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.

 

Science chief: cut birthrate to save Earth

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by RetinoidReceptor
I believe the world needs to do what China has done and force a one child policy on the people.


Well within the specific context of global warming, China is one of the worst contributors. Check out the big brown cloud that has formed over their land.

Clearly popullation control is only one piece of the sollution.




posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

Trust me, the way things are going more and more people are going to see "depopulation" as a good way to "save the Earth"... Some people will make up any excuses to accept such a policy/ideology, but of course, none of them will be the first ones to volunteer to "save the Earth' in this manner....


Actually I have already made a pact that I will have no more then 3 children... hopefully just 2, the third will be an attempt to have a girl/boy (assuming the first 2 were not boy/girl). It's not one kid, but it's still less then many traditional families.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 04:12 PM
link   
I pick naturally, through disease and famine, as it is happening now. There will always be those who are starving, and if humanity overpopulates, natural factors will curb population growth. It's sad, and I endorse charity, but you can't pretend that we're immune to nature.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by AcesInTheHole

I just can't believe people openly discuss population reduction, as if it's a good thing. It makes you wonder why they are pushing the global warming agenda so agressivly on us.



I strongly feel, based on my readings over the years, that overpopulation is the cause for many many problems in the world. However, I am not going to tag global warming to it per se, although, naturally, over popullation is a huge contributor... if not just in an indirect sense.

I really don't understand why most of you guys seem to be against this


Suggesting families limit their size is no where near the atrocity that is genocide. Or hell, what about China hammering spikes into the heads of newborn babies that are not licensed to be born? I think you guys are attributing too much extra thought to this scientists 'suggestion'.

[edit on 24-7-2007 by Cloak and Dagger]



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 04:28 PM
link   


I really don't understand why most of you guys seem to be against this


Neither do I... but, one day, when they, or their children are forced to fight for their meal, cause there are simply too many people to fit in any usable farmland, and fresh water is next to impossible to find... they will look back in frustration and wonder why somebody didn't do something to stop this...

the answer is, we tried. but YOU got in the way.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
It's only through massive increases in agricultural productivity the world is able to support the massive population we have now, and we're beginning to run into the law of diminishing returns where that is concerned.


Vertical farming is a good way to increase agricultural productivity in heavily populated areas, without taking up much space. Maybe if we spent more time trying to fix energy and hunger problems we wouldn't be so worryied about people multiplying.

www.verticalfarm.com...


Originally posted by Johnmike
I pick naturally, through disease and famine, as it is happening now. There will always be those who are starving, and if humanity overpopulates, natural factors will curb population growth. It's sad, and I endorse charity, but you can't pretend that we're immune to nature.


I agree, we can make things better, but there will always be famine and hunger to deal with.

Also, I think something not mentioned much here yet is the fact that population control relies on the death rate as well as the birth rate. How long before they start killing us off to fix the problems with their birth rate equations?

To those who recommend population control: What do you think the penalty should be if someone has more children than is allowed?



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 02:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by AcesInTheHole
infowars.com

by improving contraception, education and healthcare - we will stop the world's population reaching its current estimated limit of between eight and 10 billion
(visit the link for the full news article)



What a dolt! He does not seem to have his oars in the water. Improving healthcare will extend life not shorten it.



My two cents would be lets get rid of the scientists claimng global warning is causing all the problems by spewing hot air like this.


[edit on 7/23/2007 by shots]

Research shows that where there is better health care there is a lower birthrate DUH! Now who's the dolt. It is also exceedingly obvious why, if you think about it........



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by malcr
Research shows that where there is better health care there is a lower birthrate DUH! Now who's the dolt. It is also exceedingly obvious why, if you think about it........

Well, seeing how you make useless claims about what "research shows" without posting what it is you're talking about...

Well, you can see who the rambling dolt really is, can't you? Making claims without backing them up only makes you seem like a nitwit.



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 03:47 AM
link   
It sure is funny to me how no one even takes notice of the other option available to us currently. We can start prepping manned missions to other worlds, and colonize them. If we can live in spaceships, we can live on other worlds that are similar in gravity strength and temperature ranges. Mars is one such place. The gravity there is slightly less than it is here, but we could learn to compensate for that. And the temperatures there, at their highest, reach nearly the freezing point of water.

Should we manage to colonize another world, we'd then have TWO worlds to fill up with people. There would then be an employment boom, since we'd need people to work on the other planet, people to manufacture the parts/supplies that will be needed on the journey there, as well as after they land. Not to mention, we'll also need more people to be searching for other locations to start inhabiting. Did I also mention that we'll need people to actually inhabit those locations?

The universe is out there for a reason you all, and it's not just to kick back and stare at. While I know she's perty and all, she's designed for us to go out and explore. We DO have what it takes. We have the drive, the stamina, and the will to do so. We've proven that we have the ability to go, so what's holding us up? Oh wait, we're too busy looking inward, trying to solve a problem that would solve itself if we'd just open our eyes a bit more. It's been staring all of us in the face for a long time. We just need to embrace it before this world embraces us with extermination.

TheBorg



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 04:26 AM
link   
if the scientists had kept up with the information

which Billy Meier passed on to mankind
from his 'Pleiadian' Contacts, since the 1950s...

they would have known that over population was a focal point
in the warnings given earthmen by the 'Plejaren' benefactors

hit your search engine & you'll find warnings & forecasts
of impending doom given to Meier & the 3 prophecys predicted



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 05:33 AM
link   
Theborg, the idea of colonising new worlds is so far just pure sci-fi. If you want to rely on such to save our world then you might be in for a cruel future
So far we have have 1 planet (mars) that might be habitable with huge effort of work. We haven't even found another planet besides that and even if we would there would be no way of travel.
I dont think we have the technology to move out of this planet before the overpopulation crisis strikes.

[edit on 25/7/2007 by PsykoOps]



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 05:34 AM
link   
Regardless of what any prophet says, we can do this. Why we're not speaks much louder than anything else.

TheBorg



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
We haven't even found another planet besides that and even if we would there would be no way of travel.
I dont think we have the technology to move out of this planet before the overpopulation crisis strikes.

[edit on 25/7/2007 by PsykoOps]


The same could have been said for those first setting out in boats for the first time, over a horizon into the unknown. They didn't know what was beyond that point, but by their creators, they were going to find out. And they did. Will we lose some? Damn right we will. But anything worth anything is worth a little loss. I'd love to be one of the first to go if I could, but my situation won't let me. I'm not qualified to go.

Besides, we have spaceships that can handle that kind of travel. We're just not pushing ourselves to do what's required. I think that given 20 years, and about 4 Trillion dollars, we could accomplish it, give or take a trill.

Just my opinions, mind you..

TheBorg



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 08:12 AM
link   
Going on a boat to look for new land versus going into space to look for habitable planets cannot be compared imho. If you randomly start heading into space the changes of you ending up somewhere worthy are almost non-existent. We'd have to first find a planet with our technology, like we have found many exo-planets and then we probably would need a probes data to see if you can even send anyone there. Planets other than our own solar systems are too far for human travel though.
We have technology to travel to mars, true but we dont have what it needs to make it habitable. Well the techonology might exist but the knowledge is lacking since we still dont know how much ice there might be etc.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 02:42 AM
link   
Everything we need to survive exists on Mars. How do I know this? There's poles there that have enough ice to support human habitation for as long as we'll be there. Now, we'll have to live inside of makeshift environments until we can get the atmosphere warmed up enough, and filled with enough O2 to breathe, but we can manage it. I don't know why you think it's not possible right now. Everything we need is right here, not being used.

What's holding us up, aside from the lack of motivation?

TheBorg



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg
The universe is out there for a reason you all, and it's not just to kick back and stare at. While I know she's perty and all, she's designed for us to go out and explore. We DO have what it takes. We have the drive, the stamina, and the will to do so.


I agree, and there will come a time, even though it's far off, that we will have to leave this planet. It's a fact that earth won't be here forever, it's just a matter of how long it takes people to realize it.

As for the population control, if you allow governments to manipulate the birthrate, who's to say they won't manipulate the deathrate as they please?(war, biological outbreaks, etc)



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Suggesting families limit their size is no where near the atrocity that is genocide. Or hell, what about China hammering spikes into the heads of newborn babies that are not licensed to be born? I think you guys are attributing too much extra thought to this scientists 'suggestion'.


Ah but this is ATS, any excuse to drag out those creaky old bandwagons that make more noise than sense.

I have major problems with the idea of child rearing as a God given right as I have with driving without a licence or taking a swipe at someone because they just annoy me at it's human nature to act on our feelings.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg

What's holding us up, aside from the lack of motivation?

TheBorg


Resources. We currently don't have the know-how or technology to build the large amount of "boats" needed to transport mass amounts of people across the cosmos.

Sure we might have the tech to send a few men to mars but thats a far stretch from sending large amounts of people there and making it habitable for them.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 02:09 PM
link   
We don't have the ability for space travel right now but that's fine. It doesn't mean that will always be the case. Look at how much the world has changed in the past 100 years. Who knows where we will be 500 years from now.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 02:38 PM
link   
By that time the overpopulation crisis has probably made it's worst impact on the world



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join