[quote]Oleena wrote:
Cliff’s Notes:
Basically, in about 10-30 years we’re going to run out of oil and the population is going to be way above what it is now.
Because of this, there’s going be be much more competition for resources and the division between the poor and the rich is going to grow. the importance of human life is going to decrease and democracy is going to cease to exist (that last one is because the more people there are, the less your vote does.)[/quote]
Hmmmm Sounds Like ol Rome…wonder what happend with them?[/quote]
It is still there and bigger than ever last time I checked.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
One thing’s for sure - if all but 200,000 folks were eliminated from the earth there would still be a sizable number out of that 200k that would just have to be doomsday motherfuckers.
Chicken Little’s come and Chicken Little’s go. I’m older than most of you and can distinctly remember this bullshit flying around clear back in the 1960s.
[quote]Nards wrote:
Dude…I’m from Canada and your idea makes no sense.
We could put 200,000 people into northern Alberta and no one would know for 200 years.[/quote]
That’s the point. It shouldn’t be known we are here. If we as an “intelligent” animal were seriously worried about the state of the earth and our species, the quickest way to deal with it would be kill off 99.5% of the population. The earth would thrive and I’m guessing so would humans. [/quote]
Um…no. Humans wouldn’t thrive because that means growth and you just killed 99.5% of the population.[/quote]
I suppose it depends on how you view thriving. I don’t see humans thriving right now. Sure, we’re growing, but with a figure like 2% of the population owns more than half the wealth I can’t believe that is considered thriving.
Eliminate a majority of people, and make sure they’re set-up, that population would thrive.
There’s a possibility that this will happen anyway. Why not be preemptive about it?
[/quote]
Um, because killing 99.5% of the population is not respecting human dignity.
Personally my concern with overpopulation is not running out of oil or saving the earth or anything like that but I want to be able to sustain my quality of life that doesn’t seem possible in an overpopulated world.
I consider myself an environmentalist but not for hippy-treehugging reasons but because as a person equally as selfish as those who wish to pave over everything, I wish to not pave over everything so it is there for me to enjoy. IE I want the valleys I hike in to remain intact so I can continue to hike in them, not for the owls that may be living there, although there existence does enhance it. I think a large chunk of environmentalists are actually in it for the same reasons but won’t admit to it. But I wish they would because the dishonesty is how they lose credibility. The earth WILL survive whatever we humans can throw at it but will it be worth living on?
I believe as populations reach certain levels, quality of life does decline and so I do agree with Oleena’s title of the thread.[/quote]
Not to put you on the spot, but the Cities are becoming over populated, over fifty percent of the population lives in metropolitan areas. I don’t live in the city, so I don’t deal with “over population.”
First of all, what the hell is Human Dignity? Dignity is something you either have or do not have as an individual there is no such thing that just comes with being born. We humans are neither rare nor precious.
[/quote]
Human dignity has nothing to do with rare or precious.
[quote]
Crackpots have been shouting about peak oil since 1970 at least and so far its all been crap. Will we run out? Yep, but anybody even trying to estimate when is kidding themselves. Will we end up with massive wars over resources, probably but thats been the story of mankind for our entire history.
As for overpopulation well nature is going to take care of that if we don’t accidentally do it ourselves… [/quote]
Personally my concern with overpopulation is not running out of oil or saving the earth or anything like that but I want to be able to sustain my quality of life that doesn’t seem possible in an overpopulated world.
I consider myself an environmentalist but not for hippy-treehugging reasons but because as a person equally as selfish as those who wish to pave over everything, I wish to not pave over everything so it is there for me to enjoy. IE I want the valleys I hike in to remain intact so I can continue to hike in them, not for the owls that may be living there, although there existence does enhance it. I think a large chunk of environmentalists are actually in it for the same reasons but won’t admit to it. But I wish they would because the dishonesty is how they lose credibility. The earth WILL survive whatever we humans can throw at it but will it be worth living on?
I believe as populations reach certain levels, quality of life does decline and so I do agree with Oleena’s title of the thread.[/quote]
Not to put you on the spot, but the Cities are becoming over populated, over fifty percent of the population lives in metropolitan areas. I don’t live in the city, so I don’t deal with “over population.” [/quote]
I moved from a large city to a smaller city to get away from the population but it is growing too. But I LOVE this area and the wilderness I’m surrounded by but this city is growing rapidly. It gets harder and harder to find remote wilderness. I accept growing population as inevitable however because it can’t be controlled by policy without compromising freedoms.
[quote]kothreat wrote:
IF we were truly intelligent and rational, we would gather about 200 000 people of diverse backgrounds, set them up with all that would be needed to keep shit running on a smaller scale, then kill the rest of us.
Seriously, if we were truly worried about the survival of the human race and wanted to reverse the negative effects we have caused to this planet, that’s what needs to be done.
Oh no, but human life if too precious. Bullshit, buncha selfish fucks flying around space on this rock with a nugget centre.
[/quote]
That’s not really a clever idea. Culling the most remarkable animal to have ever existed on this planet so we are nothing more than an endangered species. For what? So birds, lizards and bugs can thrive? Are you Maurice Strong in disguise?
Overpopulation and resourse depletion is largely a myth. Every year millions upon millions of people around the globe are enjoying and ever increasing standard of living. There’s little sign that this will abeit anytime soon. It’s good thing too, once people in the developing countries realise they don’t need 10 children to have a chance to carry on their genes and just one or two will suffice (like in the western world) you will see a population decrease or leveling of.
I read somewhere that you could fit the entire population of the World into an area the size texas with 1200 square feet of space per person.
