David Attenborough declares ‘world would do better if humans weren’t here’
By Paul Homewood
Attenborough shows his true colours:
Sir David Attenborough questioned whether planet Earth would be better off without the human race because of the impact everyday life has on the natural world. Sir David insisted people have to realise they are "intruders" and should behave in such a way as not to disrupt the environment. Speaking to BBC Breakfast, the broadcaster said: "Human beings, even with the best will in the world, cannot but restrict the natural world.
"That’s what we’re doing. We’re pushing it aside. Even the most considerate of us."
He added: “That’s almost inevitable to some degree but let us realise that we are intruders, that we are latecomers and that the natural world, by-and-large, would do much better if we weren’t there at all.”
Sir David’s comments come as the broadcaster prepares to launch his latest documentary, The Year Earth Changed.
The film explores the impact lockdown restrictions across the world have had on the environment and the natural world.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
He should lead by example.
My thought exactly. Instead he continues to rake in the dough by shooting off his stupid mouth so he can continue to feather his own nest! He’s great a shedding crocodile tears.
I detect an air of increasing desperation in the alarmist coterie as the facts start to pile up. Particularly in the BBC where the Thunberg trilogy is typically misjudged. COP26 is going to expose the sham despite the noise and colour.
Yes hurry up and die you silly old man
The world could do better without politicians war makers.
He just demonstrates his utter stupidity.
What about super volcanos, asteroids, Tyranosaurus Rex, aliens, viruses, ice ages, why pick on humans??
Because he’s ignorant and thus has no sense of his own lack of competence. The constant BBC fawning over his ‘insights’ leads him to believe he is a true visionary; rather than an Emperor with no clothes.
He is ignoring the radical terraforming of the planet that has happened throughout geological history, much of it biological in origin as well as the consequences of geological processes. He is also trying to ignore the consequences of evolution. His line of thought is a retrograde mutation.
What connects Greenpeace Uber-apostate Patrick Moore and the Duke of Edinburgh? Why, they both pulled out of environmental bodies when they took up climate lying. PM – Greenpeace. Duke – WWF
To me, WWF is now WWtF.
Sadly from a couple of the tribute letters published in the Mail it would seem people still think the Duke is still connected to WWF. Unlike the erasement of Patrick Moore they want to keep pretending that the Duke is part of WWF as it is seen as positive. And there are still plenty of people who claim that Baroness Thatcher believed in global warming and ignore the fact that once she became better informed she changed her mind.
He was on the BBC news, he showed some real flashes of being completely unhinged.
He declared “children understand the science” [climate change/’required’ COP26 action].
Which is just daft. They understand no such thing, they believe and have been scared by what supposedly trustworthy adults have told them, adults who have abused that position of trust.
The BBC reports:
“The behaviour of some adults in contributing to the actions of young people during the recent street violence in Northern Ireland amounts to child abuse, NI’s children’s commissioner has said.”
And they think climate propaganda/brainwashing and exploitation and weaponization of children is different?
“children understand the science” – except climate attribution claims are all assertion, not proven science.
Yes, ask a child what the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere is to see how ignorant they are. You can do the same with MPs but then we know they are ignorant. The next stage is to ask them to explain why if it so warm there is no farming taking place on Greenland whereas the Vikings did it during the Mediaeval Warm Period. Best stand back as their heads will probably explode at this point.
As usual he talks nonsense! Non-scientific, subjective observations have no place in a rational debate. Evolution is based on sound principles, a dominant, second best species isn’t an option.
If humans weren’t the dominant species another species would be and would be less likely to respect the environment than Homo Sapiens!
To be consistent within his worldview, surely he has nothing to say. Humans are the latest product of ‘chance’ evolution. We are here – naturally. The fact that being so ‘successful’ (survival of the fittest) we may bring everything crashing down is just the way it is. After that, ‘evolution’ can start again.
Got it in a nutshell. Things come and things go. We may disappear in an instant compared with dinosaurs. After we have gone, the world will evolve again.
Great post. Thanks. This guy needs psychiatric care. I’ve done a few posts about this madman.
Attenbro’ is now a complete numpty.
As he gets older, he gets more and more bizarre.
He is exhibiting all the signs of early dementia.
I take zero notice of anything he says.
Smart move. I will follow suit. Thanks.
early dementia? At 94! I should be so lucky.
And of course Attenborough’s net worth of £24 million was achieved with zero environmental impact .
Always the same problem with these misanthropes , sparkle – jar packamac is another – too many other people .
“The film explores the impact lockdown restrictions across the world have had on the environment and the natural world.”
The travel lockdown rapidly lowered the carbon fuel emissions that green activist advocates have insisted upon. The atmosphere responded with a new CO2 record. Will the film show the severe damage that was (and is being) done to global economies? Will the film recommend even more emission restrictions on us ‘intruders’ once the pandemic is under control…something being done by us ‘intruders’? Somehow, depicting any of that seems unlikely.
Will the film show the really substantial ‘natural’ drivers of Co2 emissions that knock humanity’s paltry contribution into a cocked hat? Has he not noticed that from Iceland to Italy and from the Caribbean to Indonesia, volcanoes have, in the past few weeks, belched more emissions into the atmosphere than UK industry could in several of his lifetimes? What do you suggest we do about those David?
David Attenborough has interfered directly with more animals than anyone else during his role as a ‘BBC Idol’. I really do hope that he hasn’t transferred any harmful viruses to the Mountain Gorillas for example.
I like the idea of Attenbollox interfering with a gorilla. And what the gorilla’s response might be.
Not tonight David. I’ve got a headache.
The biggest potential challenge planet Earth faces is that of a direct asteroid collision. Our most intelligent animals aren’t going to evolve the capabilities of dealing with that in the next 10 million years. But humans are on the cusp of that capability. Humans deserve more respect than what’s coming from the Malthusians and doomsters.
He is absolutely barking. He needs help rather that Biased Broadcasting Corporation continuing to give him houseroom and airtime for his increasingly unhinged pronouncements.
Some good news – Dr Peter Ridd has been successful in getting the High Court to hear his appeal against the verdict that exonerated the JCU. Hearing is in June and he says that judges are appointed according to case importance from 1 to 7. He is expecting at least 5!
And it keeps coming – a huge chunk of viewers dumped BBC1 when Greta Thunderpants came on for the first of 3 hours of her miserable drivel says Delingpole.
Shark well and truly jumped. “Earth would be better off without the human race?” How would it know that and what would it do with it’s freedom?
Anyone else beginning to think that there is an ulterior motive for everyone including puppet Greta wanting to postpone COP26, and covid is just a convenient excuse?
Yet another failure to secure total commitment from all parties would seriously endanger the project – the farce of serial failures would become too much.
I suspect the global elites want to get it all thrashed out (at Biden’s zoom conference etc.) beforehand, and just rock up to do the deal.
After you, David.
See, conservatives are polite.
It is quite nonsensical to claim that humans and what we do are somehow not “natural”. It is simply defingina word to suit your argument. Pathetic really.
Oh what a moron is the Attenborough !!!
He is in direct line of succession from the idiot Malthus, proven wrong now for 222 years, via the eejit Paul Ehrlich, never a correct prediction his entire career, to his distinguished anti human stupid self.
Book: Merchants Of Despair by nuclear PhD engineer Robert Zubrin.
John Doran.
Recently I have been reading books which question the Darwinist/Creationist perspectives which are shoved in our faces 24/7/365.
I highly recommend genius journalist Jim Marrs’ Our Occulted History & Joachim Hagopian’s Pedophilia & Empire.
Did aliens tinker with the DNA of Homo Erectus to produce Homo Sapiens?
The elusive missing link is a huge clue.
John Doran.
Paul
it sounds to me like he has onset dementia characterised by emotional lability and a rapidly diminishing grip on reality
HT
>
So what? who would care if there were no humans, and who’s to say that some other species wouldnt rise to dominance and bugger it all up. What a stupid thing to say. When I was young I used to regard Attenborough as someone to look up to, however he has completly been taken in by the green woke mob.
I have never met a single supporter of climate change theory who has made any attempt to check the facts. They simply say everyone knows about the issue.. Oh no they don’t.
I know Christian belief is not to everyone’s taste but humanity’s situation on the planet is EITHER that we are here to undergo a period of testing before being appropriately rewarded in the afterlife OR we have simply evolved to be the dominant species (at least for the time being!). Or maybe both.
Either way we are entitled to run this planet more or less as we think fit always bearing in mind that we ought always to act reasonably and with due care for the environment which sustains us.
The concept of the planet being “better without us” makes no sense. It is literally non-sense. Without us the planet is an irrelevance. This is our home and though we should not trash it we are perfectly entitled to exploit it in our own interests.
As with all emotion rather than logic based ideologies, DA etc. fail to ask the obvious questions, like ‘save it for what?’
The next ice age.
The next asteroid strike.
To be swallowed by the sun.
If as a species we want to live in a pleasant place, rational measured environmentalism is sensible, anything more extreme is completely irrational.
First, there was the ‘red’ Pol Pot. Now we see the ‘green’ Pol Pot. Though he’d be conflicted by the use of blue plastic bags…
Sir or is it Sour David is a dixkhead without a dick. bnough said
All of the self hating environmentalists should arrange to get together and end their own misery. Then the rest of us humans who love their lives can give them a great send off, and get on with our lives.
Earth would be well on its way to becoming a dead planet if we humans had not started replenishing the CO2 in the atmosphere.
I recently asked an expert botanist – ignoring all other considerations, what would be the ideal CO2 concentration for plant life? His response “I have never been asked that question”!
It further occurs to me that , as part of the wealthy elite , the hypocritical fatcat Attenbore will probably be on Claudia Webbe’s hit list . Civil war in the ranks of the righteous . Ha .
Bless him he needs more dementia drugs clearly. Unless he is being paid handsomely by some will known WEF Great Reset folk to spout this rubbish.
‘Sir David Attenborough questioned whether planet Earth would be better off without the human race because of the impact everyday life has on the natural world.’
So what? You give priority to the 3rd Rock over your own damn species?
Attenborough’s behavior in other people would be correctly tagged anti-social.
Gotta hand it to the interviewer for BBC Breakfast. He keeps going, even after Attenborough tells him he wishes he were dead.
There were no humans to harass the dinosaurs. How did that work out for them?
Great comment: gets straight to the nub of the issue! I’ll use that with my brainwashed granddaughter who worships St. Greta
…how can someone who claims to be an atheist and a believer in Darwinian Evolution claim that human beings are ‘intruders’ i.e. that they are somehow not as ‘natural’ as any other species on Planet Earth – he is talking complete non-sense. I would like to know how he thinks humans got here – either humans ARE a special creation – i.e. created in the image of God OR they are ‘nature’ just as much as lions on the Serengeti or penguins in the Antarctic – he seems to want to have his cake and eat it!
It is what happens when you worship creation instead of the Creator.
Amen!