Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

Attenbore Redux

According to arch-misanthrope David Attenborough, humans are a plague on earth.  This claim is nothing new of course and I’ve sailed on his sea of Malthusian sewage before .  The fact that Telegraph Environment Correspondent, Louise Gray, is cheerleading for him is no great surprise either.

The television presenter said that humans are threatening their own existence and that of other species by using up the world’s resources.

But let’s not mention that Attenbore uses up those very same vital resources jetting himself and camera crews all over the world to make smug wildlife documentaries to prove his point.  All at human virus TV licence payer expense, of course.

He said the only way to save the planet from famine and species extinction is to limit human population growth.

The planet is in famine?  Really?  So why is food being turned into biofuel?

There is species extinction?  Hardly surprising since rainforests are being felled in order to create palm oil plantations to salve greenie guilt over people wanting to keep warm and lead productive lives.

We must limit human population?  Attenbore’s wish is made real because biofuel production is leading the way.

It’s not population growth that’s the problem.  It’s the growth in greenie corporatism, authoritarian stupidity and greed.

“We are a plague on the Earth. It’s coming home to roost over the next 50 years or so. It’s not just climate change; it’s sheer space, places to grow food for this enormous horde. Either we limit our population growth or the natural world will do it for us, and the natural world is doing it for us right now,” he told the Radio Times.

The Radio Times?  That world renown journal of scientific endeavour?  Well I’m convinced.

Just kidding.

I see that Attenbore has reset his personal doomsday clock – again.  The timetable for impending population doom has been de-escalated from thirty years to fifty.  As for the natural world seeing people off, it’s been doing that since people first evolved.  Nature isn’t vengeful.  It isn’t a thinking entity that targets a single species it dislikes.  Apparently Attenbore believes it is.  What a plonker!

Sir David, who is a patron of the Optimum Population Trust, has spoken out before about the “frightening explosion in human numbers” and the need for investment in sex education and other voluntary means of limiting population in developing countries.

Only in developing countries?  Why pick on them?  I mean, don’t they have enough population reduction to contend with, what with palm oil plantations displacing whole communities nature going postal on their malnourished brown bums?  I note that Attenbore limits the educational investment to family planning.   God forefend that we educate these people to a standard where they can enjoy the benefits of technology and wealth – both of which have drastically reduced the birthrate in developed countries.  To be honest, the only “frightening explosion in human numbers” I’m worried about is the overabundance of people-hating cretins like Attenbore.  In patriarchal China, where population control was limited to one child per family, a “voluntary” means of limiting population led to the abandonment and death of an untold number of female babies.  And he endorses this?

“We keep putting on programmes about famine in Ethiopia; that’s what’s happening. Too many people there. They can’t support themselves — and it’s not an inhuman thing to say. It’s the case. Until humanity manages to sort itself out and get a coordinated view about the planet it’s going to get worse and worse.”

Don’t worry, Dave.  The Ethiopian government and Somali militia are doing their best to reduce the population.  Mostly the part that opposes them but I guess you have to start somewhere.

Sir David, whose landmark series are repeated from Monday on BBC2, starting with Life on Earth, has also spoken out about the change in wildlife documentaries during his lifetime.

The 86-year-old said commentary from presenters like himself are becoming less necessary as camera work is able to tell a story.

But not the whole story, eh Dave?

“I’m not sure there’s any need for a new Attenborough,” he said. “The more you go on, the less you need people standing between you and the animal and the camera waving their arms about.

That goes double for Attenbores who wave their arms about while ranting on about how many human lives should be snuffed out in order to preserve the Attenbore’s comfortable existence world resources.

“It’s much cheaper to get someone in front of a camera describing animal behaviour than actually showing you [the behaviour]. That takes a much longer time. But the kind of carefully tailored programmes in which you really work at the commentary, you really match pictures to words, is a bit out of fashion now … regarded as old hat.”

Well I can honestly say I’ve had more than enough of your carefully tailored, anti-human crap, Dave.  Time to give it a rest, methinks.


  1. john in cheshire says:

    Well said Lynne. The man was past his sell-by date several decades ago. It would be refreshing for the bbc to give someone else a chance at making wildlife documentaries, for a change, then maybe we’d get some honesty in their production and less propaganda. But of course Mr A and the bbc are too immersed in the culture of dissembling to even think there might be other opinions than theirs.

  2. Single Acts of Tyranny says:

    If he is so against the population increase, you wonder why he has two children.

    Perhaps he is only against other people breeding?

  3. Robert Edwards says:

    RA represents the worst kind of leftist; soft and empathetic on the outside, but a screaming extremist at the core. Shaw, Wells, etc. He is not a scientist, merely a presenter (and, up to a point, he is good at it) so as such is not qualified to comment.

    As has happened to so many BBC lifers, he cannot resist becoming part of the narrative.

    But I have no doubt that if asked whether it would be legitimate, moral or desirable to rid Africa of those who have abused their authority for generations by using resolute military means, he would deflect.

    The ‘Africa’ series is, by the way, surely the most loaded and faux-sentimental piece yet. I wonder what’s next? How kind Hitler was to animals? His vegetarianism and rabid anti-smoking policy?

    I can’t wait.

  4. microdave says:

    “It would be refreshing for the BBC to give someone else a chance at making wildlife documentaries, for a change, then maybe we’d get some honesty in their production and less propaganda”

    How about David Bellamy?


  5. JuliaM says:

    I wonder if, with his undoubted clout at the Beeb, genial ol’ Dickie had something to do with Bellamy’s shunning?

  6. John Galt says:

    Very well then Sir David, after you. Dignitas say they can fit you and the kids in between lunch and 4 PM.

    What was that Sir David, “You only meant other people, mainly the ones in Africa”.

    That’s a bit racist isn’t it?

  7. What the stupid **** doesn’t get is that as countries develop out of poverty, their birth rates drop significantly. ERGO – it is in all our interests to ensure that such countries have easy access to that which has given us in the developed world such comfortable lives.

    ILLE EST – fossil fuels.

  8. Paul Marks says:

    In almost every advanced country the fertility rate of women is less than two – even someone as ignorant of science as me knows what that means.

    And cretins are talking about the danger of “rising population”.


    Why not spread advanced capitalism (and the rights of women) to nations such as Pakistan – which really do have a rapidly increasing population?

    Oh no – that would never do, as capitalism is evil.

    One must not oppose Islamism – not in Pakistan and not in Gaza either.

  9. Paul Marks says:

    By the way – a real problem lesser developed countries have is the killing of baby girls.

    This is going to lead to a very nasty skew in the population.

    Lots of men – few women.

  10. RAB says:

    Glad the commentariat picked up on the Bellamy story, a hero to Attenborough’s clueless villain…

    Yes Paul, the demographics of Asia are definitely skewed. The Chinese one child policy has led to a massive overproduction of males. Unless they are going to end up a Nation of literally Wankers, they are going to invade somewhere very soon just to get laid.

  11. John Galt says:

    “Unless they are going to end up a Nation of literally Wankers…”

    There could be a mass outbreak of faggotry.

    Not exactly unknown in China. Given the dominance of the one-child-policy in everyone’s thinking, it’s surprising that they aren’t more tolerant.

    Obviously, I’m biased.

  12. Sam Duncan says:

    Jeebus. The old running-out-of-space schtick again. Here’s a map of population density. It’s not the most recent, but I’ve chosen that one in particular because the compilers of these maps tend to average things out over an area – sometimes whole countries – making things look worse than they are and scaring the slow-witted. This one’s nice and detailed.

    The world is freakin’ empty of people. Granted, a lot of the empty bits are desert (and that map’s projection screws up relative area at the poles), but look at the Americas. Or Southern Africa. New Zealand. Hell, the Scottish Highlands. If push comes to shove, we terrace the Cairngorms and start farming there.

    Running out of space my arse.

    “We keep putting on programmes about famine in Ethiopia; that’s what’s happening. Too many people there…”

    The population density in Ethiopia is lower than… well, look at the map. If overpopulation is the problem, then Rwanda and Nigeria are in a much worse state (‘course, both have had problems of their own, but repeated famine isn’t one of them). And as for China, India, and… hey, Northern Europe! … well, they’re all screwed. Pass the food parcel.

    If Ethiopia wasn’t governed by genocidal maniacs, they’d be trading with the rest of the world and feeding themselves quite happily. What’s that? Poor natural resources, you say? Tell Singapore.

  13. Julie near Chicago says:

    In the video of the interview, the female ends by saying “Climate Change Denier.”

    Whereas anybody with a single working brain cell might recall Mr. Bellamy’s remarks about Merlot growing on the Scottish border (I daresay he meant the grapes, not the wine *g*) followed by a period so cold that people in Europe were fighting all over the place. If that’s not virtually a statement that OF COURSE climate changes (and he pretty much said that’s the point, IIRC) then I don’t know what is.

    Actually I suspect she’s really some sort of wind-up or electronic dummy with one of those speakers inside that has only one line to speak. (Well, maybe three or four, but all pre-recorded.)

    The male dude, whom I suspect of being the one who presses the dummy’s Talk button when it’s time for “her” next line, is either working from a memorized script from which he may not deviate, or else is too stupid to be allowed out alone. All he can do is repeat, “But everybody says–.” Which scarcely answers Mr. Bellamy’s point that any computer “model” is nothing but a computer model, and ***in itself*** proves nothing about mechanisms in the Real World.

    If that “model” (which is really just a computer program written to calculate the results of applying, in a certain order, certain equations to certain input data, where the equations are intended to be the mathematical expression of some theory)–if that model develops over a long series of trials specifically designed to produce errors a track record of results consonant with the theory (no errors found), we have some degree of confidence that the program itself is a correct expression of the theory. If it also turns out to give us results that match (nearly*) perfectly with past history AND also predict future occurrences (nearly*) perfectly, then we are justified in relying on the program as a correct “modeling” of the aspect of reality we’re discussing, and on the theory underlying the program.

    While, of course, always keeping an eye out for the odd anomaly that might nonetheless disqualify both the program and the theory from absolute* correctness.

    It takes a whole lot longer to say this reasonably accurately than it does to get the idea, Mr. Scriptreader.

    *The devil is in the details. Hence all the qualifiers. For instance, how “nearly” is “nearly”? Newtonian mechanics works fine a great deal of the time, i.e. within a certain realm of reality. You can use the theory to write computer programs calculating the trajectories of spacecraft to fine orders of precision. But there’s a boundary to the realm where that works, whence General Relativity.

    The only ABSOLUTELY SURE things are death and taxes. And we libertarians working on the taxes. :)

  14. NickM says:

    You stormed that one! And comments to match. But the point about bio-fuels – she shoots, she scores. In any case the odds are we’re gonna peak at around 10bn and if no bugger can figure out how to feed a mere extra three billion then we don’t deserve it. But we do. We can frack, we can build nuclear and we can go GM. Just don’t tell the Greens who are professional miserablists.

    Actually do tell the Greens! It shall be amusing. “I’m melting!” Anyhoo. we have an asteroid belt to rape and pillage.

    As an aside. How much has Dear Government spent on Skylon – that would mean Bristol International Space Port and Sydney in four hours. How much instead have they spent on Windy Miller and assorted other cuntery? Look-up Skylon – the Rolls-Royce/Reaction Engines Sabre variable cycle engine is something else. It is th Thunderbirds future I believed in in the 80s and not a cack-handed attempt to return to Hobbiton.

  15. Mr Ed says:

    @ Julie: Libertarians are working on the taxes, the socialists have been busy working on death.

  16. Julie near Chicago says:

    Oh dear, Mr. Ed. And here I was feeling clever. :(

  17. Kevin B says:

    Further on Sam’s point, if you dropped all six billion of us into the USA, the population density would be that of … England,

    And if you shifted us all into Texas, the density would be that of Manhatten.

    The OPT nasties say they want us to stop growing our population, but when you get down to it, they really want us culled back to about five percent of our current numbers, and some of them would happily build and spread the virus that does the business, (provided no other animals are hurt).

    They see themselves as lords of the manor and the rest of the survivors as peasants, all living in harmony with Gaia with Attenborough as the vicar pottering about with his butterfly collection.

    A lot of the early CAGW adopters were very much into population control. In fact the eugenics came first and CAGW was invented to give them the excuse. If you hear the word ‘sustainability’ used by anyone grown up enough to know better, you know they want to cull you and your family.

  18. john malpas says:

    Still you have to dmitr there are an awful lot of irritating people who wouldn’t be missed. Advertisers, politicians , feminists,council clerks, social workers an d even the people who leave roadworks signs there forever.

  19. john malpas says:

    I meant ‘admit’ – though ‘dmitr’ sounds forceful.

  20. RAB says:

    But those are the folk that will be saved not culled, jm. They said so themselves 😉

  21. NickM says:

    It’s Arkship B.

    Let’s hope they take a telephone sanitizer this time 😉

    I once got bored and fired-up the 386SX-16 (You can mock!) and wrote a simulation in QBasic (You can wet yourselves!). Anyway it pans out that given Western life expectancy it is 2.3 children per woman for replacement. What is really stewing the Green onions is not breeding (or immigration) but the simple fact the developing World is er… developing. It is as someone said deeply racist. The idea that a billion Indians might have a car and a telly and an XBox fills these people with sheer dread. It doesn’t fill me with dread. It fills me with hope. There would be loads of folk flying over into my gaff requiring goods and services and saying stuff like, “The Peak District is all very pretty but it ain’t the Himilayas…”

    Oh, and Kevin B – “A lot of the early CAGW adopters were very much into population control. In fact the eugenics came first and CAGW was invented to give them the excuse.” You got back-up for that because I’d love to know. Because if that is true (and it feels true) I’d love to hoist them on their own petard.

  22. John Galt says:

    I vaguely recall an article from Science in the 1990’s where they worked out the earth’s maximum carrying capacity based upon current technology was about 12.5 billion (well within Nick’s proposed peak of 10 billion, which sounds about right).

    Equally, there was another study which looked at the theoretical carrying capacity if widespread use of technology (biotech, nuclear power, hydroponics, etc.) were fully exploited and this came out with a staggering figure of 45 billion.

    Now, I’m not sure that we have the ability to squeeze the maximum efficiency out of resources to all 45 billion to live with 3 square meals a day and a roof over there heads. I also don’t think it would be very pleasant living in a world with that many people, just imagine the crowds on the Underground.

    I’m just calling ‘Bullshit’ on Sir David Addledwits, fucking numpty!

  23. Pete in Wanganui says:

    You could pretty well fit the entire population of the world on Stewart Island. If they didn’t mind standing up all the time. Or (for some of them) standing in a marsh.

  24. APL says:

    Nothing much to add to the erudite comments above. But with a nod to Paul Marks post about shitting in the woods.

    Fuck David Attenbourgh.
    Fuck Drew Barrimore.

  25. Kevin B says:

    Nick, Crispin Tickell was the chief advisor to Maggie when she started the global warming ball rolling at the Rio Summit. He is also a fearful old racist and, of course, a vicious Malthusian.

    There is also another Englishman who’s name escapes my poor old brain, but who was the big cheese at the UN and, the last I heard, was in China. He was another old misanthrope and Ehrlichian.

    And then there’s dear old Jimmy Hansen, NASA’s go to guy on CAGW and the guy who led the switch from “The Ice Age is coming!!!” to “We’re all gonna burn!!!” whilst turning the Goddard Institute for Space Science into a byword for scientific malpractice. In the article linked he teams up with two other great thinkers, Lovelock and Ehrlich, to tell us all to stop having icky babies.

    If you google the last two Chief Scientific advisors, Nursey and the other one, along with population in the search string, you will find they have had things to say about population, though not perhaps as forthrightly as dear old Sir Crispin,

    Bunch of evil eugenicists, the lot of them.

  26. NickM says:

    I buy that Kevin. I mean it is a truly horrid thing that so many Africans and Indians are actually having sex! For shame! And obviously not with Sir Crispin – though I wouldn’t with yours! Kevin, I assume you are from the USA. Interesting point about the USA is the State (of adventure- garrhh!!!*) I have spent most time in is Georgia and that has roughly 7-8 million people in a space the size of England (pop. 50-odd mill) so how does that work? Very well, actually. I like people. I live on one of the most densely populated islands on the planet and yet I can go to the big bad city (Manchester – about the same population as Atlanta) or “wander lonely as a cloud”. Ten billion matey peeps on this goodly frame rather than seven billion is a good thing in my book. Think what they could do! You think this here missive was not produced via Asians. The more the merrier I say and screw the limits of this planet! We have a sodding Universe out there.

    All of it. And if it comes to it I shall gladly buy you an “umbrella drink” in orbit around Tau Ceti. You have my word on that. And we shall reminisce about laptops and clockwork whilst comparing notes on Alcubierre drives and the allure of the naked singularity and oddly attractive birds with green skin. Though call me old-fashioned but I reckon that Aussie playing Galadriel kicks the tyres and lights my fires. Even if she has pointy ears and is several thousand years old.

    Unlike Sir Crispin I really am not racist. I seriously fancy Cate mind. Well fit. Now don’t get me wrong but I recall in like ’96 seeing the posters for the movie “Stealing Beauty” about Jeremy Irons doing a Saville with Liv Tyler and thinking she was gorgeous but I grew-up and so did she. Lorks A-lordy that was one fat elf.

    PS. At some point I’m sort of (I have no idea how I get into this sort of thing) due in Silesia to watch the entire Jackson. Yes, Blu-Ray extended versions. That will be the whole of “The Hobbit” and the “Lord of the Rings” with honey vodka and nibbles and then I shall die and they shall put me on an A-319 heading roughly into the West. Possibly the last thing I shall hear in this mortal state is, from the seat behind, “My precious!”

    *The State Motto – “Georgia – State of Adventure” . Dear Jesus of Nazareth!

  27. Kevin B says:

    Actually Nick, I’m an englishman born and… well not exactly bred since I’m descended from Irish on one side and Scots on the other. Nevertheless, I shall be supporting Mr Lancaster’s brave boys next month.

    In fact, although I’ve travelled a fair bit, the nearest I’ve been to America is Newfoundland and Bemuda, oh and a few USAAF/USN bases around the world. Sadly, I fear the America I’d want to travel in is disappearing.

    I would love to join you for a glass in orbit round Tau Ceti* but I fear the discovery of boosterspice will come along too late and the organleggers charge far too much. I have this feeling that as the kindly nurse is administering the final dose of the scouse cocktail someone will come rushing in yelling: “We’ve found the cure!!”

    Just my luck. That’s one reason I hope the afterlife bit is true; just so I can look down, (or possibly up), and say “I told you so. Didn’t bloody listen did you! I said no good would come of it.”

    *But not off the shoulder of Orion. Bloody Orion doesn’t have a bloody shoulder. The concept is meaningless. It’s just the way a few astronomical objects happen to line up when viewed from one small bit of one small galaxy. Sorry, sorry. Pet peeve.

  28. Sam Duncan says:

    There would be loads of folk flying over into my gaff requiring goods and services and saying stuff like, “The Peak District is all very pretty but it ain’t the Himilayas…”

    That’s a very good point. The pols up here are big on tourism being The Industry of The Future, but they don’t seem to want any brown people to become tourists.

    Fuck David Attenbourgh.
    Fuck Drew Barrimore.

    No thanks. Cameron Diaz, maybe, if it’s all the same to you.

  29. NickM says:

    With the best will in the World I’m not thi king of going to Scotland. The NW of England is cold enough. Despite my Nordo-Celtic genes I am much happier in, say, Florida. I recall seeing “The Mask” as an undergrad and being like, “She’s hot!” But if you ask me now, Cate is the Elven Queen.

  30. John Galt says:

    Nah, my mate Kev is from “The Toon” and he’s knocked Cameron Diaz off his “Top 10 Fucks” list, as according to Kev, “She’s really let hersen gan!”.

    For which read, she is ageing at the normal rate for females of the sub-species Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

    Tut! Tut! you boys…

  31. APL says:

    “For which read, she is ageing at the normal rate for females of the sub-species Homo Sapiens Sapiens.”

    Aye. In her day.

    The UK goes in big time for historical tourism, there’s Big Pit in South Wales although having actually worked in a South Wales pit when it was producing (some) coal I can’t for the life of me imagine why anyone would want to get into one, if they weren’t being paid.

    Cameron Diaz, all things considered is another matter.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *