James Lee was correct, but not too bright.

The gunman that took 3 people hostage at the discovery networks headquarters on september 1st, interested me for 1 reason. He didn't commit the violent act for religious, personal, or otherwise "stupid as shit" reasons. The reasoning behind the act was environmental activism. I wouldn't consider myself an environmentalist first. To put it quickly: I support environmentalism when it's primary concern is the betterment of humanity. So did this man's views jive with me?

In a nutshell, kinda sorta. I'm annoyed with alot of the reaction to global warming; because I think they don't focus on the primary concern: People. Most of the popular media describing global warming and the ensuing environmental crisis is only focued on one thing: fuel and the resulting pollution.

There's 2 more aspects to global warming, to put it simply: Overpopulation, and human suffering. I was first annoyed by the non-mention of human suffering in popular media. If the sea levels are going to rise to levels that drown previously populated areas, like New Orleans and Sri lanka, shouldn't people in those areas be evacuated? If, right now, we can only slow global warming, but not prevent it, shouldn't we be more concerned about immediate effects?

This man, James Lee, completely missed, ignored, or wasn't concerned with that point. Instead he focused on overpopulation. And that is where he was correct, but bitter. There are too many people. This has been said before, notably in the 1970s, and yet earth supports more people now than any of those scientists thought it could. They weren't precisely correct about doomsday, but their conclusion(to curb population growth) is still a good idea for other reasons.

Even if cornucopianism is true, and we can just keep expanding and inventing, why? Things would be a hell of alot easier if population was simply reduced. Why struggle for technology and resource conservation when we could all turn to the simplest form of conservation: LESS PEOPLE ON THE PLANET.

I don't share this mans contempt or hatred for humanity. Every human currently alive should remain alive, and enjoy their life as much as possible. But why more people after the current ones?

Most "breeders" as they're referred to by lesbians and idiots, believe their real and/or hypothetical personality and/or parenting to be extraordinary. Yet. according to the most accurate estimates, There are 6,866,400,000 people on earth. Your ability to produce a super-child is estimated by how super YOU are divided by your breeding partner, so 1 in 3433200000(assuming you are super). Even if you are, and swear you know how to pick 'em, that's like rolling a 1 in 3433200000 die everytime you "hit it raw", you moron.

The only lasting reason to breed is your DNA. So your "family continues on". Really? Your own family 5 generations ago was genetically 1/32nd of you. If you breed and trust your offspring to breed for 5 more generations, they'll only be 1/32nd of you once again. You are a blip on the radar. Not only that, but you'll be fucking dead by then, so who cares? Your great-great-great-grandchildren will know as much about you as you know about your great-great-great grandfamily. What a legacy!

Overall, this dude and his act made me think. And that's Probably a bad thing.