These global warming people are crazy. First, they want to take away our juicy steaks because cows fart, but now…this crosses the line of decency. A Swedish scientist suggests that it may be necessary to turn to cannibalism and start eating human flesh to save the planet (giving new meaning to the expression bite me) And NO this story is not from The Onion.
A conference about the food of the future called Gastro Summit being held in Stockholm Sweden featured a presentation by Magnus Söderlund claiming that we must get used to the idea of eating human flesh in the future, as a way of combating the effects of climate change.
As reported by the Epoch Times:
Trending: Chicago Mayor Blames GOP For City’s Gun Crimes: Gets Schooled On Twitter In a talk titled: “Can you Imagine Eating Human Flesh,” behavioral Scientist and Marketing Strategist Behavioral Scientist and Marketing Strategist Magnus Söderlund from “Handelshögskolan” (College of Commerce) argues for the breaking down of the ancient taboos against desecrating the human corpse and eating human flesh
Boy that makes me very happy I keep Kosher because humans don’t have split hooves and chew their cud, so I won’t be eating human flesh.
Söderlund refers to the taboos against it as “conservative.” Yep, he claims those who don’t want to eat your dead relatives are old fogies who don’t want to save the planet. He adds that people can be sold on the idea little by little, first by persuading people to just taste it. Tasting it? Over my dead body—-er maybe that’s not the correct phrase, but you get the idea.
Conflating resistance to eating human flesh with capitalist selfishness, the seminar’s talking points ask:“Are we humans too selfish to live sustainably?
Capitalist selfishness? Just another reason to hate Socialism.
“Is Cannibalism the solution to food sustainability in the future? Does Generation Z have the answers to our food challenges? Can consumers be tricked into making the right decisions?At Gastro Summit you will get some answers to these questions—and also partake in the latest scientific findings and get to meet the leading experts.”In his talk, Söderlund asks the audience how many would be open to the idea. Not many hands go up. Some groaning is heard. When interviewed after his talk, he reports brightly that 8 percent of conference participants said they would be open to trying it. When asked if he himself would try it, he replies: “I feel somewhat hesitant but to not appear overly conservative…I’d have to say….I’d be open to at least tasting it.
What about the fact that science has proven that eating other people can make you crazy.
A tribe called the Fore lived isolated in Papua New Guinea until the 1930s. They believed in eating their dead rather than allowing them to be consumed by worms. This led to an epidemic of a disease called “kuru, or “the laughing death,” caused by ingestion of human meat. This disease was not caused by a pathogen, but rather, a “twisted protein,” (according to an NPR report) that tricks “other proteins in the brain to twist like it, damaging the brain’s cerebellum. Researchers compared it to Dr. Jekyll’s transformation. The last victim of kuru died in 2009.
Just thinking about eating human flesh makes me crazy and nauseous.
It’s bad enough that fans of the climate change hypothesis want to destroy the economy for their worldwide redistribution of income scheme, but this is just too gross.
A Swedish professor, Magnus Söderlund, declared that in order for the planet to survive the effects of “climate change,” human beings would need to make radical changes to their way of life, including their diets. Among the recommendations are the legalization of cannibalism, saying that it would be limited to dead bodies:
Anyone who watched TV4 After five on Tuesday may have been, to say the least, surprised. There, the idea was presented to start eating people.The feature is about the fair “Gastro Summit – about the future of food” in Stockholm, where the behavioral scientist Magnus Söderlund holds seminars on the possibility of eating human flesh – to “save the climate”.– What makes most of us react instinctively with disgust when talking about eating human flesh to save the climate?, wonders host Tilde de Paula.Magnus Söderlund answers:– First of all, it is that this person who is to be eaten must be dead.One problem could be that dead bodies overall are taboo. In addition, criticism arises against defiling a dead body. Another explanation, says Söderlund, is that many are “slightly conservative” when it comes to eating something they are not used to, ie other people.The conclusion is that it can be difficult to get the Swedes to become cannibals for the sake of the climate. However, according to the researcher, it is important from a sustainability perspective to discuss different options for the future. (source, source)
Professor Magnus Söderlund has an interesting background. He is not a “scientist” in the way that one would think of when discussing environmentalism or the effects of “climate change” (despite how the Earth’s climate changes throughout history), but rather is a social scientist whose specialty is in marketing. Specifically, his area of research is into human reactions on a given topic. He has even written a book entitled “Experiments with People”, as his biography in Wikipedia notes:
Söderlund holds courses in consumer-related marketing and has written several books on the subject. Two of them have been named “Marketing Book of the Year in Sweden.” His research can be found in the field of consumer behavior ( English : consumer behavior, consumer research ), where you study how consumers acquire, use and dispose of products. His research focuses on how consumers react when they encounter marketing elements, such as a seller in a store or an ad. Examples of reactions in these studies is customer satisfaction , fairness perceptions ( English : perceived justice ), emotions, intentions and customer loyalty . These reactions are common in consumer behavior research , which is often about psychological reactions that are believed to influence consumer behavior in the form of purchases and repurchases. Many of Söderlund’s studies are experiments , which means that participants are randomly allocated to different groups, who receive different treatments, and then the groups’ reactions are compared after the treatments. An introduction to the method is given in Söderlund’s book Experiments with people (Liber, 2010) (source, source)
So what does this mean? Is Professor Söderlund really advocating for cannibalism in the true sense?
It is possible. However, noting that his specialty is in public reactions for marketing, could it be that this professor was paid to make this statement to see how people would respond?
Sometimes in news and media, something called a “trial balloon” is performed. This is when an organization makes a statement, usually something that is over-the-top, in order to see how the public responds. This is done usually because some form of the idea wants to be legitimized, and there is an attempt being made to see (a) how people will respond, (b) what arguments for or objections to they have, and (c) how to temper the message for the future based on the current conditions. It is a way of social programming.