With all respect to Professor Meadows , I dont agree with the 7.5 billions humans population limit . as a fact earthe can host the double of that limit or more if all of the dear and unique professor Meadows paradigms are and will be applied!

Boah! Dass genau an DER Stelle der Ton "zufällig" ausfällt, halt ich keineswegs für einen Zufall. Was ist das hier? SED 2.0? Hervorragender Vortrag übrigens!

Totally typical Scientism or being religious about science that is being manipulated , a court of justice doesnt ask a scientist for the verdict , he asks a selection of ordinary people , and the jury is out , a global warming climate crisis is a lie , because good science always gets the nod from the public because - Its easily explained to the layman . Its logical . People can see its not indoctrination or a cult of faith , characterised by numerous highly paid zealots trying to baffle the public with " The Science " . It holds up to robust scrutiny and critique . Its observed that there are no vested interests .

Are young adults actually paying for this crap? You can check out a first grade science reader at your local library.

Welcome to agenda 2030. "Great" ideas to fix the planet from Club of Rome. Do you want to eat bugs? Be awake.

Only now are we taking nuclear power seriously, after abandoning it since the 70s under Carter. Why didnt we move to nuclear? Why were `environmentalists' like John Kerry and Al Gore, major figures in the Club of Rome's limit to growth movement - why did they remove funding for research? So many other questions but to the energy and polution question, Meadows and his kind were always about depopulation over solutions.

CANADIANS please read and sign parliamentary petition e-4623 to remove us from UN,WEF etc

Shame on you pos

Satans little helper.

Nur mi bildung, Mathe, Physik.. für Amazon

start with yourself, you fascist filth

Thank you Professor Meadows - Well said sir. Our Plundered Planet by Fairfield Osborn, published in 1948 was read by academics and ignored by the public. In 1948 the population was around 2.5 Billion, in 1972 at the publication of Limits to Growth the population was just under 4 Billion, today it's passed 8 Billion. I'm an old man, I believe I'v lived during the golden age of mankind, my early thinking was influenced by Rachel Carson's Silent Spring and LTG as well as Osborn's publication. Unfortunately the response to concern about rising population, destruction of the biosphere and reaching a tipping point for a climate shift catastrophe was often " don't talk daft laddie " or god will provide. The path we're now on will in the words of Roger Waters - amuse ourselves to death.

I HAVE TO LAUGH ABOUT YOU PEOPLE. SORRY BUT ? WHAT DENNIS MEADOWS AND THE UNELECTED PEOPLE AT THE W.E.F. ( WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM) WANT TO DO IS THIS ? WE HAVE 8 BILLION PEOPLE ON THIS PLANET NOW. WE ARE CARBON BASE HUMANS AND WE EXPELL METHANE GAS. JUST LIKE COWS DO. WE ALSO EXPELL OUT CO-2 AS COWS DO. THIS DENNIS MEADOWS AND THE W.E.F. WANT TO ERADICATE 6 TO 7 BILLION PEOPLE ON THIS PLANET. CHECK IT OUT. THEY CALL IT SUSTAI ABILITY. MEANING ERADICATED. NOW IF THE W.E.F. AND THEIR FILTHY ELITISTS WOULD STOP ALL MANUFACTURES OF THIS WORLD. NO JETS, NO TRANPORTATION, AND NO WATER BOTTLES BEING MADE TODAY. I WOULD AGREE. BUT THIS NOT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN ! THEY WANT FULL CONTROL OF YOUR LIVES. WHILE THEY CAN ROAM AROUND THE WORLD AND DO WHAT THEY WANT AND EAT. NO RESTRICTION FOR THEM. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR EVERYONE? HERE THE QUESTION ? IF JUST HALF THE POPULATION ON THIS BLUE MARBLE . WOULD JUST START PLANETING FRUIT TREES AND A BIG GARDENS TODAY. DO YOU REALLY THINK ANYBODY WOULD STARVE OR GO HUNGRY ? BUT YET FOR DECADES. THE MANUFACTUREA HAVE BEEN PUTTING POISONOUS FOODS ON OUR DINNER PLATE. CHECK OUT YOUR FOOD LABELS AND CHECK THE FANCY WORDS ON GOOGLE. THIS IS WHY TODAY PEOPLE ARE GETTING MORE CANCERS, OBESITY. DIABETES, STROKES. HEART ATTACKS, ARTHRITIS AND ETC. DO YOUR HOME WORK PEOPLE. BEING IN THE MILITARY. WHAT DENNIS MEADOWS IS PRESENTING ? IS CALLED SCARED TACTICS. TO CONDITION YOU INTO BELIEVEING. NOT LIKE WE HAVEN'T SEEN CHEM TRAILS COMING FROM JETS. KLAUS SCHWAB AND HIS RICH FRIENDS ARE NOT LOOKING TO HELP YOU. THEIR LOOKING TO HELP THEMSELVES. YOU WILL REMEMBER ME WRITING TO YOU ABOUT THIS. THANKS

Humans in 2030 is unlikely let alone 2100. Meadows has not reckoned on the exponential function of ecosphere collapse, apparently.

Having read their "report" long ago, most of their extreme predictions were wrong. He does seem to now realize that there are only two resources relevant to humanity's future on this planet and they are energy and human creativity. His food prediction fell apart with increasing yields and now GMOs. His mineral predictions fell apart as shown by long-term inflation-adjusted price decreases and we still have not gone after the deep sea resources. "Peak oil" was claimed back in the 70's but has been postponed by half a century. A half a century hear and a half a century there add up over time. It is only politics that has prevented the rest of the world from fracking shale deposits for gas (the governments own the mineral rights and in the US only most of the mineral rights and the fracking is almost all private rights areas -- most governments are not rational). He doesn't even consider that we have a 600-year energy supply in depleted uranium stored above ground (no mining) that could be used in fast breeder reactors. If we ever figure out economic fusion humanity will have almost infinite growth potential. Having been into math modeling at the time, their model never had stability and their solution never would have worked. It was a very simple model, even for the time, but it gave them the answers they wanted. There was no ability in their model to ever accommodate our present population let alone the 3 billion more people on the way as the human population ages (not a birth rate issue, but a low death rate).

Ihm wurde zugehört.

Resilience?

37" on is significant as Russia and Trump war as political to address instability

You'd expect more from academicians than figuring out that the earth is finite. The answer is what it always has been. The strong one lives and the weak one dies, this time on a global level. Politics need the problem and the solution, The Club of Rome forgot the solution.

Welcher Praktikant hat hier die Kameraführung übernommen? Das ist ja grausig! Man will doch die Folien sehen und nicht den Sprecher!

God is above everything. His will be done.

The UN declared that Finland was the happiest country on earth according to a petit bourgeois survey. Finland is in fact an unhappy country with high rates of depression and alcoholism. The need for social services made it the happiest country to the UN because the survey questions were about social services.

You glorify a psychopath. A modern times Mr. Hitler with disgusting standpoints.

Dr. SHIVA Ayyadurai, MIT PhD, is correct when he says there is no such thing as climate change. It is fake science.

The parasite class is LYING to you, fellow human beings. They bought the world and they want you off of their property as soon as possible. WAKE UP.

Welches PISA-Ass hat denn da die Kamera bedient?

Food production is now under pressure because government policies are destroying farmers ability to survive. This man is a charlatan.

Incredible how his predictions about Germany's problem caused by its dependence on Russian energy supply came true just recently, along with his predictions of higher prices for food. I wish our political leaders would listen to him. I wish they would not have to fear being voted out of their office by taking the right decisions in order to ensure that at least a bit of the collapse ahead will be buffered. Every word of this talk is so precious and so true.....

Thanks.

If every couple has just one child we can reduce the human population from 8 billion to 2 billion in just two generations. Now what a feat this would be. It would be the fairest with no discrimination. Do read about doubling time. If it takes one hour to fill a bottle at what time will it be half full?

This is one of the most influential people of the 20th century, and what he's saying is wrong! Interesting Meadows begins by talking about habits - because at 4:52 he seemingly makes a habitual assumption when he talks about the need to change our USE of energy. This assumption stems from an anti-capitalist political bias that precedes the Limits to Growth hypothesis, such that the analysis suffers from confirmation bias. In fact, we need to change our SUPPLY of energy, and looking at the problem in these terms, there are no Limits to Growth. It's difficult to overstate how significant this mistake has been; the assumption of Limits to Growth is ubiquitous on both left and right; with the left talking about 'infinite growth on a finite planet' and demanding policies to reduce demand; the universal assumption underlying all green policy approaches is that sustainability requires sacrifice. The right believe this too; and consequently ignore the climate and ecological crisis because they don't want to 'pay more, have less, stop this and tax that' - and so actively campaign against environmental science. Limits to Growth is an extremely influential idea; but it's factually incorrect! In 1982, NASA/Sandia Labs demonstrated the viability of drawing energy directly from magma pockets in the earth's crust, and estimated the size of the US magma energy resource alone - at a minimum of 50,000 quadrillion btu. Global energy demand is a mere 600 quads. Worldwide, the magma energy available is effectively limitless. Given limitless clean energy to spend, there are no limits to growth. Magma energy, converted to base load electricity and clean burning hydrogen fuel, could supply all our energy needs carbon free, plus provide ample energy to desalinate water to irrigate land for agriculture and habitation, recycle all waste, and capture atmospheric carbon. In this way, it's possible to sustain economic growth, and increase prosperity for many more people - without costing the earth. Excluding this possibility for the past 50 years by assuming Limits to Growth may very well have killed humankind. I wonder how things might have been different had Greenpeace through to Extinction Rebellion demanded application of magma energy technology to balance capitalist prosperity and environmental sustainability; instead of a green communist dictatorship imposing poverty forever to save the world!

I hope EVERYONE can see what they are dressing in the sweet words of "science" and congrats to all who ja bb ers who are accepting their sick ge no ci de voluntarily! These people are sick!!!

Excellent ..thank u

32:30 35:10 40:40 📢 46:45 📢 50:25 📢📢 Nordhouse

I fucking lold with his crossed arms trick. He literally dictated an audience what to do and how to cross their hands making them cross the hands not in the natural way. But he does not say why this is useful for them or at least for the audience. Pure manipulation of the crowd like in a fucking circus. The logic question would be for him is Why the fuck should I cross my hands in the way which is not comfortable for me. On the top of that crossing hands the other way is just have nothing to do with any benefits to me personally and to the people in audience. So the only reason you make me cross the hands you like is the manipulation. So fuck off you old clown and so is your pathetic book. I read it by the way. It literally starts with a phrase that you might be wrong with whole this concept. And you know what, 2022 is here and yeah your biblical Apocalypses is not showing. So I won’t cross the hands you told me. I would rather say fuck you a manipulator and a paid actor. Post scriptum In your book you mention that the previous projects the Rome club had was the Latin America in 1966. This is where you did your job. And guess what. Latin America is fucked in 2022. So why should we hire for such a huge project as world order if you have any success in your portfolio. Because this is how you trust companies, people, universities. You research their portfolios. You had no success before this fairy tale and you have nothing but money now.

Since 1972 there have been many inventions that make the fuels we have extraordinarily more efficient. These inventions have been quashed by the oil companies and other energy producers. So the poor man pays for the inefficient fuels and then is left to pay to fix the problem caused by the greedy. It seems to me that Meadows and the world leaders he surrounded himself with could have dealt with this in the past. In the follow video, MIT professor debunks the notion of MANMADE climate change: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pqjZh5imnbl8frc

"Personally, don't spend too much time solving climate change." I DO NOT AGREE. Stress R Us

"If you find that book, tell me." OK. "Stress R Us". 21:45

Ich finde es sehr gut, das solche Veranstaltungen aufgezeichnet und hochgeladen werden. Ich muss allerdings auch anmerken, dass die Tonqualität äußerst schlecht ist.

Felicito al Dr Meadows por ir a las universidades, son ellos los que pueden a través de la práctica de la resiliencia lograr un cambio en los patrones de consumo. Los gobernantes e instancias como la ONU sólo han retrasado las tomas de decisiones necesarias!

WOW!! WHAT HE BEGINNING TO SAY AT 48:07 IS ironic as hell! Just look at what is going on in the United States now! This is one thing he was definitely wrong about.

Schade! Sehr unprofessionell gefilmt und der Tontechniker hatte wohl Schwierigkeiten! Ärgerlich!

This guy and his followers were apparently cheering for Thanos in Infinity War and Endgame.

Completely wrong on climate change. Earth is cooling. Plants thrive and are equally nutriticous. Why do commercial greenhouses pump in CO2?

Can some one provide a link for the book mentioned about 7 mins before the end concerning the case study of Japan. Prof Meadows calls it Negative Population Growth Economics (I think) but nothing shows up in a google search with that title.

"...as the CO2 increases in the atmosphere the food quality of the plants goes down, their nutrition level..." This I did not know. There is nothing positive at all in a globalised neoliberal growth economy - indeed it is hugely negative. Why are we doing this?

I get emotional each time I see this.

Say hi to future historians 👋

*

I would hope that we can ask how we do sustainability 'responsibly' - education is vital.