Agenda 21: Death by Sustainability?

It’s a Friday night in 2021, and you’ve had a long, hard day. Your job of stamping codes on malaria pills bound for developing countries is unsatisfying, but until a position in another section becomes open (and assuming you pass the myriad Fairness Tests for it), it’s where you are. Right now, all you want is to be in your Home Unit, off the clock and enjoying Dinner Paste #7 (real meat flavoring is a weekend treat, after all.) The electric bus drops you off at Building 844 in Downtown Zone G12. You walk in and notice it right away. The light in the bathroom. You left it on. Panic grips you as you run to turn it off. Maybe they didn’t notice. Maybe they don’t know.

Then you hear the knock on the door. They know. Four blue-helmets stand there, armed to the teeth. One of them hands you a slip of onion-skin reading “CITATION 36-H53.1: LEFT BATHROOM LIGHT ON DURING WORK SHIFT.” And without a word, you go with them. There’s no need to pack and no point in protesting. By nightfall, you’ll be farming wind at a Work Camp 100 miles outside of the city, and nobody will say a word about the new code-stamper at the factory on Monday. Because they don’t want to be next. And in the North American Continental Sphere, anyone can be next.

This horrifying vision of an Orwellian nightmare future is what some fringe authors, conspiracy theorists and an increasing number of political extremists in the United States think awaits us if Agenda 21, the United Nations’ nefarious plan for world domination though social engineering at the local level, is fully implemented. Under its myriad laws, penalties and dictates, the entire American way of life will be subverted and destroyed, replaced by urban serfdom and “smart growth.” Citizens will be crammed into city-wide “stack ‘em and pack ‘em” towers located in urban human habitation zones, with public transportation required, suburban growth banned, personal choice abolished, freedom to travel restricted, family planning mandated and environmental impact put before human happiness. Countries will be abolished and freedom will be a relic.

Secret, yet freely available

Secret, yet freely available

The end result will be a great depopulation of the planet with the survivors turned into little more than slaves of an environmentally-obsessed world government, with the UN at the head of the snake. And all of it was crammed down our throats without any oversight or ratification by Congress. Or so they say.

While its opponents look at Agenda 21 as a road-map to death by sustainability, the truth is much less nightmarish. Let’s take a look at what Agenda 21 is, what it represents, and most importantly, what it’s not.

Agenda 21 is a non-binding, unenforceable, voluntary policy paper, developed in 1992 and signed by 178 countries, including the United States. It is, at its core, a long-term plan for environmentally-healthy development, more efficient use of land and resources, improved urban planning, promoting health, combating poverty and reducing our impact on the world around us. Much of it is tailored to assisting the developing world, but it can be carried out at any level, from the local township to entire countries. It has no penalties for noncompliance, no enforcement arm and you can put into practice any, some, all or none of it. It’s not a treaty, a law or a charter, hence why it was never ratified by Congress. And, unlike most secret plans for world depopulation and domination, it’s available online in its entirety, in a variety of languages.

The entire document is over 300 pages long, and split into four large sections, so it’s hard to summarize all of its many suggestions and ideas. But even a glancing read will tell you that is has no provisions for banning travel, seizing your property, taking babies away, plowing the suburbs under, curtailing gun ownership (the word “gun” never appears in the document) or turning the civilized world into a UN police state/wildlife preserve. Some of what it does deal with can be found in a random sampling of chapter headings:

Promoting an international trading system that takes account of the needs of developing countries
Encouraging data collection and research
Promoting sound economic policies
Enabling the poor to achieve sustainable livelihoods
Encouraging greater efficiency in the use of energy and resources
Meeting primary health care needs, particularly in rural areas
Control of communicable diseases
Reducing health risks from environmental pollution and hazards

While Agenda 21 might be overly reliant on vague buzzwords like “sustainable” and “local,” these are lofty, and in many cases, life-saving goals. Shouldn’t we be striving to use our land and resources better? Shouldn’t we be committed to lifting developing nations out of crushing poverty? Shouldn’t we be combating urban blight and soulless suburban sprawl? Haven’t we all sat in traffic long enough?

According to a loose coalition of conspiracy theorists, Tea Party activists, John Birch Society anti-one-world-government types and opponents of all things United Nations, the answer to all of those questions is a resounding “no!”

Despite the plan being over 20 years old, the anti-Agenda 21 movement is a fairly recent phenomenon. It appears to have been almost non-existent until late 2011, when Glenn Beck began talking about it regularly on his various media platforms, portraying it as a liberal elite conspiracy to herd us into giant Soviet-like apartment buildings and turn the Earth over to the UN. Other conservative outlets picked up the story and ran with it, and soon, a series of voluntary suggestions was seen as a crusade against the suburbs, industry, capitalism, humanity in general, and most importantly, America.

There are now thousands of anti-Agenda 21 organizations, websites, blogs, Facebook pages and Twitter handles. Fueled by panic and rumor, cities and states across the country are passing vague “anti-Agenda 21” resolutions and laws, declaring that they WILL NOT be part of the UN’s takeover of our precious strip malls and golf courses, despite the option never having actually been presented. Language decrying Agenda 21 even made it into the Republican Party Platform for 2012. For a conspiracy theory, it has an astonishing amount of mainstream acceptance.

Subtle and discreet

Subtle and discreet

Portions of Agenda 21 are meant to be implemented at the local level, coordinated by a United Nations subsidiary group called the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). Subsequently, that’s where a good deal of the protesting has occurred – much of it in the form of heated arguments at normally dry affairs like planning commission seminars, city council hearings or board of supervisors meetings.

These protests have become a serious problem for communities trying to deal with a host of issues, from zoning to septic tanks to adding bike lanes to roads. All of which, according to the conspiracy theorists, are tentacles of the great UN octopus, slowly squeezing our freedom. According to a 2012 article from the New York Times:

In Maine, the Tea Party-backed Republican governor canceled a project to ease congestion along the Route 1 corridor after protesters complained it was part of the United Nations plot. Similar opposition helped doom a high-speed train line in Florida. And more than a dozen cities, towns and counties, under new pressure, have cut off financing for a program that offers expertise on how to measure and cut carbon emissions.

With such a disparate group of people backing a conspiracy theory that’s fairly new, it’s not surprising that the paranoia over Agenda 21 has grown so quickly and loudly. But like most of the other conspiracy theories we look at, it falls apart once critical thinking is applied. For one thing, Agenda 21 doesn’t actually contain any language advocating any of this. It’s about better use of what we have, not cramming us into “human habitation zones.”

It’s also absurd to think that the mighty United Nations is taking over the world one urban planning commission meeting at a time through ICLEI, which isn’t actually part of the UN. It’s a small independent nonprofit devoted to solving land-use and environmental issues on micro levels. Like any legitimate nonprofit, you can read its financial information for free.

If the UN really did have a plan to eradicate the meddling influence of human beings by killing billions, would it really be hatching such a plot out in the open, free for anyone to read? Would it really be discussed at city council meetings? Just like Illuminati hand signals or vast government conspiracies, to accept Agenda 21 as a destructive plot to is to believe that it’s being done in plain sight over decades, with thousands of people in the loop about it.

And as with the vast majority of conspiracies and pseudoscience, someone is making money off it. A quick look at Amazon shows about a dozen anti-Agenda 21 books and DVDs available for purchase, with Glenn Beck’s own novel/polemic Agenda 21 the top-seller. While the people protesting Agenda 21 might truly believe it to be a vast plot against freedom, it seems just as likely that it was something new for Beck to cash in on. And cash in, he did.

So is Agenda 21 a road-map to the future or a blueprint for tyranny? Read the document and judge for yourself. But realize that those railing against it have an agenda all their own, and it’s likely to be based on nothing more than misinformation and fear.

About Mike Rothschild

Mike Rothschild is a writer and editor based in Pasadena. He writes about scams, conspiracy theories, hoaxes and pop culture fads. He's also a playwright and screenwriter. Follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/rothschildmd.
This entry was posted in Conspiracy Theories and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

55 Responses to Agenda 21: Death by Sustainability?

  1. mud says:

    This is skeptoid???? Maybe I need Klog’s dog to enlighten me a bit further.. I just fear the hangover..

    “Its a long, long way to Pasadena” suddenly makes a Whole lot of sense.

  2. bilbo says:

    I love when Skeptoid cross-posts from the Daily Kos. It just makes me feel all egalitarian inside.

  3. John Grey says:

    For the record, Beck didn’t actually write Agenda 21. Harriet Parke heard him talking about it on the radio and went to research it to prove him wrong. What she found apparently convinced her that he was right, so she wrote this post-Anthem/Brave New World/Hunger Games dystopian novel and mailed it to him. He liked it so much that he hired her through his publishing imprint, tinkered with the book a little, and then published it with his name prominent so it would have bigger sales.

    While this sort of Patterson-esque “my name on your novel” thing bugs me, I’m sure Parke is just thrilled with her royalty checks….

  4. Peter G Brooksbank says:

    I’m sorry, this is the worst debunking prose I have ever read. Paradoxically most of what is written is probably true with regard to vested interest and not been explicit but it misses by a million miles. Does the word nuance mean anything to you?

    No, I’m no conspiracy nut and I am a confirmed skeptic of over thirty five years. I’m just like you and have read countless editorials and books on countless weird and wonderful things but Agenda 21 is something else. I’ve agreed with virtually everything that I have ever read of Brian Dunning’s and agree that as much as we would like to believe in UFO, aliens and hauntings ect there is almost always a logical reason behind them. It’s naive in the extreme to dismiss peoples fears over Agenda 21 though.

    Why do I think this? Well, the British aren’t quite as excitable as you Americans, so often we can be naturally skeptical. My problem with Agenda 21 is what I’m seeing on the world stage in politics and business.

    Britain has almost lost the right to govern it’s self. Under the guise of a so called common market we have ended up with an unelected, unaccountable and immune to prosecution tyrannical super state that is in the process of dismantling sovereign states therein.

    The Cypriot government has just raided the bank accounts of everyone in it’s jurisdiction, foreign national or not under the direction of the EU in order to subsidise the bailout that it is receiving from the EU. No notification, you just wake up in the morning and hey presto they have taken some of your hard earned cash.

    The EU formulate 75% of our laws. What ever political party we vote for makes no difference as our government is impotent.

    Every time I hear the misnomer “sustainability” I wince. It’s is widely attributed to misguided left wing greens that encourage the pouring of endless taxes into so called green projects which are far from sustainable or desirable. Often blinding the well meaning but gullible into their web of deceit with a guilt trip over the consumerist legacy we are leaving for our children.

    For the record, nothing is sustainable, me, you this website or indeed the Earth.

    I don’t see Agenda 21 as some benign road map to the future but a very cleverly unassuming document with insidious overtones. This is way the EU started out and the phenomena that is control through AGW scaremongering. I can assure you this has happened in the UK as the environmental agency had to apologise and withdraw an alarmist TV advert that was literally scaring children with tales of dying animals and dried up rivers here in Britain.

    If I’m wrong about Agenda 21 then in twenty years we can all breath a sigh of relief and you are welcome to have a good laugh at my expense. I fear at some stage in the not too distant future we will be crying though.

    I respectfully suggest that Mr Rothschild goes back and opens his eyes, taking a long hard look at what is going on in the world.

    I’ll leave you with a question. Just what are those murals about at Denver airport? At best they are inappropriate and at worst, well it doesn’t bare thinking about.

    • Carl Palley says:

      You spelled “itself” as “it’s self,” therefore your entire argument is invalid. On with Agenda 21!

      :)

      • Peter G Brooksbank says:

        I’m sorry, I didn’t realise that we where playing scrabble or is it dungeons and dragons. Do I get £200 if I pass go.

    • mud says:

      and the above bloke is a skeptic????

      How so?

      • Peter G Brooksbank says:

        And I quote; Skepticism is generally any questioning attitude towards knowledge, facts, or opinions/beliefs stated as facts or doubt regarding claims that are taken for granted elsewhere. Do you get irony?

        • Jacob says:

          Yes I do…the irony of someone who uses that definition believes in this bull only based on personal accounts and shows no evidance…

  5. Freke1 says:

    Everybody wants to save the planet, but no one wants the one world government that can actually do it. This inconsistency in logic is very popular. “I want to be safe, I’ll buy a gun”. And when everybody does that people get killed. We are consuming 1.5 earth’s but we only have 1. There is no long term policy, no sustainability, no logic. Just growth, growth, growth and everybody knows what happens in a closed enviroment with unlimited growth. Who thinks about the earth in 500 years, let alone 1 million? Nobody. Yet it is the most important issue. Every day we are polluting the land, burning energy that it took 50-300 million years to create, enhancing the greenhouse effect etc. Back to nature, that’s where we are going, but no willingly.

    I like this picture of peak oil:
    http://8020vision.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Peak_Oil_2.png
    kinda puts things in perspective (we are right at the top (2005-2008)).

  6. HardRain says:

    This writer is naive. Simply reading the UN Agenda 21 document is like reading the former Soviet Union’s Constitution. It sounds pretty good until you see its implementation. The overwhelming legislative infusion of Agenda 21 principles into Federal and State laws and regulations raises this “non-binding” document to the force of law. It is an outgrowth of communist re-distribution of wealth dogma.
    As one who has extensively researched United Nations Agenda 21, the WHY of it, and compiled almost 100 pages of history, cited materials with live links and amassed significant quotes from world leaders, my studies have compelled me to conclude this Agenda 21 is a much more ominous worldwide plan than merely destroying private land ownership and rewilding the globe.

    UN commissioned scientists known as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and NASA have declared a global emergency…terminal Climate Change caused by humans. That decision has already been made and the elites are working on implementing the solution. The climate change pitch is via United Nations Agenda 21, whether scientifically sound or not. The real problem has been officially declared as over-population. The vehicle to solve it is Agenda 21.

    The bottom line is this:
    It’s “sustainability” basic theme relies on the CO2 Climate Change argument. It has everything to do with the “accepted” scientific conclusion that overpopulation will kill the Earth by 2050. Even if CO2 emissions fall to zero the plague upon the Earth will remain: us…. you and me.

    The UN commissioned Global Biodiversity Assessment Report, page 773, calls for a population reduction to 1 billion people. (An exception is provided: if the world is de-industrialized (meaning pre-1765), a peasant population of 4- 5 billion is to be allowed). http://www.freedomadvocates.org/images/pdf/Unsustainables_UN_Global
    The Report’s bottom line is clearly stated:
    “Population growth has exceeded the capacity of the biosphere.”

    Population will reach 10.8 billion by 2050. 15.8 billion by 2100. To feed it, food production must increase in the next 37 years by upwards of 100%. See:
    http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Excel-Data/population.htm
    http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/longrange2/WorldPop2300final.pdf

    CO2 emissions must drop to zero immediately to keep PPMs below 450 and keep average temperature from increasing by more than 2 degrees Celsius, the allowable ceilings. (A much bigger and imminent threat recently identified is the release of gigatons of methane now taking place due to Arctic ice melt and projected methane release from thawing of the Russian tundra permafrost.) But in order to feed so many, CO2 would have to drastically rise, not fall. So the only conclusion is we must depopulate now by 5-6 billion and slash CO2 fossil fuel emissions to zero. The iron fist of communism is needed to make it work. We are already essentially there. http://www.libertyzone.com/Communist-Manifesto-Planks.html
    And that is exactly what is being undertaken, with help from UN Agenda 21 and well known billionaires, who contribute huge sums to a broad array of UN and other population control programs. It’s all there if you do the research, as I have. See UN World Economic and Social Survey 2011 for a very explicit summary of this whole non-fiction agenda: http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/wess/wess_archive/2011wess.pdf

    NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laborartory has confirmed all of the above. See the presentation of Dr. Riley M. Duren, Jet Propulsion Institute Director, Climate Change/Solar Radiation Management/Mitigation/Aerosols/Capture
    February 14, 2013
    Population “change” and CO2 emission energy use emergency.
    http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/29293171

    Also see Final Keck Report/Duren contributes
    http://www.kiss.caltech.edu/study/geoengineering/geoengineering_final_report.pdf

    So what is really meant by UN Agenda 21 “sustainability” is simply that you and I are not “sustainable”.

    I’m so glad I already had a fantastic ride in what used to be America but I fear for my daughter and grandson. As a Bronze Star Medal recipient commissioned officer who fought communism in Vietnam and as a Constitutional attorney for 38 years, it is uniquely disturbing to me to see this Fabian Socialist (Fascist)/Communist program being seamlessly sewn into world, federal, state and local governments and the cultural mindset.

    This helps in exposing the cancer. Congratulations and thank you but….
    ‘the pellets of poison are flooding the waters’. “Hard Rain’s Agonna Fall”, Bob Dylan.

    How would you handle this massive overpopulation problem?

    This is not a joke.

    Good luck, Comrades…

  7. HardRain says:

    You say The Global Biodiversity Assessment Report (annually updated for the UN) has nothing to do with the UN?

    Here’s a quote from the UN:

    “The Global Biodiversity Assessment completed by 1500 scientists under the auspices of UNEP in 1995 updated what we know, or more correctly how little we know, about global biological diversity at the ecosystem, species and genetic levels (Heywood, 1995).”
    http://www.un.org/earthwatch/biodiversity/assessment.html

    I suppose you could read the following UN quotes as benign. I don’t. There are thousands of such quotes.

    UNFPA calling for “a sustainable world population.”
    From UNFPA (United Nations Population Fund) website:

    “Five steps back from the brink”

    “Immediate mitigation—rapid reductions in emissions—is a complex and politically sensitive challenge. It is the major topic before the negotiators in Copenhagen in December 2009. It is possible that population growth in developed countries, and conceivably in some large and rapidly developing ones, will arise as among the factors to be considered in setting goals for emissions reductions. The long-term effort to maintain population-wide human well-being in balance with atmosphere and climate will ultimately require sustainable patterns of consumption and production that can only be achieved and maintained in the context of a sustainable world population. Over decades and centuries the trajectory that world population follows will help determine the levels of per capita emissions of greenhouse gases that will be consistent with a stable atmosphere and climate.” The route to a climate-sustainable human population therefore lies in the removal of barriers to the use of family planning and the rights-based population policies envisioned by conferees in Cairo in 1994.”
    http://www.unfpa.org/swp/2009/en/ch6.shtml

    “UNFPA supports key population, environment and sustainable development activities at global, regional and national levels. These include policy dialogue, planning and research relating to population, poverty, environment and sustainable development. UNFPA also provides support for institutional capacity building to improve data collection, analysis, research and dissemination, and promotes population and sustainable development information, education and advocacy.
    UNFPA�s work in the area of environment and sustainable development is guided by the 1994 ICPD Programme of Action (chapter 3), UNCED�s Agenda 21 (chapter 5) and the 2002 WSSD�s Plan of Implementation. Population dynamics, poverty reduction and better management of the environment are central to sustainable human development. UNFPA raises awareness of the interrelationships between global population growth, demographic dynamics, the environment and sustainable development. It is also committed to helping countries achieve the internationally agreed development goals, including those contained in the United nations Millennium Declaration, including MDG 7 in ensuring environmental sustainability.”
    http://www.unep.org/un-env/Default.asp?gegid=29

    UN Programme of Action of the International
    Conference on Population and Development (1994) Major Policy paper.
    1.11. Intensified efforts are needed in the coming 5, 10 and 20

    years, in a range of population and development activities, bearing

    in mind the crucial contribution that early stabilization of the

    world population would make towards the achievement of sustainable

    development. http://www.un.org/popin/icpd/conferenchttp://uctcriminology.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/bill-gates-co2-p-x-s-x-e-x-c/e/offeng/poa.html

    UN WEBSITE: Rio+20 Comprehensive Statement of Goals
    Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future:
    “1. Introduction
    The total population of the world has just passed seven billion and is continuing to increase. Everywhere people aspire to higher living standards and higher levels of consumption. There is growing concern about the capacity of the world’s natural resources to provide food, energy and other materials to sustain this growing demand. At the same time the growing scale of human activity is threatening to cause dangerous levels of climate change, increased levels of pollution, destruction of natural habitats and biodiversity.” http://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/index.php?page=view&nr=286&type=510&menu=20&template=529&str=Sustainable consumption and production (SCP)

    • Jacob says:

      Here is something from one of your links:
      “Outmoded attitudes about “population control” have been replaced by more holistic, rights- and health-based views about population dynamics and their relationship to climate change. In December 2008, the Asian Forum of Parliamentarians for Population and Development stated, “There are strong linkages and correlation between population growth and emission of greenhouse gases that cause climate change, and … communities experiencing high population growth are also most vulnerable to the negative effects of climate change, such as water scarcity, failed crops, rise in sea level, and the spread of infectious diseases.” The parliamentarians—representing 20 countries—called for efforts to “support and empower poor and marginalized people” in combating climate change, and the integration of “gender perspectives into climate policymaking to ensure outcomes benefit both women and men equally and equitably.”
      &
      “Since the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), however, the world has learned that trying to “control” human population risks depriving women of their right to determine how many children to have and when to have them. What we can work toward instead is environmentally sustainable population dynamics that are characterized by safe childbearing, long life expectancies and freedom for individuals to make their own reproductive health decisions. We can also step up our efforts to support young people so they may live productive lives and fully realize their rights to education and health.”
      Really, these statements contradict what you are trying to say…do you even read these things fully?
      None of these things explicitly or even implictly talk about depopulation or population control at all
      not here: http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/wess/wess_archive/2011wess.pdf
      nor here: http://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/index.php?page=view&nr=286&type=510&menu=20&template=529&str=Sustainable
      or even here: http://www.freedomadvocates.org/images/pdf/Unsustainables_UN_Global (notice that there is nothing from that link)…it sounds like you are cherry-picking things that vaguely sound like they support this ‘conspiracy’

  8. Peter G Brooksbank says:

    The involvement of the the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is not good. I’m highly skeptical of all they do.

    • Freke1 says:

      Yes they are very conservative. Climate change is happening much faster. But I guess that wasn’t what You meant.

      They have though updated the 2 degree C temperature rise to 4-5 degree C by the year 2100. The difference between the last iceage and now was approx. 5 degree C. When there was a 3-4 km (2 mile) ice sheet over USA. So climate change is not just more sunny days for everybody. It’s drought, tornadoes, floods, refugees and skincancer.

      And the only way to stop this is to shut everything down. Which will only happen as we run out of (easy to get) oil. The biggest oil field discovery in 25 years was recently found in Brazil. It’s amazing! There is enough oil to power the planet for a hole 3 months.
      No worries mate ;-)

      • Peter G Brooksbank says:

        Oh I’m not worried by sunny days, what are they? I’m concerned about a unaccountable, unregulated organisation with a leader that leads an hedonistic life style and makes spurious claims. The snow cap on mount everest ring any bells? And they accuse me of not been skeptical!

  9. Carl J says:

    Dear Mike:

    Please write a followup article addressing the citations brought up by HardRain. I can’t be bothered to click on all those links.

    • I’m not a big fan of proof by verbosity.

      • Carl J says:

        So you will not do any more research? You will stop thinking about the issue right here? There is no possibility that you might be only thinking from one perspective? There is literally nothing more to say on the matter, case closed, anyone who disagrees is a “denier?”

        I kid. It’s obvious from the way you equate Glenn Beck with “extremists” and “conspiracy theorists” that your political stance is set in adamantium. Ignoring evidence that contradicts your worldview does not foster trust in your skepticism.

        • Why is the research so important for me to do, yet not important enough for you to do? If you can’t be bothered to click on links, why should anyone else?

          I read Agenda 21, and I didn’t see any evidence of a conspiracy to depopulate the planet or cram all of us in urban shoe boxes. Posting additional links from various UN-based sources that also don’t contain evidence of such a conspiracy doesn’t further the cause of those who do believe in such a conspiracy.

          • John Bluespoons says:

            It can also be argued that there’s no evidence in ‘Mein Kampf’ that millions would eventually be slaughtered by a dictatorial regime.

            But yes, you’re right, there’s no real evidence in Agenda 21…..

            Interestingly, there’s no real evidence that unregulated population growth and human development is ‘unsustainable’ either, though we’ve been indoctrinated to believe it.

            It’s not a real crisis, only a speculative one, but the UN’s Agenda 21 is crystal clear: humans are the problem, and regulating humans is the solution. Regulate and control, regulate and control.
            Eco-fascism marches on……

        • Jacob says:

          Mike is right…why don’t you get off your ass and look at these links? Why do you need someone else to do your thinking for you?

  10. HardRain says:

    Or research……….

  11. Anonymous says:

    Your article is proof of quintessential “verbosity”.
    Did you look at any of my links? I’ve got a hundred pages of ‘em…..

    • I looked at some of them. And what do they say? That the planet’s population is skyrocketing, and developing nations are struggling to feed and clothe their people? That many poorer countries are struggling with environmental issues? This isn’t news, nor is it evidence of a conspiracy.

  12. HardRain says:

    They aren’t going to announce genocide so that everyone of us gets the message loud and clear but here are some pretty loud messages…the last is my favorite by John Holdren, Obama’s Science czar, co-author of Ecoscience with Paul Ehrlich. His “Planetary Regime” just might be Agenda 21. Anyway, Mike, food for thought, huh?

    “… the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million but less than one billion.” – Club of Rome, Goals for Mankind

    The present vast overpopulation, now far beyond the world carrying capacity, cannot be answered by future reductions in the birth rate due to contraception, sterilization and abortion, but must be met in the present by the reduction of numbers presently existing. This must be done by whatever means necessary.”
    Initiative for the United Nations ECO-92 EARTH CHARTER

    “One American burdens the earth much more than twenty Bangladeshes. This is a terrible thing to say in order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it’s just as bad not to say it.”
    Jacques Cousteau, UNESCO Courier

    “A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline would be ideal.”
    Ted Turner, founder of CNN and major United Nations contributor

    “A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells, the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions.” – Prof. Paul Ehrlich, in his book The Population Bomb.

    “The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.” — John P. Holdren, Obama’s science advisor, Ecoscience 1977.

    • Some out-of-context quotes, many of which are decades old, are not evidence of a conspiracy. They’re only evidence of disagreeable (and abhorrent, I might add) ideas, none of which appear to have been acted on.

      Since between 1980 and 2010, the planet’s population grew by 2.5 billion people. If the UN is going to depopulate the Earth, they’re sure taking their sweet time about it, and making their “job” a whole lot harder.

      Also, Holdren made it quite clear during his confirmation hearings that he doesn’t support the ideas he’s written about: http://scienceprogress.org/2009/07/right-wing-attacks-on-science-adviser-continue/

    • Jacob says:

      Many of Prof. Paul Ehrlich’s predictions haven’t come true, despite his claims to the contrary, Mike has debunked your quote from Holdren, among other things.

  13. eric says:

    I think we are making some good steps towards sustainability. Coal usage in the U.S. is down, renewable energy is up considerably, and were looking at a future where maybe we can phase out coal, and possibly nuclear in a couple of decades. Also a report just came out that pointed out we can reduce our carbon emissions in this country by 80 percent if we all start adopting hybrid, electric, biofuel, clean diesel, highly efficient cars etc… This is all with current technology. So I think this is all up to us to do something and make a difference as far as sustainability goes. It’s not a State or U.N. solution I think it’s an individual solution.

    • John Bluespoons says:

      Eric, one of the things I was surprised to learn when I started studying the science of global warming is that the vast majority of reputable skeptics of dangerous global warming believe in the greenhouse effect. What they dispute is how sensitive the climate system is to additional CO2. To date, all the evidence, not just some of it, but all of it, indicates that the climate system is not as sensitive to CO2 as originally feared. In other words, human activities don’t have a dangerous impact on the climate.

      It can also be argued that addition CO2 is actually beneficial, since there’s solid scientific evidence confirming this, which is in sharp contrast to what we’re being told. I encourage you to do you’re own evidence-based research since there’s so much BS coming from the media, politicians, and environmental groups.

  14. Peter G Brooksbank says:

    Jesus wept, I cant believe what I’m reading on here. For crying out loud, nothing but nothing is sustainable, its all relative. We have people on here that with no sense of irony quote green neo-marxist rhetoric that points to green solutions creating as many environmentally damaging technologies as they replace.

    People who state the oceans are rising but there is no evidence to support this. Where are the oceans rising exactly?

    All this started off by someone who thinks agenda 21 is benign just because it doesn’t implicitly state its the UN’s intention to bring about mass depopulation.

    I think this site should be renamed Gullibleoid instead of Skeptoid.

    I offer no answers and no solutions in the interest of encouraging the questioning of everything as a healthy skeptic should do.

    Take nothing as read, I aren’t saying agenda 21 is a diabolical road map to wiping out the masses but I’m not saying it isn’t.

    I will quote Charles Fort but to be honest I feel its a wast of time. This is for you all but especially for Mike Rothschild:

    “The outrageous is the reasonable, if introduced politely.”

    I ask again, can anyone tell me, Just what are those murals about at Denver airport?

    • From the Skeptoid episode about the Denver Airport conspiracy:

      “In fact those two creepy murals were each half of a diptych, a two-part mural, each depicting a hopeful message of man’s journey from brutality to peace. They were made by Chicano artist Leo Tanguma, one of several artists commissioned to paint similar murals throughout Denver International. The Children of the World Dream of Peace shows a menacing Nazi-style soldier wreaking havoc and fear, and includes a poem written by an actual child who died at Auschwitz. In the second half of this diptych, the soldier is dead, and the children of all nations come together over his corpse and beat the world’s swords into plowshares, inspired by the Bible verses Isaiah 2:4 and Micah 4:3.

      Tanguma’s other mural, In Peace and Harmony with Nature, shows the Earth suffering from exploitation, and some species extinct and now found only behind museum glass, mistaken by the conspiracy theorists for elite species being protected from the Apocalypse. The alleged Mayan reference to 2012 is simply a small piece of carved stone with Mayan-style decorations held by one figure in the mural and representing the decline of indigenous populations. (Tanguma himself is a Mayan.) The second half of this diptych shows children from all nations gathering at the flowering tree of peace on a rejuvenated Earth.”

  15. Peter G Brooksbank says:

    Ok, thanks for that. I take your explanation at face value. It all seems a little heavy for the location it is displayed, macabre to say the least. It may have been made with innocent honest intentions but its more suited to an art gallery than an airport. Its what they would say in Scotland as something to keep the bairns (children) away from the fire. Its certainly thought provoking though.

    I do see things moving on a global scale, GM food, contingency plans for national emergencies and the threat to world peace from certain countries, religions and organisations. Mainly the ineptitude of governments worries me including the US and Great Britain. I have lived long enough to witness the moral and social decline of Britain and I would go as far as to draw a parallel with George Orwell’s 1984. Not literally but the use of sport, sex, drink and drugs to control the masses. Thats why I’m wary of Agenda 21, these things are played out over a long time scale. We are talking decades.

    I can tell you that the marxist left under the green banner would sacrifice the lives and welfare of people today in a bid to stave off an imagined future that is based on maybe’s and is by no means certain. They are doing it now in Britain with green taxes and laws that are strangling or business and standard of living while huge nations pollute with impunity.

    Just for the record I have had a life time of interest in the unknown and strange phenomena. I work as a college lecturer, teaching business studies and functional skills. I also write and have had articles published internationally but only on health and safety. This is split with working as a health and safety consultant, this is where my highest qualifications lay as well as expertise.

    I am wary of conspiracy theorists but am also wary of governments. I am extremely wary of worshipping at the alter of science. Some of my friends and colegues are scientists and they laugh at the blind faith that some put in them. Having standing in life or a lofty profession doesn’t make anyone less fallible or human than anyone else and that includes me.

    Take it easy, the truth is often somewhere in the middle and remember, even people who are consistently wrong will be right once in a while. They found that out when Winston Churchill’s voice in the wilderness was finally vindicated at the eleventh hour. Lets not leave it so late next time.

  16. It’s frustrating and amusing that the same people who think the government couldn’t organise buying a beer in a pub are convinced the UN can subvert the whole world with dystopia plans of global genocide and reverting civilisation to the stone age. If you believe that we can blithely continue to chew up resources at the current rate you’re living in a fantasy. The earth is a closed system with finite resources and you need look no further than Easter Island for the classic example of what happens to a civilisation that treats a system as having no limits.

    Educating a population, especially the girls and women, generally brings rampant population growth under control, so no need for UN death camps and global poisoning of Homo sapiens. A mix of renewable energy sources, possibly with some nuclear and small numbers of gas backup generation, and large scale recycling means you don’t have to destroy our current level of technology and it’s benefits. Indeed it’s more likely to advance technical innovation and improve living standards sooner than continuing to use oil, coal and gas.

    Of course we can keep the status quo and ultimately do a global Easter Island and let some other species fill the niche once held by us.

  17. Peter G Brooksbank says:

    I also find it amusing that the same people who trust scientist on climate change don’t trust them on GM crops. You have a point but it depends who’s pulling the strings. I would have a look at common purpose.

  18. Damien Morgan says:

    Interesting isn’t it that here in Australia, we have heard very little opposition to Agenda 21 programs. Two reasons I think: we seem to have a far more relaxed and egalitarian outlook to life than many other countries, and we don’t see as much of Glenn Beck

  19. Doug says:

    The output from the Magic World Population Clock – the business case for Eugenics – is entirely bogus. From there the deceptions worsen. Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from evil… It is these travesties we chronicle and cast a light upon!

    Coerced volunteered self extermination is one of these…
    http://beyondprophecy.blogspot.ca/2013/05/volunteered-self-extermination-our-new.html

  20. It seems as though misinformation and fear-mongering have become the strategy of choice for those who have something to gain by opposing any move that might make the planet more habitable.

  21. Peter G Brooksbank says:

    Unfortunately the only way this can end is in tears. Its about time people learned to balance their needs with the possible needs of future generations in a more realistic manner, granted.

    Something that is virtually impossible given that human nature dictates we are basically selfish and logic dictates that we could be depriving people in the here and now when as yet unknown technological advances or future wars and disasters could render all our efforts obsolete.

    There is also the moral dilemma of why should people pay the price now when in reality its those that have the least that bear the brunt of sustainability.

    The planet is habitable now but the population explosion and the destruction of our wild places is a trend that doesn’t bode well.

    Over the last fifty years I have seen many of Britain’s natural places destroyed or squeezed and the government still wants to build more to accommodate an ever increasing influx of people we cannot afford to support. Its often the small areas that existed in beautiful isolation that have gone forever.

    I have been visiting India for fifteen years and in the last five I have seen the same happening there.

    There is neither the political will or enough of a desire in our populace to precipitate change. The older I get the more I see politicians falling by the way side caught up in various scandals that makes a mockery of democracy. What chance have we got when almost all have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo?

  22. kennie says:

    Very good article I must say I liked it and I think it’s a good platform for rebuilding.
    Thinking of all the vacant buildings just in the Cleveland area and homes, they could be removed for green space, and used in so many different ways.
    And cutting down on our carbon footprint by car polling, or building better mass transportation, why is building a better world such a bad thing.
    However lol I haven’t read Ahenda 21 so now I must in order to make an informed decision as to weather or not I like it.

  23. leticia finley says:

    Just for fun, I tried clicking on soney of the links. Glenn Beck is off limuts and do are others. Do my h for reading both sides if tge coin@

  24. Peter G Brooksbank says:

    Visit UK Column, so many come together because they know something is wrong. The British are not known for their excitability or wild imaginations. It’s just that, they know something is wrong with our world view.

  25. Is this guy just naive or devoid of irony? Rothschild probably isn’t the best name to post under in defence of Agenda 21. It’s advisable to read agenda 21 with your 3D glasses and double speak brain filter on; like looking at one of those pics where you have to shift brain/focus to see what’s hidden behind/within.

  26. Anonymous says:

    Mike Rothschild is a dumb shit! You even state the truth from this video and then deny it’s a problem, you have to be the most stupid person I have ever had the displeasure of reading comments from! Your a waste of cyber ink!

  27. Peter G Brooksbank says:

    There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them. George Orwell. Agenda 21 is one of them. Its real, it’s happening now and the signs are everywhere. by the time most have woken up it will be too late.

    • Anonymous says:

      correlation is not causation. just because some things appear to follow the conspiracy theorists view that this or that was caused by agenda 21(or any like conspiracy item) does not at all mean the two are related.

  28. robbes7rh says:

    Frankly, your comment is one of the most bizarre rebuttals to a thoughtful and persuasive debunking article that I have read. Does the author’s prose really strike you as coming from someone who doesn’t comprehend nuance? Perhaps you could benefit from a long and thorough revisitation of rational thought and reading comprehension. Agenda 21 is a non-binding, voluntarily implemented action plan of the United Nations with regard to sustainable development. Pretty scary stuff, alright. Surely, the best way for nations to progress into the future is to ratchet up the present rates of deforestation, population growth, fossil fuel dependance, stressing fresh water sources… All 300 pages of the document have been available to the public since 1992. It’s as straight forward and benign an endeavor for the U.N. as one can imagine. I’m not aware of it having a deleterious influence on children’s sleep over the past 22 years.

    Now, you may be on to something with the murals created for Level 5 of the Jeppesen Terminal at DIA, by the Chicano mural artist, Leo Tanguma. He is known for painting themes of childhood courage and idealism, environmentalism, multiculturalism, and socially-conscientious spirituality. It has become a tradition that when a NEW WORLD ORDER is poised to assert absolute global domination, that they provide a “heads up” to the populace via publicly displayed mural art. Naturally, a left-leaning Chicano from humble beginnings in rural Texas is ideally suited for this task. As these murals are named, “Children of the World Dream of Peace” and “In Peace and Harmony with Nature,” there can be no doubt about the message they impart: a cold, calculating cabal of reptilian/humanoid hybrids, intends to destroy human culture and systematically kill or enslave every human on the planet. Children who are spared death will serve as sex slaves and babies blood will be drunk in debauched Satanic rituals. Hey, cheer up! I mean, you were always gonna die anyway. Now, the uncertainties surrounding death will be resolved sooner than you had ever imagined!

Leave a Reply