Bill Gates Calling For Population Control Through Vaccinations
- Thread starter Absolutely
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
But that isn't what was actually said in the video was it. Perhaps you're interjecting a red herring?
The video never said vaccines lower population.
And of course vaccine by definition is a noun and is defined as, a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
Now, as pertains to antifertility vaccines? Yes!
This has been something in research since the 30's.
https://www.cell.com/trends/immunology/comments/S1471-4906(02)02182-8
Abstract
The possibility of using immunization as a method of birth control has been explored actively since the 1930s, with several different sperm, egg or hormonal antigens having been studied as suitable targets for intervention. However, it is only in the past decade that the efficacy of vaccination against fertility has become established firmly in both humans and free-roaming animal populations. We will review recent progress in the continuing development of antifertility vaccines, with an emphasis on vaccines intended ultimately for use in humans, whilst highlighting also some of the notable successes achieved with vaccines produced for use in other species.
The video never said vaccines lower population.
And of course vaccine by definition is a noun and is defined as, a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
Now, as pertains to antifertility vaccines? Yes!
This has been something in research since the 30's.
https://www.cell.com/trends/immunology/comments/S1471-4906(02)02182-8
Abstract
The possibility of using immunization as a method of birth control has been explored actively since the 1930s, with several different sperm, egg or hormonal antigens having been studied as suitable targets for intervention. However, it is only in the past decade that the efficacy of vaccination against fertility has become established firmly in both humans and free-roaming animal populations. We will review recent progress in the continuing development of antifertility vaccines, with an emphasis on vaccines intended ultimately for use in humans, whilst highlighting also some of the notable successes achieved with vaccines produced for use in other species.
-
1
- Show all
The full presentation would be fair to what BG actually said at least ten years ago.
The world population now ten years and more, because this video was posted to YT ten years ago and that doesn't mean it was posted anywhere near on the day of the conference, has of course altered. "Live" world population clock sets the global population number as of this moment in the billions. 7,827,724,615
World population density The world population density is 57.0 people per square kilometer (147.7 per mi 2) as of September 2020.This number is calculated using 7,763,035,303 people as the world population and 136,120,354 km 2 (52,556,368 mi 2)as Earth's total area.This is the sum of land and water areas within international boundaries and coastlines of all the countries in the world.
This is the closest I could come to finding anywhere near the full presentation by BG.
Though he is talking about population control at the 4:41 mark. I wonder. Has both he and Melinda (of the Gates Foundation) been sterilized so as to reduce the number of carbon footprints they could birth to life on the planet in that formula of his? If they have children that are now adult, are those children voluntarily sterilizing themselves for the same cause?
Save the Earth!
EAT the rich.
Bring lots of hot sauce. My bet is they taste terrible.
The world population now ten years and more, because this video was posted to YT ten years ago and that doesn't mean it was posted anywhere near on the day of the conference, has of course altered. "Live" world population clock sets the global population number as of this moment in the billions. 7,827,724,615
World population density The world population density is 57.0 people per square kilometer (147.7 per mi 2) as of September 2020.This number is calculated using 7,763,035,303 people as the world population and 136,120,354 km 2 (52,556,368 mi 2)as Earth's total area.This is the sum of land and water areas within international boundaries and coastlines of all the countries in the world.
This is the closest I could come to finding anywhere near the full presentation by BG.
Though he is talking about population control at the 4:41 mark. I wonder. Has both he and Melinda (of the Gates Foundation) been sterilized so as to reduce the number of carbon footprints they could birth to life on the planet in that formula of his? If they have children that are now adult, are those children voluntarily sterilizing themselves for the same cause?
Save the Earth!
EAT the rich.
Bring lots of hot sauce. My bet is they taste terrible.
*raises hand* I'm a good cause.
A very good cause.Cause I could use the money. Cause I could pay off my mortgage. Cause I could fix up my older car and get it out of the garage. Lots of causes I can list.
-
1
- Show all
S
I don't expect you to change you mind, because it was too easy for me to find this information myself, so I assume you know it but are keeping it from your intended audience, but I post it here for those who think they heard something sinister in those videos of Bill Gates theory on vaccine and population control. Unfortunately people are not being told the whole story. I think that is evil. Trying to make people think something sinister about a persons intentions by withholding information. Who's the Psycho Now?
Dr. Sanjay Gupta: Ten billion dollars over the next 10 years to make it “the year of the vaccines.” What does that mean exactly?
Bill Gates: Over this decade, we believe unbelievable progress can be made, in both inventing new vaccines and making sure they get out to all the children who need them … We only need about six or seven more — and then you would have all the tools to reduce childhood death, reduce population growth, and everything — the stability, the environment — benefits from that.
As discussed in a 21 November 2011 Forbes cover story profiling the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, reducing population growth has always been integral to their stated mission of “improving people’s health and giving them the chance to lift themselves out of hunger and extreme poverty”:
In 1997, when he and Melinda first ventured into public health … they focused on birth control, funding a Johns Hopkins effort to use computers to help women in the developing world learn about contraception. The logic was crisp and Bill Gates-friendly. Health = resources ÷ people. And since resources, as Gates noted, are relatively fixed, the answer lay in population control.
As further discussed in this piece, Gates later came to the conclusion that birth control was not the best approach to achieve the goal of slower population growth, instead realizing that — counterintuitively — a reduction in childhood mortality was the best way to limit population growth:
In society after society, he saw, when the mortality rate falls—specifically, below 10 deaths per 1,000 people—the birth rate follows, and population growth stabilizes. “It goes against common sense,” Gates says. Most parents don’t choose to have eight children because they want to have big families, it turns out, but because they know many of their children will die.
“If a mother and father know their child is going to live to adulthood, they start to naturally reduce their population size,” says Melinda.
This is a point Gates has made repeatedly, and his views were clearly articulated in the 2009 Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Annual Letter:
A surprising but critical fact we learned was that reducing the number of deaths actually reduces population growth … Contrary to the Malthusian view that population will grow to the limit of however many kids can be fed, in fact parents choose to have enough kids to give them a high chance that several will survive to support them as they grow old. As the number of kids who survive to adulthood goes up, parents can achieve this goal without having as many children.
In other words, Gates is not interested in using vaccines to reduce the population by using them as an agent of death or a tool to sterilize unsuspecting masses. Rather, Gates is interested in keeping more children alive in order to reduce the need for parents to have more children, thus limiting the overall population growth rate.
As evidenced in a 2014 paper published in Science that attempted to calculate future population growth, not everyone is convinced childhood mortality is the smoking gun to quell population growth:
Among the most robust empirical findings in the literature on fertility transitions are that higher contraceptive use and higher female education are associated with faster fertility decline. These suggest that the projected rapid population growth could be moderated by greater investments in family planning programs to satisfy the unmet need for contraception and in girls’ education.
But Gates’ view on childhood mortality contribution to population growth is increasingly discussed in the scientific literature and is still subject to debate. What is not up to debate are the intentions of the Bill and Melinda Gate’s Foundation with regard to vaccines and population growth, as articulated by Bill and Melinda Gates in their Foundation’s 2017 Annual Letter:
Melinda: Saving children’s lives is the goal that launched our global work. It’s an end in itself. But then we learned it has all these other benefits as well. If parents believe their children will survive — and if they have the power to time and space their pregnancies — they choose to have fewer children.
Bill: When a mother can choose how many children to have, her children are healthier, they’re better nourished, their mental capacities are higher — and parents have more time and money to spend on each child’s health and schooling. That’s how families and countries get out of poverty. This link between saving lives, a lower birthrate, and ending poverty was the most important early lesson Melinda and I learned about global health.
PUBLISHED 10 MARCH 2017 And YET HIS COMPLETE TRANSCRIPTS GET IGNORED BY THOSE WHO seem to wish he wanted to kill people. Who is evil, bill Gates or the people who have heard his complete explanation but will not share it along with their cheesy video mash ups? Who's the psycho now?
Dr. Sanjay Gupta: Ten billion dollars over the next 10 years to make it “the year of the vaccines.” What does that mean exactly?
Bill Gates: Over this decade, we believe unbelievable progress can be made, in both inventing new vaccines and making sure they get out to all the children who need them … We only need about six or seven more — and then you would have all the tools to reduce childhood death, reduce population growth, and everything — the stability, the environment — benefits from that.
As discussed in a 21 November 2011 Forbes cover story profiling the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, reducing population growth has always been integral to their stated mission of “improving people’s health and giving them the chance to lift themselves out of hunger and extreme poverty”:
In 1997, when he and Melinda first ventured into public health … they focused on birth control, funding a Johns Hopkins effort to use computers to help women in the developing world learn about contraception. The logic was crisp and Bill Gates-friendly. Health = resources ÷ people. And since resources, as Gates noted, are relatively fixed, the answer lay in population control.
As further discussed in this piece, Gates later came to the conclusion that birth control was not the best approach to achieve the goal of slower population growth, instead realizing that — counterintuitively — a reduction in childhood mortality was the best way to limit population growth:
In society after society, he saw, when the mortality rate falls—specifically, below 10 deaths per 1,000 people—the birth rate follows, and population growth stabilizes. “It goes against common sense,” Gates says. Most parents don’t choose to have eight children because they want to have big families, it turns out, but because they know many of their children will die.
“If a mother and father know their child is going to live to adulthood, they start to naturally reduce their population size,” says Melinda.
This is a point Gates has made repeatedly, and his views were clearly articulated in the 2009 Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Annual Letter:
A surprising but critical fact we learned was that reducing the number of deaths actually reduces population growth … Contrary to the Malthusian view that population will grow to the limit of however many kids can be fed, in fact parents choose to have enough kids to give them a high chance that several will survive to support them as they grow old. As the number of kids who survive to adulthood goes up, parents can achieve this goal without having as many children.
In other words, Gates is not interested in using vaccines to reduce the population by using them as an agent of death or a tool to sterilize unsuspecting masses. Rather, Gates is interested in keeping more children alive in order to reduce the need for parents to have more children, thus limiting the overall population growth rate.
As evidenced in a 2014 paper published in Science that attempted to calculate future population growth, not everyone is convinced childhood mortality is the smoking gun to quell population growth:
Among the most robust empirical findings in the literature on fertility transitions are that higher contraceptive use and higher female education are associated with faster fertility decline. These suggest that the projected rapid population growth could be moderated by greater investments in family planning programs to satisfy the unmet need for contraception and in girls’ education.
But Gates’ view on childhood mortality contribution to population growth is increasingly discussed in the scientific literature and is still subject to debate. What is not up to debate are the intentions of the Bill and Melinda Gate’s Foundation with regard to vaccines and population growth, as articulated by Bill and Melinda Gates in their Foundation’s 2017 Annual Letter:
Melinda: Saving children’s lives is the goal that launched our global work. It’s an end in itself. But then we learned it has all these other benefits as well. If parents believe their children will survive — and if they have the power to time and space their pregnancies — they choose to have fewer children.
Bill: When a mother can choose how many children to have, her children are healthier, they’re better nourished, their mental capacities are higher — and parents have more time and money to spend on each child’s health and schooling. That’s how families and countries get out of poverty. This link between saving lives, a lower birthrate, and ending poverty was the most important early lesson Melinda and I learned about global health.
PUBLISHED 10 MARCH 2017 And YET HIS COMPLETE TRANSCRIPTS GET IGNORED BY THOSE WHO seem to wish he wanted to kill people. Who is evil, bill Gates or the people who have heard his complete explanation but will not share it along with their cheesy video mash ups? Who's the psycho now?
-
1
- Show all
BG talked about two different areas, vaccines and reproductive health care. Which some people interpret as abortion.
Transcript:
co2 is warming the planet and the
00:05
equation on co2 is actually a very
00:08
straightforward one if you sum up the
00:11
co2 that gets emitted that leads to a
00:15
temperature increase and that
00:16
temperature increase leads to some very
00:19
negative effects the effects on the
00:21
weather perhaps worse the indirect
00:23
effects in that the natural ecosystems
00:26
can't adjust to these rapid changes and
00:28
so you get ecosystem collapses now the
00:31
exact amount of how you map from a
00:34
certain increase in of co2 to what
00:37
temperature will be and where the
00:38
positive feedbacks are there's some
00:40
uncertainty there but not very much and
00:43
there's certainly uncertainty about how
00:45
bad those effects will be but they will
00:47
be extremely bad I asked the top
00:50
scientists and at several times do we
00:52
really have to get down to near zero
00:54
can't we just you know cut it in half or
00:56
a quarter and the answer is that until
00:58
we get near to zero the temperature will
01:02
continue to rise and so that's that's a
01:04
big challenge it's very different than
01:06
saying you know we're a 12-foot high
01:08
truck trying to get under a ten foot
01:10
bridge and we can just sort of squeeze
01:12
under this is something that has to get
01:16
to zero now we put out a lot of carbon
01:19
dioxide every year over twenty six
01:22
billion tons for each American it's
01:25
about 20 tons for people in poor
01:28
countries it's less than one ton it's an
01:30
average about five tons for everyone on
01:33
the planet and somehow we have to make
01:35
changes that will bring that down to
01:38
zero it's been constantly going up it's
01:42
only various economic changes that have
01:45
even flattened it all so we have to go
01:47
from rapidly rising to falling and
01:50
falling all the way to zero this
01:52
equation has four factors a little bit
01:55
of multiplication so you've got a thing
01:57
on the Left co2 that you want to get to
01:59
zero and that's going to be based on the
02:01
number of people the services each
02:04
person's using on average the energy on
02:07
average for each service and the co2
02:10
being put out a per unit of energy
02:14
so let's look at each one of these and
02:15
see how we can get this down to zero
02:19
probably one of these numbers is gonna
02:21
have to get pretty near to zero now
02:23
that's back from a high school algebra
02:25
but let's let's take a look first we've
02:28
got population now the world today has
02:31
6.8 billion people that's headed up to
02:34
about 9 billion now if we do a really
02:36
great job on new vaccines health care
02:40
reproductive health services we could
02:42
lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent[/quote]
02:44
but there we see an increase of about
02:47
1.3 this new vaccines new vaccines new
02:56
vaccines healthcare reproductive health
02:58
services we could lower that by perhaps
03:00
10 or 15 percent
03:09
you
English (auto-generated)
Transcript:
co2 is warming the planet and the
00:05
equation on co2 is actually a very
00:08
straightforward one if you sum up the
00:11
co2 that gets emitted that leads to a
00:15
temperature increase and that
00:16
temperature increase leads to some very
00:19
negative effects the effects on the
00:21
weather perhaps worse the indirect
00:23
effects in that the natural ecosystems
00:26
can't adjust to these rapid changes and
00:28
so you get ecosystem collapses now the
00:31
exact amount of how you map from a
00:34
certain increase in of co2 to what
00:37
temperature will be and where the
00:38
positive feedbacks are there's some
00:40
uncertainty there but not very much and
00:43
there's certainly uncertainty about how
00:45
bad those effects will be but they will
00:47
be extremely bad I asked the top
00:50
scientists and at several times do we
00:52
really have to get down to near zero
00:54
can't we just you know cut it in half or
00:56
a quarter and the answer is that until
00:58
we get near to zero the temperature will
01:02
continue to rise and so that's that's a
01:04
big challenge it's very different than
01:06
saying you know we're a 12-foot high
01:08
truck trying to get under a ten foot
01:10
bridge and we can just sort of squeeze
01:12
under this is something that has to get
01:16
to zero now we put out a lot of carbon
01:19
dioxide every year over twenty six
01:22
billion tons for each American it's
01:25
about 20 tons for people in poor
01:28
countries it's less than one ton it's an
01:30
average about five tons for everyone on
01:33
the planet and somehow we have to make
01:35
changes that will bring that down to
01:38
zero it's been constantly going up it's
01:42
only various economic changes that have
01:45
even flattened it all so we have to go
01:47
from rapidly rising to falling and
01:50
falling all the way to zero this
01:52
equation has four factors a little bit
01:55
of multiplication so you've got a thing
01:57
on the Left co2 that you want to get to
01:59
zero and that's going to be based on the
02:01
number of people the services each
02:04
person's using on average the energy on
02:07
average for each service and the co2
02:10
being put out a per unit of energy
02:14
so let's look at each one of these and
02:15
see how we can get this down to zero
02:19
probably one of these numbers is gonna
02:21
have to get pretty near to zero now
02:23
that's back from a high school algebra
02:25
but let's let's take a look first we've
02:28
got population now the world today has
02:31
6.8 billion people that's headed up to
02:34
about 9 billion now if we do a really
02:36
great job on new vaccines health care
02:40
reproductive health services we could
02:42
lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent[/quote]
02:44
but there we see an increase of about
02:47
1.3 this new vaccines new vaccines new
02:56
vaccines healthcare reproductive health
02:58
services we could lower that by perhaps
03:00
10 or 15 percent
03:09
you
English (auto-generated)
-
1
- Show all
In science its a well known fact that correlation does not equal causation as there are many factors that can make a difference...
Also one has to put their faith in what BG is saying there as he doesn't refer us to a particular statistical data...
A lot of people have only seen the first video and not the second... I personally don't find his explanation to be very convincing...
Its another suspicious coincidence from BG... Who would have guessed that the answer to lowering population growth was what he was already doing for 10 years...
Also one has to put their faith in what BG is saying there as he doesn't refer us to a particular statistical data...
A lot of people have only seen the first video and not the second... I personally don't find his explanation to be very convincing...
Its another suspicious coincidence from BG... Who would have guessed that the answer to lowering population growth was what he was already doing for 10 years...
-
2
- Show all
F
When it doesn’t happen you have all these wacky conspiracy thinkers to thank.
Because biometric vaccins are already being tested. Why are they being tested when they are not going to be used?
https://www.reuters.com/article/hea...onavirus-antibody-tests-vaccine-idUSL8N2BV0BI
Biometric vaccin, chipping like a pet, tomato, tomata.
Because biometric vaccins are already being tested. Why are they being tested when they are not going to be used?
https://www.reuters.com/article/hea...onavirus-antibody-tests-vaccine-idUSL8N2BV0BI
Biometric vaccin, chipping like a pet, tomato, tomata.
-
2
- Show all
... Save the Earth!
EAT the rich.
Bring lots of hot sauce. My bet is they taste terrible.
EAT the rich.
Bring lots of hot sauce. My bet is they taste terrible.
-
1
- Show all