* Jason Brent
* 01 Jun: EoP Re: Quora-JBrent: Sustainable Development academic fraudsters should be executed.
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub: EoP v Jason Brent / EoP NWO SCO: EoP NTE GM: EoP NTE GMA| EoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP Academia, EoP v WiP Media, EoP v WiP Charity / EoP v WiP Neg.
Subject: EoP Re: Quora-JBrent: Sustainable Development academic fraudsters should be executed.
Date: 2018-06-01 20:26
From: EoP MILED Clerk <email@example.com>
To: Jason Brent <firstname.lastname@example.org>
TO: Jason Brent (email@example.com)
EoP Re: Quora-JBrent: Sustainable Development academic fraudsters should be executed.
Hope you are well.
There are no differences between economic and sustainable development. The concept of sustainable development was created by fools and cowards who were afraid to advise humanity that since the earth and the resources it can provide humanity are finite, both economic and population growth must and will cease in the very near future. They are attempting to confuse and mislead humanity by putting the word “sustainable” in front of the word “development” they can convince humanity that economic growth will continue forever into the future and humanity will not have to face the stoppage of growth. Everyone who created the concept or use the words “sustainable development: should be executed for crimes against humanity and pure stupidity and arrogance – Jason Brent; Quora: Jason Brent A: What is the difference between economic and sustainable development?.
EoP Feedback to your suggested execution of ‘sustainable development’ academic fraudsters:
Everyone who created the concept or use the words “sustainable development”: should be executed for crimes against humanity and pure stupidity and arrogance. – Jason Brent; Quora: Jason Brent A: What is the difference between economic and sustainable development?.
I would rephrase your statement within the context of Ecology of Peace Scientific and Cultural law recommended Crimes of Procreation, Consumption and Deception Aggression, as follows:
Prior to EoP Scientific and Cultural law legislated as international law:
All ‘sustainability’ and/or ‘sustainable development’ academics should (a) clarify any errors of fact, logic or reasoning in the Ecology of Peace legal ‘sustainability’ – aka sustainable procreation and consumption EoP Footprint [eop-footprint.tygae.org.za] – definition as submitted on behalf of EoP Applicants; to the International Criminal Court Judges – 29 Dec: ICC: Judge Silvia Fernandez de Gurmendi: Re: EoP ICC Private Pros: EoP PoW’s -v- Nobel Committee and Peace Laureates et al; and in the absence of any perceived errors of fact, logic or reasoning in the EoP Footprint definition; (b) sign their Responsible Freedom [responsible-freedom.tygae.org.za] Oath and/or EoP Policy Statement [eop-policy-stmnt.tygae.org.za] to support legislators to implement EoP Scientific and Cultural Law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za] as international law; which would require all citizens from all nations, races and religions to procreate and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits [eop-footprint.tygae.org.za]; and if they refuse by a particular date; (c) refrain from representing themselves as ‘sustainability’ academics and/or experts; or be charged with academic fraud.
Under EoP Scientific and Cultural international law:
All citizens of all nations, races and religions who intentionally without legal justification refuse to sign their responsible freedom [responsible-freedom.tygae.org.za] oaths; shall be convicted of intentional crimes of aggression [crimes-of-aggression.tygae.org.za] the sentence therefore being the death penalty: they shall be given the opportunity to remove their fuck honour genes from the planetary genepool by their preferred method of assisted suicide, within two weeks of sentencing and/or by a particular date as decided by the sentencing judge; and if not done by such date, will be humanely and orderly assassinated by law enforcement appointed assassination squad officials.
The Ecology of Peace legal ‘sustainability’ – aka sustainable procreation and consumption footprint EoP Footprint [eop-footprint.tygae.org.za] – definition submitted to the International Criminal Court Judges – 29 Dec: ICC: Judge Silvia Fernandez de Gurmendi: Re: EoP ICC Private Pros: EoP PoW’s -v- Nobel Committee and Peace Laureates et al – is as follows:
A Sustainable society practices Sustainable Procreation and Sustainable Natural Resource Utilization Behaviour; i.e. all of its citizens consume and procreate below carrying capacity. Sustainable Natural Resource Utilization Behaviour behaviour involves the utilization of renewable natural resources—water, cropland, pastureland, forests, and wildlife—exclusively, which can be depleted only at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are replenished by Nature. The utilization of non-renewable natural resources (NNR’s)—fossil fuels, metals, and minerals—at any level, is not sustainable .
Carrying Capacity Sustainability: I=PAT Equation:
For activities to be genuinely sustainable it must be possible for them to continue indefinitely. The impact of humanity on the environment and the demands that people place on the resources available on the planet can be summarised by what is known as the Ehrlich or IPAT equation, I=PAT. I = impact on the environment or demand for resources, P = population size, A = affluence and T = technology. The two most important conclusions deriving from this IPAT footprint relationship are that: (i) the Earth can support only a limited number of people, at a certain level of affluence, in a sustainable manner; and (ii) Population and Consumption must be reduced to below carrying capacity.
Carrying Capacity aka Biocapacity Limits:
“The maximum number of individuals that can be supported sustainably by a given environment is known as its ‘carrying capacity’. Worldwide the total amount of biologically productive land and sea amounts to 12 billion global hectares (gha); or 1.8 gha each if divided by 6.7 billion each. Guerrylla Laws are drawn up in accordance with the proactive conservation policies of Bhutan, who set aside 40% of their biologically productive land to be returned to its natural state, for other species and wildlife conservation purposes; then that means that the total amount of biologically productive carrying capacity land available to humans is 60% of 12 billion; which amounts to 7.2 billion gha total; or 60% of 1.8 gha, which is 1 gha each. Population factor is relevant, because the more humans there are, the less biologically productive land there is for everyone else. For example:
Biocapacity limits of 6.7, 3.5, 1 Billion, 500, 250 & 100 Million:
7.2 billion global hectares of biologically productive land and water divided by (a) 6.7 billion humans, equals: 1.07 gha each; (b) 3.5 billion equals 2.05 gha each; (c) 1 billion equals 7.2 gha each; (d) 500 million equals 14.4 gha each; (e) 250 million equals 28.8 gha; (f) 100 million equals 72 gha each.
As noted, the more people there are; the less biologically productive land there is available for everyone else. According to the research of Paul Murtaugh [sq-pmurtaugh.tygae.org.za], the procreation factor that should be added by ecology footprint organisations to their Consumption footprint calculators, is 20 per child. Put differently: Each Child increases a parent’s cumulative consumption footprint by factor of 20.
Difference between Sustainable (Leaver Eco-Innocent) v Unsustainable (Taker Scarcity Combatant):
An individuals IPAT footprint is a result of: (A) Consumption Footprint multiplied by (B) Procreation Factor (Every child increases 20 Child Factor). If their IPAT footprint is below carrying capacity limits, they are an Eco-Innocent Leaver; if their IPAT footprint is above carrying capacity limits, they are a Scarcity Combatant Taker.
Total Footprint = Consumption x Procreation Factor.
To work out your Consumption footprint; you will need to use a Consumption Footprint calculator. Current online footprint calculators: Global Footprint Network (copy available at Earth Day; Center for Sustainable Economy; EcoCampus. See more at Global Footprint’s Application Standards, where they detail how their calculators calculate Consumption footprints. The quiz will ask you various questions about your consumption habits, and provide you with a final consumption footprint in global hectares which is your ‘consumption footprint’. For the purposes of this calculation; avoid footprint calculator quizzes that do not provide you with your final gha consumption footprint amount, such as for example: World Wildlife Fund’s footprint calculator or Stanford International Students (which is excellent and has great detail; but does not provide you with a final footprint in gha terms). Multiply your consumption footprint gha amount by your Procreation Factor: the number of children you have procreated multiplied by 20. The total amount is your Total Footprint.
 Sustainability Defined, Chris Clugston, WakeUpAmerika
 EcoFootprint: The difference between the biocapacity and Ecological Footprint of a region or country. A biocapacity deficit occurs when the Footprint of a population exceeds the biocapacity of the area available to that population. If there is a regional or national biocapacity deficit, it means that the region is importing biocapacity through trade or liquidating regional ecological assets. Global biocapacity deficit cannot be compensated through trade, and is overshoot.
 Bhutan Proactive Conservation: Bhutan is seen as a model for proactive conservation initiatives. The Kingdom has received international acclaim for its commitment to the maintenance of its biodiversity. This is reflected in the decision to maintain at least sixty percent of the land area under forest cover, to designate more than 40% of its territory as national parks, reserves and other protected areas, and most recently to identify a further nine percent of land area as biodiversity corridors linking the protected areas. Environmental conservation has been placed at the core of the nation’s development strategy, the middle path. It is not treated as a sector but rather as a set of concerns that must be mainstreamed in Bhutan’s overall approach to development planning and to be buttressed by the force of law. – “Parks of Bhutan”. Bhutan Trust Fund for Environmental Conservation online. Bhutan Trust Fund.
Please let me know what your feedback is to the (a) EoP suggested draft rephrase of your ‘all sustainable development academics should be executed’ and (b) if you are aware of any errors of fact, logic or reasoning in the Ecology of Peace Scientific and Cultural law suggested ‘sustainability’ – aka sustainable procreation & consumption footprint – legal definition.
Also still waiting for your response to: 22 Apr: Jason Brent: Draft: Request Confirmation: EoP RH FR & EoP Policy Statements.
A copy of this correspondence is documented at EoP Legal Submissions [eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za].
Lara Johnson, aka Andrea Muhrrteyn [EoP Oath PDF]
Former MILED Clerk & Acting Clerk