percent of humanity dying from
Ebola by natural means -- let alone 90%.

So if Ebola is not a threat to humanity, no
matter how large or small the total population
of the world, just what is Pianka warning us
against?

Overpopulation has nothing to do with Ebola
itself.

Pianka's defenders are saying that the scientist
who broke the original story is misconstruing what
Pianka said and meant.

If Pianka didn't want to his remarks to be
misreported, why did he insist on turning off the
video camera?

If he wants to warn us, why does he refuse to go
on national radio shows?

If really wanted to warn humanity, he now has a
golden opportunity -- and he's hiding.

Former students are saying that he often expressed
satisfaction at the concept of a 90% reduction in
the world's population.

If he was warning us against a natural plague, he
wouldn't declare that the Reston strain of Ebola
was his favorite means of doing it. Especially
since it may not even be lethal to humans as it
is to monkeys.

It would take human intervention into the Ebola
virus genetic material to make it lethal.

Then someone would have to spread it throughout
the world so it infected everyone.

And that would probably kill over 90% of the
human race, because treating such diseases
properly requires close monitoring of body
fluids.

Therefore, if everyone on the planet caught a case
of Ebola that was as lethal as Ebola Zaire,
the mortality rate would probably be even more
than 10%.

That's probably make Pianka even happier.

And oh, yes -- to those who claim he doesn't really
want to reduce the population of humanity by
90% by killing off 6 billion people ASAP. If
he's willing to wait for those 6 billion people
to die natural deaths, then why does he dismiss
AIDS as his "plague" of choice because it's
too slow?

HIV is actually the virus that the human race
should fear the most. Bird flu may or may not
start a pandemic. But HIV is a very sure (if
relatively slow) killer. In a generation or two
he might do what Pianka wants. But he's not
willing to wait that long.

Let's face it -- what he advocates makes Hitler,
Stalin and Pol Pot together look like small time
hoods. And most of their victims were killed
relatively quickly. Ebola is horribly painful
for 1 to 2 weeks. It's a horrible way to die.

This is a blog about bird flu, and so I have to
wonder, if Pianka really wanted to warn us of
danger -- why not warn us about bird flu?

Many people are doing so -- including me.

The difference is, I want to save lives.

That's why I did a lot of research into how to
survive bird flu.

I've compiled it all right here:

How to Protect Yourself
and Your Family From Bird Flu