It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Depopulation agenda

page: 1
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   
From the Georgia Guidestones to Bill Gates claims of wishing to reduce the population, there is a conspiracy side to a very real problem. Our population is already at a point were sustainability is questionable, and knowing that all indications show an ever increasing population, conspiracy theory may well move into conspiracy fact in the very near future.

It's obvious that nobody wants to just cull a large portion of the population. That would be cruel, and quite Hitleresq. But if something isn't started as a genuine way to control overpopulation in the future, there may not be much of a future to worry about. Barring an ELE, (extinction level event) or some catastrophic natural disaster, if something isn't done, our planet will not allow us to continue. A proper plan should be put in place. A very long term plan. But please, hear me out before you hang me with the NWO rope.

If we enact a program to deal with this issue now, we may be able to survive in a long term way.
1.Starting with education. Make sure everyone knows the real dangers of an over populated planet.
2.Awareness. Be sure there is an active campaign to be continually aware of the problems and solutions and keep new ideas flowing.
3.Knowledge. Have a real, updated place for unbiased research and existing knowledge of the issues.
4.Design a way to implement plans with oversight to reduce populations in future generations. (not eliminating any existing people, but ensuring that future generations don't mass produce babies)
5.Penalties. Eventually, once plans are in place for some sort of global control over population, there would need to be some sort of ramification to going against the rules of society.


Now, all that sound quite scary and very, very, NWOish. After all, it's a global issue with global implications.

Could we as a society, handle starting a reasonable plan at this point, or do you think the panic and fear of "them" taking over would be too great?

Is overpopulation even a real issue that should be on the radar?




posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:08 AM
link   
I dont overpopulation is a problem. The populations of developed countries are starting to level off or even drop. And the planet has the resources for more people if distributed evenly.
The prob;lem seems more to me inequlaity in the system, of wealth land food etc.
How can a larger populayion be sutained if most of the resources are controlled by a tiny minority.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude


ur population is already at a point were sustainability is questionable, and knowing that all indications show an ever increasing population, conspiracy theory may well move into conspiracy fact in the very near future.


No it's not. There's is no science that states that the world is overpopulated as a whole. Certain regions of the world are over populated, but that's about it.


But if something isn't started as a genuine way to control overpopulation in the future, there may not be much of a future to worry about.


There's no indication that this is the case. Nor would would we need to control the amount of population, even if it was.

It's not to do with the number of humans, it's how many resources some humans consume, versus others.


4.Design a way to implement plans with oversight to reduce populations in future generations. (not eliminating any existing people, but ensuring that future generations don't mass produce babies)
5.Penalties. Eventually, once plans are in place for some sort of global control over population, there would need to be some sort of ramification to going against the rules of society.


There's no reason to do this. What you have to do is teach people about greed. Teach people about how to grow their own food and be self sustainable. There is no indication, that the world as a whole is overpopulated and cannot support 7 or 8 or 15 billion humans.

It's the systems we have that are our enemy, not the amount of us.

~Tenth



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: WilsonWilson

I am not sure about your first point of populations dropping ( www.worldometers.info... ), but I think your second point is spot on. Without a massive paradigm shift, there could be mountains of problems due to the have/have nots, aside from population itself.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
From the Georgia Guidestones to Bill Gates claims of wishing to reduce the population, there is a conspiracy side to a very real problem. Our population is already at a point were sustainability is questionable, and knowing that all indications show an ever increasing population, conspiracy theory may well move into conspiracy fact in the very near future.



You're being paranoid for no reason friend.

The Georgia guidestone simply says:




Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.


Don't pay attention to the 500,000,000 figure as its simply an ideal number which would be impossible to achieve exept if a massive natural disaster occurs.

It is simply speaking of a world in which we have quality not quantity. The lesser the population the greater the standards of living would be. There would be plenty for everybody.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower


It's the systems we have that are our enemy, not the amount of us.

~Tenth



I agree that as of right now, there is still lots of room (physical space) for the numbers we have, but resources to support long term growth need to be looked at while there is still time. To ignore all this now, and wait for our grandchildren to realize we failed them will be a horrible thing. (IMHO)

I honestly don't see how we can ignore this due to the exponential increases common sense dictates are inevitable. But again, I am asking, not telling.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Even with large natural disasters and whatnot, the world would not see an immediate major depopulation.

Depopulation along the lines of what you are talking about can only come from disease. Disease has the only ability to naturally depopulate the entire world in a fairly short period of time, and is also the most likely thing to do so. It has happened on large scale before, and will happen again.

Just wait until the warmer weather comes back around.....we will start seeing new forms of diseases popping up everywhere, and one of these will be a true killer.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude


agree that as of right now, there is still lots of room (physical space) for the numbers we have, but resources to support long term growth need to be looked at while there is still time.


Resources are a plenty. It's a myth that there isn't enough to go around. We are just greedy and wasteful.

Population control will only hurt people like you or me. It will force more resources into the hands of those who don't need it.

~Tenth



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: rokkuman

I am aware of the message on the stones and understand it's reasoning. I fully believe the stones are there in case we have an ELE and some surviving people wish to re-start society. It's a suggestion based on well reasoned thought. They don't frighten me. I actually very much agree.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower


Population control will only hurt people like you or me. It will force more resources into the hands of those who don't need it.

~Tenth


My point may not have been clear, the population control won't affect us, or our kids at this point. The message and planning would be for a few generations in the future. An attempt to not have to find out if 25 billion people on this planet is a good idea or not.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

What I am proposing/asking is based on many years in the future, with some global agreement on the planing now. As I said, reducing our existing population isn't a factor. As 10th said, there are plenty of resources now, but in 100 years, will that still be the case? And, if we don't start to ask that question now, when would be the proper time to bring it up?



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Vasa Croe

What I am proposing/asking is based on many years in the future, with some global agreement on the planing now. As I said, reducing our existing population isn't a factor. As 10th said, there are plenty of resources now, but in 100 years, will that still be the case? And, if we don't start to ask that question now, when would be the proper time to bring it up?


I don't think it will have to be brought up. Earth has taken care of itself for this long. It will take care of itself in the future when the time is right.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:27 AM
link   
I have gone into this very subject on many threads, to the point where Mods have threatened me over posting the information again, I have posted the proof one to many times I guess.

We are in the throws of depopulation already.

If current birth/death rates continue as they are; within 50 years the population will begin a steep decline, so steep that some projections predict extinction within 500 years.


So no worries for the future overpopulation.

ALL first world countries have less than replacement rate births among their native populations (people who are born in the country). It is only immigration that props up first world populations right now.

However, even second and third world populations are beginning to decline. In Mexico for example, their birth rate is only .1% over replacement rate now and should shortly fall below replacement rate.

Look at articles about Japan and their population problem and you will see what the entire world will look like in 70 years.

Wherever women have access to education and economic freedom the birth rate declines immediately to below replacement rate. Which is why some countries/religions make education and freedom for women illegal, keeping women dumb and in domestic slavery keeps them reproducing.

I read an article where even in Iran they are having a problem with below replacement rate births. Seems that fathers who love their daughters are not forcing them to marry, and many educated women are refusing to marry. In the middle east there is a city under construction that will be a female only city, no males allowed. So that these women who are educated and who do not want to live a life of abuse and servitude can live in peace without men.

No worries about overpopulation, very soon the entire world will be in correction mode. The population will eventually, if current trends continue fall below the guidestone mark, then continue the precipitous fall.

Don't ask me for proof, the Mods will no longer allow me to post it, look at my previous posts, over 6 months old and it is all there.




edit on 9Fri, 06 Feb 2015 09:44:40 -0600am20602amk065 by grandmakdw because: addition grammar



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Vasa Croe

What I am proposing/asking is based on many years in the future, with some global agreement on the planing now. As I said, reducing our existing population isn't a factor. As 10th said, there are plenty of resources now, but in 100 years, will that still be the case? And, if we don't start to ask that question now, when would be the proper time to bring it up?


I don't think it will have to be brought up. Earth has taken care of itself for this long. It will take care of itself in the future when the time is right.


Not to be an ass, but isn't that like putting on blinders and hoping things just work out? At some point, should we step up to the plate and plan for the long term?



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Vasa Croe

What I am proposing/asking is based on many years in the future, with some global agreement on the planing now. As I said, reducing our existing population isn't a factor. As 10th said, there are plenty of resources now, but in 100 years, will that still be the case? And, if we don't start to ask that question now, when would be the proper time to bring it up?


I don't think it will have to be brought up. Earth has taken care of itself for this long. It will take care of itself in the future when the time is right.


Not to be an ass, but isn't that like putting on blinders and hoping things just work out? At some point, should we step up to the plate and plan for the long term?


I don't think so at all. Earth has proven many times in the past that it takes care of itself and will be around a lot longer than we will, at least in the physical form we are now. I don't see the Earth ever really becoming overpopulated though...there are PLENTY of areas that are untouched. I used to live in Montana and traveled all over the place out west and can tell you that there is no risk of those areas being overpopulated for the next few centuries, likely a lot longer.

I think disease will wipe out many, far sooner than a depopulation plan will be put in place.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Even with large natural disasters and whatnot, the world would not see an immediate major depopulation.

Depopulation along the lines of what you are talking about can only come from disease. Disease has the only ability to naturally depopulate the entire world in a fairly short period of time, and is also the most likely thing to do so. It has happened on large scale before, and will happen again.

Just wait until the warmer weather comes back around.....we will start seeing new forms of diseases popping up everywhere, and one of these will be a true killer.


Actually, it is happening naturally and the world is in self correction mode.

We don't need disease. Depopulation is already underway in most of the world.

Because of the few countries who have poor to non-existant education and allow women to be treated as virtual slaves, we still have a mild population growth that will continue for about 50 more years, and then if all the world wide population trends continue on their current path, even those countries/religions will fall to below replacement rate births.

There will be no problem within a very short time with too many people and too few resources.

The real upcoming problem will be too many elderly and not enough young people to support and care for the elderly.
But I'll be dead by then, it will be your children and grandchildren who will suffer as elderly under the dwindling resources to care for those who are too old or infirm to care for themselves. Also, a lack of people to actually do the work to make the world run, food, utilities, etc may cause the kind of shortages that the OP worries about with overpopulation.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

My computer did not like that website, i couldnt get past the world population counter on the front.
But i'm sure birth rates where i live in the UK are dropping.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Just force sterilize the Duggars.That will fix it right there.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

TBH with you... it all depends on where one lives (I've mentioned this in numerous similar threads as have others). Demographically the Cities are way over-populated not to mention Environmentally unfriendly and I would put forth a plan for 25% to be moved out to rural areas! Those 25% could also take their Transportation with them so as to free up the clogged roads of the City and reduce the Pollution therefore we can re-grow Trees when we knock down their Houses!

If we could keep the populations in the City thereafter to the same amount, then that would sort one problem out.

Maybe some of those 25% could go to their Parents Original Country of Origin and create a small City there for themselves instead of over-populating the City they reside in now.



posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

How could you take away their transport, they would still need to commute to the cities for their jobs, or would you provide free public transport?



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join