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.

 

U.S. Scientist calls for Ebola to kill 5 Billion Humans!!

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 11:21 PM
link   
And you'll note I said it should be considered as an extreme last option, and suggested other things to do.

I don't consider myself an environmentalist either, rather someonbe who thinks logically rather than emotionally.




posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 11:25 PM
link   
If the scientist was serious it just goes to show that you can study a few books on a given subject and get advanced degrees but it still won't necessarily give you common sense or a sense of vision for mankind. This planet alone has more than enough resources to feed and clothe the entire population currently here and then some. If you think about all the resources on this planet and elsewhere, mankind's population is so small we are in danger of becoming extinct. One major problem on this planet and mankind could easily become extinct. The scientist may have earned an advanced degree but he apparently missed a few other things along the way. That is if this wasn't just a big joke.



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 01:14 AM
link   
I honestly don't think this is that big of a problem because there will be a vaccine in time before anything catastrophic happens. At least in the virus world but in the weather world, it is a whole other horse completely.



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by kid301
I honestly don't think this is that big of a problem because there will be a vaccine in time before anything catastrophic happens. At least in the virus world but in the weather world, it is a whole other horse completely.


Well, if this virus was created and broke out, and saying that scientists had done preliminary research, I'd estimate it would take a few months for them to find a cure, and it would take alot longer to make enough for people.

I'm confused, how exactly would a virus effect the weather?



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 11:30 AM
link   
No, I am saying that the virus is not as immediate as the crazy weather or this next WW3. Sorry about the confusion.



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
...I'm confused, how exactly would a virus effect the weather?


Everyone here knows global warming is responsible for everything from teenage acne to the Floyd Landis doping scandal.

If the evil Bush had only passed the Kyoto Treaty there would be no world problems today and everyone would all live in peace and harmony while singing "Kum Ba Ya"



posted on Aug, 8 2006 @ 04:07 AM
link   
Dude, the world far too corrupt far too long ago. There is no saving it now. And yes Bush has a great part of causing this next war but whatever already. I know this may seem a little insensitive but trust me when I say there is no one else on this planet that hates this crap on the news more than I. My dad watches CNN all the time and all I say is "Why do have this stupid show on T.V." or "What is so GREAT about watching stupid idiots try to make decisions for everyone on this stinkin' planet" or "Can we have a break from death today please". Keep in mind I am not trying to offend anyone here, I was and still am when I said these things. But I think all that is beyond saving. Peak Oil, WW3, just forget about it and try to create your own electricity by using generators.



posted on Aug, 8 2006 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
That's an ATSNN thread though.

There can be an ATSNN thread and a general ATS thread about the same thing.



As for the topic, well he is right we do need to eleviate the number of people on the planet, I however think his idea should be a last option.

What we should do is build orbital habitats and colonies throughout the Solar System, or atleast colonise the sea.

[edit on 4/2/2006 by iori_komei]


Yea, i agree.

Instead of pumping all this money into useless warfare and oil they should
spend it on NASA projects and speed up construction and development
of spacecraft for colonization of other planets like Mars for example.

And, maybe, like China we should allow only one or two children per family..
Now this may sound like a ludicrous idea i know that but they are right when
they say humans are killing the earth so a PEACEFUL reduction would be one
that would limit how many children you can have...



posted on Aug, 8 2006 @ 07:37 PM
link   


And, maybe, like China we should allow only one or two children per family..
Now this may sound like a ludicrous idea i know that but they are right when
they say humans are killing the earth so a PEACEFUL reduction would be one
that would limit how many children you can have...

I agree with you on that.
I mean there's no need to have 13 kids, and that's not an exageration,
I know a couple who has that many kids, naturally.

Of course, when we have orbitals and colonies that can hold thousands, than we should'nt use it, but it's a good idea for the world right now.



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Maybe to control the population, there could be a limit of naturaly yours and an adopted. People can only have one of their own and if they wanted another, they would have to adopt. This way we coul help those orphans not be orphans anymore. Plus someone has to take care of them.



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 02:58 AM
link   
Let's say this has happened and there is a cure for Ebola,do u think u are among the first ppl to get a vaccine?!
this looks to me like purification of the planet(innocent ppl aka working force). With all the advanced robotics,nanotechnology and other astonishing technologies they don't need us any more!!!



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei


And, maybe, like China we should allow only one or two children per family..
Now this may sound like a ludicrous idea i know that but they are right when
they say humans are killing the earth so a PEACEFUL reduction would be one
that would limit how many children you can have...

I agree with you on that.
I mean there's no need to have 13 kids, and that's not an exageration,
I know a couple who has that many kids, naturally.

Of course, when we have orbitals and colonies that can hold thousands, than we should'nt use it, but it's a good idea for the world right now.


Government mandates that regulate your family life and control your choices of lifestyle are more frightening than terrorism, global warming, ebola, et al combined.

There are WORSE things than overpopulation.



posted on Aug, 10 2006 @ 04:16 AM
link   
If developing nations continue to industrialize if when they become "developed" they follow the footsteps of modern developed countries populations will decrease dramatically. It is difficult to estimate when this will occur but it certainly will occur if no measures are taken to prevent it and if countries like china and india have lower birth rates when they develop. It also may not occur if overpopulation becomes so big of a problem before this has a chance to happen that famine and disease become widespread and the human population is decreased in this way. In any case i see this slow death as just as possible as a famine,war, or disease that results from overpopulation.



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 10:03 AM
link   
I never have heard something like that.
that so called Cientist,
is in my eyes no cientist but a pure Terrorist.

technologie has deveoped so far that we can make land on places where there used to be water.

sadistic people



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Samoth
I never have heard something like that.
that so called Cientist,
is in my eyes no cientist but a pure Terrorist.

technologie has deveoped so far that we can make land on places where there used to be water.

sadistic people


He's not a terrorist just because he came up with a logical solution to a problem.

What do yo purpose we do about our overpopulation.


Oh, and we can't create land anywhere in the water, we can create land
above sea level in places that the water is shallow enough to, and build
floating barges, but we can't just create islands in the middle of the ocean.



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 09:44 PM
link   
how about restrictions on the number of children in countries were it is necessary and the development in areas such as genetically modified foods, alternative energy sources, restrictions on the massive amounts of water wasted in developed countries, and improved desalination? Surely their are ways to overcome the overpopulation problem that don't involve the mass death of billions of innocent people.



posted on Aug, 22 2006 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Liquid Swords1
how about restrictions on the number of children in countries were it is necessary and the development in areas such as genetically modified foods, alternative energy sources, restrictions on the massive amounts of water wasted in developed countries, and improved desalination? Surely their are ways to overcome the overpopulation problem that don't involve the mass death of billions of innocent people.


Those would work.
The only problem is the majoirty of the human population
is'nt exactly intelligent, and let there religion, emotions and
distrust of science rule the vast amount of decisions that
are'nt easy for them.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join