• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Bill Gates endorsing vaccines to lower population

I think that this may be better placed in the 'conspiracy theories' forum.

A quick google search for that phrase only yields conspiracy theory sites.

My initial guess is that when gates says:
Stating that the global population was heading towards 9 billion, Gates said, “If we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services (abortion), we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 per cent.”

The "that" isn't referring to population, but the 9 billion projected population. In other words, if we slow the rate of increase in population, it might not peak at 9 billion, but perhaps 10 - 15% lower, or maybe 8 billion. Either number is higher than today's population, which would not be a "decrease."

ETA - your skepticism of Alex Jones is well-placed. He makes money off of the paranoia of his audience, so it is in his benefit to scare them with "quotes" like the one you referenced.
 
Last edited:
I wonder who decide to claim he meant abortion when he (supposedly) said "reproduction health services".
 
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6350303.ece
its not just Bill Gates
its Ted Turner and Oprah Winfrey too
see how the real NWO reveal themselves
SOME of America’s leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world’s population and speed up improvements in health and education.

The philanthropists who attended a summit convened on the initiative of Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change.

Described as the Good Club by one insider it included David Rockefeller Jr, the patriarch of America’s wealthiest dynasty, Warren Buffett and George Soros, the financiers, Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York, and the media moguls Ted Turner and Oprah Winfrey.

These members, along with Gates, have given away more than £45 billion since 1996 to causes ranging from health programmes in developing countries to ghetto schools nearer to home.
Click to expand...


not a conspiracy site
;)
 
Paradox74 said:
Aside from whether or not vaccines are dangerous (I have doubts about Alex Jones and his ilk), was Bill Gate's statement about lowering the world's population through vaccines true or not?
Click to expand...
.
The actual quote (once you find it, here is the cleanest copy I could find) shows what he's doing is referring to uncited studies which demonstrate medical aid to third world countries, used for things like vaccines, also results in decreased population growth.

Dunno to which studies he refers, but such aid often has an educational aspect which may explain the the drop in growth.
.
 
Last edited:
Right, but the point being that a drop in GROWTH does not mean this:

Bill Gates: Use Vaccines To Lower Population

Microsoft chief echoes John P. Holdren’s call for massive sterilization program, wants CO2 tax

Bill Gates: Use Vaccines To Lower Population 010310top

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, March 1, 2010
Click to expand...
 
carlitos said:
Right, but the point being that a drop in GROWTH does not mean this:
Click to expand...
.
True, I followed a series of articles *back* to the video from a snippet in the PP post (no, I'm not going to try to recreate it, and besides most of them were malware havens to which I won't subject anyone,) each saying "click here to go to original story" or words to that effect, each getting gradually less dishonest about the quote (tho none less than freaking about it)
.
 
Last edited:
The quote is from Gates's speach at TED2010 http://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gates.html

I'm not sure what Gates meant. He is talking about reducing carbon emmisions. He says the factors to carbon emissions are:

CO2 = People X Services per person X Energy per service X and CO2 per unit engergy.

This equation has four factors. A little bit of multiplication. So, you've got a thing on the left, CO2, that you want to get to zero, and that's going to be based on the number of people, the services each person's using on average, the energy on average for each service, and the CO2 being put out per unit of energy. So, let's look at each one of these and see how we can get this down to zero. Probably, one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty near to zero. Now that's back from high school algebra, but let's take a look.

First we've got population. Now, the world today has 6.8 billion people. That's headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent, but there we see an increase of about 1.3.
Click to expand...

A commentor on that page says this:

C'mon. no need for conspiracy nonsense here. Gates has made clear on numerous occasions his view, backed up by a lot of evidence, that the one of the best ways to reduce population growth is to improve health, especially of children. When parents are confident their children won't die, they don't have as many.
Click to expand...
 
This:

one of the best ways to reduce population growth is to improve health, especially of children. When parents are confident their children won't die, they don't have as many.
Click to expand...
Norm
 
Great, now I'm a little bit stupider from following that link. "Durr, making people healthier is bad. Lowering carbon emissions is bad. Hitting yourself in the junk with a baseball bat is good."

Actually, the writer of that article whacking himself in the nuts a few times probably would do humanity some good.
 
I mean lower population is GOOD. If your kids stand a chance of growing up to support you in your old age, you will have fewer children.

In a nation without health care for the elderly, children are your retirement.
 
There was an in depth issue of Scientific American 20 or 30 years ago on population growth. They had some excellent graphs showing how population growth changes as the economics of a population improve. It's clear from abundant data and has been clear for decades that when economic conditions of a country improve, after a lag adjustment time, population growth slows.

This is a no brainer. Parents shift from high numbers of offspring needed in a society where lots of kids die, to investing in higher quality offspring when kids stop dying in such high numbers. This is not a new concept folks.


NWO? :rolleyes: Puhleeese.
 
Last edited:
I'd note that in the generation that first obtains good health care there is a surge of births then it drops off as noted above. You can see these bubble of births in the Arab countries when they took on modernity following floods of oil money.
 
This part of the article seems to be the utter nonsense they just made up: "Quite how an improvement in health care and vaccines that supposedly save lives would lead to a lowering in global population is an oxymoron, unless Gates is referring to vaccines that sterilize people, which is precisely the same method advocated in White House science advisor John P. Holdren’s 1977 textbook Ecoscience."

Umm, duh, if people live longer, you need (and can support) fewer of them. And obviously contraception education and supply will lower upward population growth.
 
One time I heard that Alex Jones tried to pull off a "War of the Worlds" type scheme and acted as if WWIII had started claiming Russia just launched Nukes etc. I can't remember if it was around Y2K time or not.

Anyways he is a total fruit cake. Be very wary of that man.
 
I take Gates's words to mean that by ensuring the health of people's offspring, particularly in the third world where high infant mortality means women tend to be perpetually pregnant during their fertile years, the population wouldn't grow at the current rate because women could trust that their first few children would reach adulthood, freeing them (the women) to pursue other objectives, like helping the family earn a living, seeking an education, etc. There are probably studies out there that back this up.
 
There is overwhelming evidence of what happens to the population growth in societies as the standard of living improves. There is a lag time of about a decade then people start wanting better things for their offspring and that requires they have fewer of them. There was an entire edition of Scientific American published over 30 years ago showing the effect of improving the standard of living on population growth.

It's oversimplifying things to say it's only about parents having less kids if they don't think a number of their kids are going to die in childhood. It actually depends on the standard of living altogether. For example, the middle class parent wants their child to go to college. They can't do that if there are too many kids to send. Ensuring health is one piece of the standard of living.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom