All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 20, 2022 - Info Warrior - Jason Bermas
54:40
The Club Of Rome Is A Cult Of Doom - Reality Rants With Jason Bermas
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everybody, Jason Bermas here wishing you a very happy holiday season.
I really truly hope that you're spending it with your loved ones and enjoying it across the board.
I want to thank all of you out there that have come over to alternative platforms such as Rumble to view my stuff.
Support me on Rockfin.com.
To ensure that I continue on and especially those that have come over to redvoicemedia.com for the second premium hour.
Now every two weeks we release the previous premium no matter what and in real time you can also listen Over at theinfowarrior.podbean.com or get the MP3 archive there.
I mean, we're doing the best we can.
But this segment right here, you're going to want to watch.
This was a segment on the Club of Rome.
And their infamous eugenics paper, The Limits of Growth.
So saddle up, sit back, and enjoy the video.
Without further ado, last 10 minutes before we go to redvoicemedia.com slash Jason.
Sign up for a dollar a day.
The Limits of Growth by the United Nations.
This was a free service.
It's in the Pennsylvania Public Library's Film Center.
Oh, thank you so much, State of Pennsylvania.
1973, here it is.
The limits of growth.
Oh! Hmm.
I mean, boy oh boy, you're going to love this one.
I can guarantee you that.
It's got that nice old-timey vintage feel, everybody.
Our riches and our numbers burden the world.
The world was full of hidden gold and
silver.
If you remember the dramatic pictures taken by the Apollo flyers of the Earth
floating out in space all by itself, no one after seeing that could deny that the world is finite.
Then it's impossible for people to go on saying, we have an infinite supply of air, an infinite supply of water, So let's just stop it.
Tell me that isn't representative of all this, we need a reset.
The environment, the Earth, the new Gaia religion.
Look at how they incorporate space and the NASA propaganda.
That the Earth is finite.
Listen, yeah, it's finite.
But the idea that we have somehow...
Exploited the resources on Earth so badly that we are destroying a planet is bullshit.
And the real people that are exploiting it in a manner where they're genetically modifying organisms that not only do we eat, but now things like mosquitoes.
That's a real threat we don't talk about.
Allowing our water system to be polluted with all sorts of chemicals including estrogen mimickers, that's a problem we're not talking about.
Instead, it's too many people doing too many things specifically causing too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and we're worried about their carbon footprint.
So let's take a life force on the planet, demonize that, look the other way on everything else and empower those doing it.
and will empower global governance with propaganda pieces like this one.
People are bad.
Yeah!
People bad!
People bad! Smokestack bad!
As we grow richer, there is rising concern about pollution, our ability to feed a growing population, and fears that we may run out of fuel and metals.
Let me say this. This should tell you that these people are totally and completely full of shit and love the strife and disaster that they have caused.
If you don't think...
That if we wanted to, as a human population, we could have stamped out all of, if not the vast majority, of hunger across the world with the food and the resources we have.
You are extremely ignorant.
Of course we could. The vast majority of people who are starving are in resource-rich nations.
But we want...
When we want to control people, we want control over their water supply, their food supply, their energy supply.
And ultimately now with the systems they're bringing in, their ability to consume things, what they can consume, when they can consume it.
Restrictions on your travel.
Too many people doing too many things, according to Ted Turner and others under this mindset that are...
Too many people doing too many things causing the climate change.
But they're going to do whatever they want.
Whenever they want to do it.
And blame you sauce.
And your sauce.
And your family.
And your friends.
You're the problem.
You. A computer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has been used to look at these problems.
Wait a minute! Whoa, whoa, whoa! Massachusetts Institute of Technology?
You mean like MIT? You mean like what we just watched right there?
MIT? Like Boston Dynamics?
MIT? DARPA? MIT? Huh?
They're telling us back in the 70s about this?
Oh wow! That must be a coinkydink!
To analyze in broad terms the direction in which our world is headed, Sponsored by a group of businessmen and academics.
Oh, businessmen and academics.
Where could we go wrong?
They've never led us anywhere astray before.
They've certainly never looked to their own interests or promoted a what?
Globalist, Malthusian, transhumanist agenda.
Never, never, never. Never, never, never.
The Club of Rome.
Its conclusions are revolutionary.
Yeah, yeah. The Club of Rome.
The people behind Malthusianism.
If you haven't seen the Truthstream Media King of the World documentary, where they go through that publication specifically talking about the inversion of reality and demonizing carbon and a movement away from the real things that we're polluting society with, I'd encourage you to do so.
Aaron and Melissa Dykes, they do top-tier stuff.
So, if this hasn't piqued your interest three minutes into a 30-minute watch-along, I don't know what will.
I don't know what will. But what's about to happen is we go in premium over at redvoicemedia.com slash Jason.
One dollar right now.
Okay? And that means it's Monday.
There will be a new second hour fully released over at redvoicemedia.com slash Jason.
That's where you can find all my stuff.
So... The Infowarrior.podbean.com It's a great way to support the broadcast.
Reality Rants is here, 8 a.m.
to 10 a.m. Monday through Thursday.
I think we're doing really important work here.
We're doing really cool interviews.
And I think that this is a much-needed topic of discussion when the news cycle is always talking about what?
Twitter or Hunter Biden or yay.
And sure, that's important.
And we talk about that a little here.
We got some meat and potatoes for you.
Okay, that's what this is.
We're trying to bring you an information of gravy trains with biscuit wheels.
Full of proofs that you can show other people to try to bring them into the fold of a very real agenda out there.
Let's play some more of this, huh?
Club of Rome, MIT, too many people, United Nations.
The most important lesson is that we're near the end of development of society, which we've been going on for about 2,000 years.
And we've reached levels of prosperity, which carry the seeds of disruption.
So in other words, you've had it too good for too long.
Your standard of living is too good.
We don't like that. We're the club of Rome.
And necessitate a complete re-look at the whole world, social, political, and other situations.
It's telling us that the world is in a completely unstable situation and is likely to fall to pieces if it doesn't stop growing.
So again, likely to fall to pieces if it doesn't stop growing.
That's your transhumanist, your cyberneticist.
I think they didn't say cybergeneticist.
Cyberneticist. So cybernetics, the merging of man with machine.
That's your guy. And here's another Club of Rome representative.
Let's put it bluntly.
Our option is not between this kind of society, present society, and a stable state society.
It is between a stable state society and chaos.
So in other words, in the 70s you still had it too good for too long.
We need a stable society.
That's like the sustainability movement that they're talking.
You know, in our progress is our end.
It's not the threat of artificial intelligence, etc.
It's human beings on the planet.
That's the problem.
🎵 Notice the space propaganda.
Remember, and by the way, asteroids that they're showing you right there, that's another threat, an existential threat, where they'll put in fear Bring in institutions and more command and control systems.
The world is six billion years old.
Again, we don't know that.
Again, that's trust the science stuff.
I'm not saying it is. I'm not saying it isn't.
But you cannot prove the planet is six billion years old.
I just want to put that out there. That's going to be an ever-present theory.
There's no historical record that the Earth is six billion years old.
Okay? Sorry. That is unimaginable.
So think of it as a week.
All through Sunday, and most of Monday, nothing much happens.
Now again, you see what they did there, right?
So those listening and those watching, they show you a cracked piece of earth...
Which they want to relate with a living thing, which it is, but they want to humanize it while they're demonizing you as a human being, right?
So what do they show you?
They show you a vein of some sort.
Oh, okay.
So now it has biology because you saw a crack in the planet.
And it does have biology because it's the planet, right?
It has other things it needs as a life force, you know, like carbon dioxide, like oxygen.
Life forces on the planet.
Late Monday night, a cell divides.
Life has begun.
Nature sells!
Through Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and most of Saturday, life becomes more complex and more beautiful.
So again, when I talk about social Darwinists, and I talk about evolution, just look at the push on this in the first, we're not even five minutes into it.
Disaster, space, NASA, MIT, overpopulation, evolution, trust the science.
The Spider's Web The Spider's Web!
Bum bum bum, the sun!
The Earth! The Moon!
In a barren universe, life on Earth is being sustained by an increasingly stable and complex biology.
At tea time on Saturday, it is the age of the reptiles.
At three minutes to midnight, man appears.
you One second before midnight, man the hunter becomes man the farmer.
At one fortieth of a second of midnight, the Industrial Revolution begins.
Now we have machines.
They just whipped right through that one, huh?
Don't worry. Now we're in the fourth Industrial Revolution.
It is now midnight.
In that last 40th of a second, we have started to get richer at an ever increasing rate.
Growth is explosive.
Population now doubles in 30 years.
Man now uses twice as much energy as he did 15 years ago.
And industrial production has nearly trebled in the last 15 years.
Cars are bad.
Right? Again. This propaganda has been around for a very long time.
They've seeded it via various outlets, via the media, for a very long time.
During this program, men on the earth will consume 200,000 tons of petroleum and 200,000 tons of coal, produce 2,000 motor cars, and use 400 million kilowatts of electricity.
If we use known stocks at present rates, there will be no copper left in 2008, no zinc in 1995, no tin in 1989, and no mercury in 1985.
All bullshit!
Let me bring it back to everything they just said there.
We increased our use of all of it.
All of it. All of it.
And all those dates have passed.
It's constant fear-mongering.
Constant fear-mongering.
And use 400 million kilowatts of electricity.
If we use known stocks at present rates, there will be no copper left in 2008, no zinc in 1995, no tin in 1989, and no mercury in 1985.
There will be no silver, without which we cannot make films, in 1987.
Today we consume more than yesterday.
Our children, if they live as we do, will use up resources more than twice as fast as we do.
So again, even then they were telling you that your kids were bad to want what?
A family, a house, two cars, a high standard of living.
You were bad then.
This was made in 73 before I was born.
It's almost 50 years old now.
Our grandchildren might need twice as much oil as we found in Alaska just to meet their increased needs for one year.
Such growth threatens to use up all the resources the Earth has to offer us.
Such are the enormous needs of the Industrial Society in progress.
The Industrial Revolution has consumed vast quantities of fossil fuels, for example, and now there aren't many left.
And it's as simple as that.
If you have a kind of society which is going to eat the very planet we're on, eat it up, consume it, you will find that there's nothing left.
So again, that propaganda has been around forever.
We shouldn't have it.
During the 9-11 stuff, so many people tried to sell me on peak oil.
Peak oil is the reason. They need to go to the Middle East.
They need to take the oil reserves.
Bullshit. Again, bullshit.
If that were the case, they wouldn't need to be artificially shutting down pipelines in 2020.
It's artificial scarcity.
It's fear-mongering.
It's demonizing the human species as a whole when, again, it's a very specific small group within the industrial realm, within the government sector, within the media military industrial complex because of all the military testing and death showers from above and those type of technologies that actually pollute the planet.
And you think they're going to lose power?
No, they're going to restrict your access to things that empower you and your family to enslave you under the guise of saving the planet.
Bullshit. Our industry, the way we make things, attacks the fabric and stability of nature, the ecosystem, on which all life, including man, depends.
And again, what's Dennis Bushnell of NASA? We'll bring NASA back into it.
The premise is, not just global warming, the ecosystem appears to be crashing.
The ecosystem appears to be crashing.
That is their narrative.
And it has been for some time.
It has been developed to exploit the ecosystem without taking into account its continued existence.
And our new technologies tend to disrupt ecological cycles, to break them, to intrude harmful, unnatural materials on them, and therefore to destroy the base of its own existence.
Because of that, we are on a suicidal course.
Dun, dun, dun, dun!
We are faced by dilemmas.
Spooky music!
It looks like showing you nuclear reactors.
They demonize nuclear energy as well.
Industry cannot exist without the raw materials it must use up.
Nor can it function without the natural world that it may be destroying.
That it may be destroying.
Again, humans on the planet Take up less than like 5%, less than 5% of the usable space on the planet to live.
It is a farce that we are overpopulated, or were then.
Period. A farce.
Spooky music, sound effects, everybody's back.
So great is our progress, that it may push the Earth to its limits And beyond.
We'll show you electrical grids as if they're bad.
We threaten a confrontation with nature.
Progress to that confrontation is speeding up.
Look at the painting of Earth.
Maury's strong. He is...
Woo! Maury Strong is one of those guys that stuck it out.
He was around for a long time.
You're looking at a top-level eugenicist right here, Maury Strong.
Okay, big time.
Being told is that although nobody knows for sure exactly when it will happen or exactly what risk is the greatest risk man faces, scientists are fairly unanimous in saying that man does face extremely important risks.
Scientists, again, trust the science.
They're fairly in line with one another.
That's before they could get away with things like just saying everybody's in lockstep.
Everybody that matters is in lockstep.
Right? That's where they're at now, where they'll ban you if you're not part of his clique.
If you're not part of the United Nations clique or the WHO clique, your science no longer exists now.
Thanks, Maurice Strong. When global population is doubling every 33 years, when resource consumption is doubling every 20 years, no long-term view of mankind can proceed without first forming some preliminary answers to these questions.
Professor Dennis Meadows at a conference in Washington to mark the publication of his team study for the Club of Rome, The Limits to Growth.
It concludes that economic growth always generates a crisis, that the road to riches is the road to disaster.
Even if we solve problems like pollution, growth within a century or so would lead to widespread famine and social chaos.
Think about that.
Again, this is 50 years from now.
They're telling you to keep growing in the next 50 years now.
Widespread famine. Remember, they already told you a bunch of resources were going to be gone that aren't gone.
This is predicated on an agenda where the people at the top take hold of the evolution of the entire planet via their biomimetics and cybernetics.
Alright? And you get the short end of the transhumanist stick.
That's where we're at.
If you're around at all.
While they're automating you out with dancing K-pop robots.
Dennis Meadows and his team used a computer.
He explains why. With system dynamics, a methodology that we use, we organize the available information on the relationships in some system.
Now, again, We're now moving to an AI society.
You have the muskernuts out there showing you Neuralink, talking about upgrades, talking about being hooked to the cloud, even talking about the planned obsolescence of these objects.
Alright? How much science do we trust?
How much do we get away from our intuition as human beings?
Our spiritual nature.
The true meaning of what it means to be a human and have actual consciousness.
How long?
At first sight, there doesn't seem to be much relationship between farming and industry.
But industry produces pollution, and pollution affects crops.
So a change in industry affects farming via pollution.
The man-made world consists of a whole complex of subtle relationships like that.
Yeah, so let's genetically modify the food to work with the industry, right?
I mean, that's what they did. Change one thing, and it sets up a slow and complicated chain reaction.
The equations in the computer define these relationships, so the computer can show how one thing affects everything else, not only immediately, but over many years.
Worship computers.
Viewers computer show how these things would interact and affect man's future
They use the computer to see what would happen if man successfully tackled his obvious problems if he grew more
food found more natural resources and controlled pollution
But first they ran the computer to see what direction the world would take if it ran its present course
so again Let's put every doomsday scenario into a glorified word processor in the 70s and then we'll put out a publication, have a large-scale press conference saying human beings are bad and we need to manage them and manage their population and manage their resource,
not Find innovations, not utilize the resources we haven't discovered, etc.
No, no, no. First, let's do this and let's amplify this.
As the century unfolds, industry grows.
As does food production and population.
But we're using up all our raw materials, the limited metals and fuel in the earth.
These run out.
Without fuel and metals for the factories, industry collapses.
Farming has become highly mechanized.
And without petrol and electricity, food production falls too.
There's no food and massive unemployment.
And yet, right now, it's not that we don't have enough energy.
We're not allowing certain energy to be used.
And it's not that we don't have enough farmland.
We're restricting the use of farmland by farmers based on nitrogen and other things.
Huh, it's weird how that works.
Under the same agenda, by the way.
So the population falls.
People are dying.
Dennis Meadows explains.
Because of the high population levels and the increasing industrialization, natural resources are depleted at an increasing rate, and finally they fall down to the point where the industrial system can no longer be sustained.
What might this mean in human terms to the average Western family?
Over 50 years or more, we get richer.
we consume more and more resources.
Things like gas and electricity.
Thank you.
When essential raw materials like oil and copper run out, civilized life ends.
And listen, copper has become more valuable and scarce, but civilized life doesn't have to go anywhere.
We've found other types of materials.
Alright, we've created fiber optic networks.
Tesla himself back in the day had a wireless energy plant.
We've grown up in this closed circuit system when there is an open circuit system readily available.
These are things they don't tell you.
If we go on as we are, society collapses because we run out of metals and fuel.
Growth is halted by a resource crisis.
But again, that's not why growth has been halted.
At all. Not even close.
Science. Science and technology could help us here.
We might find new sources of fuel.
Use nuclear power or harness the energy of the sun to replace oil and coal.
And again, those are all real things.
And if you listen to Ray Kurzweil, for some reason...
We're all worried about this carbon command and control system, and I'm sure that he would agree with it, you know, Mr.
Head of Calico himself.
But at the same time, he tells you what?
That by 2030, that solar and renewables will be so good, and we'll only have tapped into one ten thousandth of it, that we'll be able to power the entire planet if we want to.
Not in some sustainable nightmare, but But again, utilizing the sun.
And the new levels, like third, fourth generation nuclear power, they're way different.
Other than the outcome and heating up the water, etc.
Then the initial plants, they're way safer.
But again, they've been demonized.
They don't want you to be energy independent.
They don't want you to have cheap and abundant energy.
Let alone free energy.
Oh my god! What kind of blaspheme is that?
Trust the science, we've gotta be- The metals could be used more carefully. We could save and
sort out our scrap. We might find substitutes for scarce metals.
So they ran the computer to see what would happen if we solved the resources problem that caused the crisis in the
first run.
The End Look at that thing. It's so, so crazy.
This time, natural resources used carefully run down slowly.
But industry continues to grow.
This industrial growth produces a serious pollution problem.
Pollution attacks both people and plants.
Crops cannot grow.
And farming starts to fail.
And by the way, one of the biggest excuses by guys like Gates and others that we can't just plant more trees to absorb more of the evil carbon dioxide is that the soil is so depleted.
And in some regards, they are correct.
The soil is vastly, vastly depleted throughout the planet.
But that's not everywhere.
There are certainly pockets of the planet where that is not the case.
And soil can be rejuvenated.
It can be treated. Fulvic acid is just one of many ways to do so.
So they're giving you false arguments.
And instead, right now, 50 years later, we're seeing the food taken over, the food supply taken over by people like Gates and big companies like Monsatan, who he's been in bed with forever, and then genetically modifying the structure of what we eat and not selling us food.
That now, oh, we're destroying the planet and we can't grow food because it's absurd.
Okay, but selling us on the idea, it's bad to have those certain foods.
It's bad to eat meat.
And you're going to eat the printed food and the bugs for the protein.
What? What?
The population starts to collapse when people die of hunger and pollution.
Look at these in search charts.
Industry, without a workforce, collapses too.
But now pollution is permitted to rise because industrialization goes further and finally pollution begins to impair the lifetime of the people and the productivity of the agricultural sector.
This time, then, growth is not stopped by a resource crisis.
Our family grows richer.
Consuming more and more goods.
The factors producing these goods are also producing pollution.
This time it is pollution that halts growth in catastrophe.
To keep growing, we need more raw materials.
If we find those materials, growth continues till we die of pollution.
See that? So again, no matter what, no matter what, we die.
No matter what, we die.
Even if we find all the resources, which we have, we have an abundance of resources on this planet.
We are a smart and ingenuitive species.
We can not only maintain or sustain, we can thrive.
Again, that's not on the agenda.
Eventually, pollution will get you.
But we could control pollution.
Indeed, we are already beginning to do so.
We know how to clean up our water and air.
The pollution created by technology can be restrained by technology.
So in the next run, they assumed not only that we had solved our raw materials difficulties, but that we had controlled pollution as well.
More Club of Rome pay for work.
So resources still run down slowly.
Industry can expand.
Pollution, now controlled, doesn't become a problem.
Growth is progressing.
But this time the population grows so large that food becomes a problem.
Food production cannot keep pace with population.
People starve. I love how the United Nations has always used the guise of caring about starving populations for their agenda when one of the things we discussed earlier is the fact that we could feed the planet and we have failed to do so and that exposes bare their agenda.
In this case, the land resources become insufficient, pressure on the land begins to lead to land deterioration, and finally food per capita collapses and brings about a population decline.
Oh, there's that juicy meat!
The problem is food.
Growth provides us with increasing wealth, but as the population grows, food becomes
more and more expensive.
The growing food shortage turns slowly to famine.
Thank you.
And again, food shortages get set up via the COVID-1984 nightmare, right?
Through supply chain disruption.
Everything they've postulated here is a farce.
There's plenty of food.
There's plenty of resources on the planet.
Okay? Farming's still really a thing.
It's a lot of land to do it on.
Both with produce and raising animals to eat.
Oh my god. Did Jason just talk about raising animals to eat?
That son of a bitch.
So if growth is not halted by pollution or a resource shortage, it is halted by a food crisis.
Laying out every agenda they can throw at you.
But there could be a solution to that too.
Oh. The Green Revolution.
Scientists have been able to double and even treble yields.
We can grow more food.
So on the next run, as well as pollution controls and a careful use of resources, they assumed that food production could be doubled.
So once again, the promises of GMO, oh, we're going to be able to double food production.
Just let us tinker with the genetics of the food.
No big deal. Good ideas.
We have a computer. The sources still used carefully fall slowly.
Pollution still controlled is no problem.
And now food production, backed by the Green Revolution, rises.
The Green Revolution, even then?
The system is experiencing explosive growth.
The lines go off the graph.
This growth of industry is so huge and rapid that it suddenly generates a pollution problem, despite pollution controls.
See? And the industry and the population collapses.
Once again, people are the problem.
They're going to cause some disaster.
If there's too many people, there's too much pollution.
It's going to shoot through the roof and then a bunch of people die.
Because land is no longer a limit to growth, industrialization rises to the point where even with the pollution control measures we had before, pollution becomes a very serious problem and again brings about the collapse.
Boy, that computer is really, really long.
So we control pollution, conserve natural resources, and grow more food.
Growth is still halted by a pollution problem.
Technical solutions are not sufficient.
Pollution control, resource conservation, and the Green Revolution serve only to postpone or worsen the crises.
Like, it's the craziest thing.
So then they tell you, you know, we're benevolent.
Here are the problems.
Let's offer you the solutions.
Now, all the solutions are going to fail, but we're going to give you another solution.
And even the green revolution.
The GMO revolution is the green revolution?
What?
The obvious is not enough.
Runs illustrate very succinctly that pollution, natural resource depletion are not problems
themselves.
The problem is growth in a finite world.
So long as we ignore that fact and rely on growth over the short term to solve our problems,
overshoot and collapse of the form which we see in the world model seems to us to be absolutely
inevitable.
So, again, inevitable.
And this was Bushnell talking back in 2011, what?
That they would go from a growth mantra to what one of sustainability and that's your standard of living
plummeting under these auspices
Scary music Farm picture.
And scarcity are not really problems.
They are symptoms.
Symptoms of growth.
Symptoms of too many people walking around doing too many things.
But what about population?
Was instability due to the pressures of population growth?
A population that doubles every 30 years, that adds 70 million extra human beings to the planet every year?
They ran the computer to investigate what would happen if nothing but population were controlled.
Oh! What would happen if nothing but population were controlled, Club of Rome?
Interesting! Thank you, Club of Rome, for your computer.
Population is stabilized.
Only two children per family.
Oh! Industrial production and food production surge ahead.
And pollution rises too.
The system is growing.
But again, industry uses too many resources which run out.
Bringing down the system yet again.
So, again, even if you do everything they say, the system collapses.
Even if they stabilize the world population and give you a two-child policy, that's not enough.
Think about that.
Even with population controlled, growth brings us up against a resources problem.
Pretty buttons, computers!
So population control is not sufficient either.
They made other runs on the computer, different combinations of policies.
However they juggled, population controls with pollution controls, with resource conservation,
with food production, the result was a breakdown.
So everything in the system constantly breaks down, no matter how much population control
they institute.
And yet that's still the mantra, still the agenda, still where we're at at the end of 2022.
A breakdown that implies millions of deaths and the collapse of civilized life.
What had been the reaction of informed opinion to this study and its bleak prognosis?
Well, I think the study makes an important contribution to the environmental dialogue.
It points up some of the fundamental issues that man is going to have to grapple with if he's going to survive and continue to improve his position on this planet.
More he's strong, man.
Scary. Scary.
I think this has two important advantages over other studies in this field, and there have been many other studies.
The first is that the computer allows you to handle a very complex situation, an enormous number of interrelated effects, so complex that One could not grasp all these within one human mind.
Exactly. Bend the knee to the AI. Bend the knee to the science.
Ignore the fact that everything we did, including population control, failed.
And go with population control anyway.
And all of our other recommendations of a command and control society, top-down style.
A computer can handle those easily, and, uh, Explore the way they react upon each other and how they evolve.
That's the first point.
Second point, I think, is that because you have to put it into a computer, you have to get all your assumptions out on the table.
And that means that the thing is very precise, and if someone doesn't like the model or assumptions, they can see Damn straight.
I think that's a very reasonable response.
The question comes, of course, is it possible to put something into the computer which can be defended as reasonable, which alters the conclusions?
I'm rather confident that while in the precise nature of our conclusions there will ultimately be made changes, that the general conclusions, the fact that Growth has a tendency to resolve itself through collapse.
Those conclusions are simply not going to be altered by any reasonably defensible additions to the model.
The computer does not predict.
It sketches the direction in which our world is moving.
Listen, again, nonsense in, nonsense out.
That brings us back to when we were talking about grace.
It's going to do what it's programmed to do.
It clarifies some of the conflicts between the natural and the man-made world.
Nature is balance.
Tamper with one part of it, and the complex and unexpected will turn up in another part.
That is what the study shows.
Nature videos.
Peace.
Birds screaming.
Lights flashing.
Fish eaten. Flowers blooming.
God, this so has that classroom feel from the 80s.
Anybody like me that grew up in the 80s when they break out, this is like pre-VHS tapes when they were first just starting to get the VHS tapes in.
And you had the reels that they'd had for the last 20, 30 years.
It reminds me so much of that.
Because it is that.
A mole coming out of the ground.
Technological societies too are highly interconnected.
Intervention in one part, increasing, say, food production, may have unexpected and unfortunate results elsewhere.
Oh, increasing food production, unexpected and unfortunate results.
Oh, really?
Kind of wonder if there's MKUltra and the kids without lighting.
Babies everywhere!
Weird sounds.
It doesn't prophesy, but it does give us a new way of seeing the world.
It is showing us how and why some of our most serious problems interrelate.
Again, they're trying to merge, even here, the idea of nature and technology.
Of natural things with computer systems.
Even here, in the 70s.
The AI society.
The model is simple.
The world is complex.
The crude predictions we see in the study would appear in the world in much more complex ways.
The real event, if it happens, would certainly be more complicated.
And different kinds of countries are vulnerable in different ways.
It seems obvious to us that decline, if it does come, will be experienced at different times and in different ways in various societies.
The United States might conceivably have a natural resource problem, while Japan could conceivably fail to cure its pollution problems and be led into difficulty that way.
So, once again, we don't have a natural resource problem in this country.
That's ridiculous. That was based on the oil model.
This is pre-fracking.
This is all, we won't have enough energy.
And as far as air quality goes in Japan or even in China or other industrial areas, it is still piss poor.
Yet, they're still thriving as economic powerhouses.
Some of the less industrialized areas at the same time might be having a food crisis.
The world is running out of many things that it needs.
Fossil fuel, for example, is the classic example.
But food...
We are very, very short of food and we have two-thirds of the world undernourished to prove it.
Again, no reason for that.
We have all sorts of resources.
We don't have to be starving.
Now, when we talk about ecosystems crashing, remember Bushnell going around talking about sustainability is under the guise of what?
That we're running out of fresh water.
It's not just food, it's fresh water as well.
Oh. A report from the World Bank reads, What are we to say of a world in which millions of people are faced with day-to-day deprivations that degrade human dignity to levels which no statistics can adequately describe?
And the World Bank has since solved that problem, right?
Just like the IMF has solved that problem.
Just like the World Food Program under the United Nations is gonna solve that problem now, right?
As long as we have the blockchain people and the refugee camps.
Oh boy.
Disaster. Win.
Many, many millions of people already starve to death in the world.
Pollution is killing people.
Not very many.
The health of a large number of urban dwellers is being decreased because of environmental deterioration.
There is authoritative and growing evidence that we are polluting the planet.
Authoritative. Oh, authoritative information.
Well, my ears are perking up now.
We want to listen to those authorities, especially today, almost 50 years after this broadcast.
...generations will never take a sign.
The year 2000 is sufficient to melt the polar ice cap, placing most of the American city people...
in an inner-vacancy polluted situation.
It turned up in the drinking water of the city of Buffalo, New York.
It was nitrate, appreciable amounts of nitrate.
It was a polygraph, most parts of it.
We don't know, it's not a heavily polluting disease.
Perhaps millions of people breathe the dust.
Very real danger.
A large threat of contamination.
So there it is again.
More fear-mongering.
Fear, fear, fear. Contamination bad.
Are already at work in the world today?
Some would say so, and go further.
See the symptoms of growth in Vietnam and Bangladesh, in crime rates, and the state of the world's great cities.
You look at the city.
In America already, the city is falling apart from the center outwards, so that you can't walk in the center of the big American cities without running great physical risks.
They're covered in concrete in cars.
Poorer people can't get out of the center and therefore form ghettos.
The problems are overwhelmingly bad.
And yet, they want us to what?
Consolidate into these type of cities, but then they want to stack them up and they want to act like they're going to be equitable and they're going to be good for the environment.
Right? Right?
I thought cities are good for the environment.
Because we're infringing on less of the land.
Eh? Neom? The line?
I wouldn't go so far as to say that the troubles we see are all part of this business of an overloaded society that doesn't know how to conduct itself any longer.
Some World Trade Center imagery right there.
Big skyscrapers.
Bad! Bad music!
City's bad! Now slide out of the car.
We need to stop traffic.
We have to begin to solve the problem of drug abuse in this country right now.
I mean, you like how they threw that in there?
I think that's important because this is 73.
By the 80s, what?
You had a now war on drugs.
Who was shipping in most of the drugs again?
Who was shipping in all that cocaine?
Huh? Was that the military industrial complex?
Was that the intelligence agencies?
Huh? But we need a war on that too.
Because the city's scary.
Scary city.
Sirens going. Cameras twirling.
People shouting. Look, there's about two minutes left on that.
▲
Export Selection