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: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Here's an interesting video, Steven Colbert talking about the illuminati depopulating the world. The audience seems to think it's all a joke.

I'd bet many people would be unpleasantly surprised if they had a clue of what's really going on.


Originally posted by Golack

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.


I don't think the problem is resources, I think our problem is our priorities.




posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by AcesInTheHole
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.


How are we to know if it's far off or not? For all we know, there's a killer asteroid on a collision course with us at this very moment, due to hit us inside of 2 years. The point here should be that if we have any desire at all to save ourselves from the same fate as that of the dinosaurs, then we need to make it a priority to get off this rock and into the ever-expanding universe, before we're left behind.



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)


As an aside here, what makes you think that they aren't already doing this?

TheBorg



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by AcesInTheHole
I don't think the problem is resources, I think our problem is our priorities.


I'll have to second that motion. We are sitting on literally the best minds that this world has to offer, and what are we doing with them? We're holding them back from making the impact that they could make if they were given a chance to try. Resources are plentiful, we just need to get ourselves in the right mindset to get things rolling. We CAN do this, if we all come together with the same intent in mind. We can do anything that we put our minds to.

It just comes down to how badly do we want it? Can we do it in a timely manner? I think so. Given about 10 years, if we started now, we could be on our way with, ohh... I'd estimate about 50 people at a time. We could even have rapid turnaround time on new shuttles being produced to send others out. It's quite feasible if we'd just DO it already.

Again I ask, what's holding us up? Cause it certainly isn't resources.

TheBorg



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 07:46 PM
link   
The problem is we have been living on borrowed time there hasn't been a population bottleneck, not enough catastrophes, one major one outta do it, then those who survive will need to breed like bunnies. Problem solved.





[edit on 26-7-2007 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Too lazy to read the whole thread BUT I think this is a really rotten idea. The human race is already on a "going-out-of-business curve", in fact, I think I'll start a new thread on this soon. Some even predict that with current trends in birthrate, homo sapiens will be gone by 2400 or 3000. This idiot wants to speed that up!!!

I say we should instead focus on more efficient technology to conserve resources.

"Preference for fewer children; if developed world demographics are extrapolated they mathematically lead to 'soft' extinction before 3000 AD. (John Leslie estimates that if the reproduction rate drops to the German level the extinction date will be 2400[6])."

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg

Originally posted by AcesInTheHole
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)


As an aside here, what makes you think that they aren't already doing this?


I'm sure that this happens all the time. The problem is there is very little hard evidence to support this. They just aren't so open and friendly with that information. At least not until everyone's "on board" with their population control plan. Then it will be seen as "necessary" because we will all die if we don't start killing people.

This is why population control will be tough to accept: No where nearly enough people care enough about this planet enough to actually want to change their lives in a major way. It's just hard to change an entire planets views on such matters, because we will all be dead by the time these things actually affect our planet. Major change usually only happens when we are literally forced to as a people, wether it be by nature or government.

It just seems like more people are talking about global warming these days, when in fact it's just the same amount of people, only talking louder.

I'd rather die on a dieing planet than tell one of my friends or family that they have to give up their 3rd child because the government said they had to.

With that being said, I do hope people stop damaging our environment, but earth is tough, and so is life, and I highly doubt it will end for us anytime soon.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Nature takes care of itself. For example, mankind can never render itself infallible against any particular disease. SARS is a good recent example of a pandemic where people around the world were once again coming face to face with the possibility of a massive culling of the human race. In terms of global history, the Industrial Revolution happened only yesterday, complete with its promises of technological and economic progress - and replete with the inherent dangers - or innovations if you want to look at it from that perspective. Chemicals, factories, the growth of worker's slums. And now we're living in a world where cities are once again desperately trying to deal with huge masses of people living and working in "smaller" spaces. Cities are growing and planners are working feverishly to accommodate them in terms of living space, green space and transit. We can't get away from the basic facts, there is an argument that there are too many people on Earth right now for what's likely ahead. Global warming was here decades ago, yet only now do we wake up and smell the coffee and start trying to do something about it. And what of all the new pollutions rendered into our environment over the past decades? The Earth's ionosphere/atmosphere and oceans have been puked on for so long now I can't imagine it's not ailing in ways we can't even begin to understand at this stage. But we will. And soon. Strap yourself in for some weird # coming this way. Nature is in charge, not mankind. Nature will tear its way through the human race if it needs to.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 01:04 PM
link   
I have to wonder what is wrong with the phreaks who object to limiting the population, and even reducing it by atrition.


YOu seem to take it as a personal threat. Why?


THINK!! And then tell me EXACTLY why we need 10 billion people on this planet. HOW will this benefit the Earth? HOW will this benefit YOU??


YOu talk about food and rescourses, BUT - NO ONE ever considers the amount of garbage and feces that must be disposed of. Oh horros! You have to think about that? Yes you do!


ALL our waterways including the oceans are polluted with human and animal feces in various states of decay. Unfortunately much of it does not decay fast enough. That is why beaches get closed when bacteria count reaches a certain level. That is why, even in "pristine" looking areas, like in the mountain wilderness, those pure looking streams contain enough bacteria to kill you.


Overflow from septic tanks is seeping into Florida's aquafer. If you want cleaner water you have to drill a well 600 feet or more deep!

Maybe you don't mind drinking the filtered sewage that comes out of your faucets laced with deadly chemicals. I mind. I have a deep well.

Oh, and why sterilize the mother of the 20 children. If the family was Mormon there were likely several mothers. I say sterilize the both the father and the mothers.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 01:09 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.

infowars.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


Actually, I think he's absolutely correct. Reducing the world's birth rate IS the only logical way of reducing the damage we are doing to the planet. I think it's crazy to expect the planet to be able to sustain exponentially larger, and larger human populations when it's unable to deal with what is already here in terms of numbers. It's simple logic really...

J.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 01:12 PM
link   





'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'

Heheh...they already do
I believe they call it 'War'.

J.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Too lazy to read the whole thread BUT I think this is a really rotten idea. The human race is already on a "going-out-of-business curve", in fact, I think I'll start a new thread on this soon. Some even predict that with current trends in birthrate, homo sapiens will be gone by 2400 or 3000. This idiot wants to speed that up!!!


Yes, but the whole point of this research is that if we DON'T reduce population levels - the human race will become extinct by these dates. If you reduce the rates, you reduce the chances of extinction. If you do nothing - then yes, extinction is probably inevitable. I think you're interpretating the conclusions of this research incorrectly


J.

Mod Edit: Please follow the quoting guidelines

[edit on 7/29/07 by FredT]



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 11:42 PM
link   
The current world population is supported by the change from horse power to machine powered farm cultivation. Something the gentleman from 300 years ago probably couldn't have imagined. At this point there would not appear to be a similar improvement to agriculture in the future (meaning the easy fix of tilling more land with less labor). Other fixes like genetically engineered crops, chemical fertilization, and irrigation, have their own pitfalls and limitations.
You can wear out farmland just like any other resource. Some people don't realize it.

Folks that cringe at the thought of population control need to look at the overall impact that doubling the population will have on the Earth.
First you have to feed them all...
You have to house them all...
You have to deal with all their waste products...
You have to use additional resources to provide them with all the kinds of gizmos and crap we have now.

Some people get it in mind that all we have to do is grow more food and build more houses. Problem is we are already building more houses... on the land that was growing food. Which puts more pressure on the land thats still growing food. It just wont work out in a sustainable way.

Never fear though, between mother earth and politicians we will always have a certain amount of control on the human race.

I'm with TheBorg about the need for us to head for space but it wont solve the crisis on the ground. The numbers are too great, right now the population rises about 6 million a month.

www.census.gov...

So even if you constructed a city sized spacestation of a million units, you would need 6 a month to keep the population even... right now. And those people will be breeding on board as well... just too many. Without breakthroughs in space elevator tech or antigravity propulsion just getting 6 million people off the Earth a month would drain resources in no time.


Foolish humans... go back to sleep and await your fate.


[edit on 29-7-2007 by Axxis]



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 11:49 PM
link   
No, Jimbo, you're reading the research wrong...THERE IS NO REALISTIC CHANCE OF HUMAN EXTINCTION FROM DEPLETION OF RESOURCES. However, if people don't reproduce at or above replacement rate, extinction is inevitable.

The researcher I am quoting is concerned about voluntary infertility. He is not, as far as I am aware, concerned about depletion of resources.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 01:46 AM
link   
I have had enough of this criticism of people on welfare.

Some you are sounding like a bunch of elitists snobs. Do any you know what its like to be homeless ? To Be truly hungry ?

My wife works as a nurses aid taking care of Alzheimer's patients who's own families don't wont to be bothered with them. I stay at home and take care of our to kids because we both believe that children need a stay at home parent. So don't even begin to flame me because I put raising my kids to be first and foremost.

And guess what we are on HUD housing. And why is that ?

How about because this society decided that some person who sits on there butt all day in front of a computer is worth more then a person who take care of another human being who can not take care of them selves.

Since I am poor I must be stupid. So could some tell me how a person like Paris Hilton is worth more money then my wife ?

Paris Hilton does not give any thing to society, be she has more value then my wife, and my kids ?

Do any of you know what its like to be on HUD housing ?

Did you know my wife would have to make almost double what she makes now just to afford the rent of our supposed low rent apartment building ?

Did you know that my wife barely make over minimum wage. She takes care of another human being and a Wal-Mart grunt makes almost as much as she does.

And get this HUD housing won't let her get a raise. If she even gets a $1 more an hour, HUD will drop us like a bad habit. And then were back on the street.

My wife loves helping take care of people and is working as a nurses aid plus taking classes to become a full fledge nurse, and she still treated like garbage because her family is on welfare.

So after all of that you want me to accept some pencil pushers idea on how my wife and I should live our lives and let alone if we should be allowed to have more kids or not ?

How about this, instead of making life harder on the poor people. How about you smart people figure a way to colonize space instead of trying to keep me from ever being a Grandfather.

Why the heck does a man who plays a game for a living make millions of dollars and gets to be called a hero. But a family of four just trying to survive is called a burden on the environment ?




posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   
I started a parallel thread a few weeks ago about this overpoplution problem a few weeks looking at it with a little bit of an alien perspective. I think what needs to done is what the aliens have been doing for a long time now, and that is collecting sperm and ovulae, seeds and microorganisms and cryogenitically deepfreezing them as a safe guard, a sort of noahs ark collection. Just wait in about 15 years from now when we reach 10billion, it will be unreal how much in a bad mess we will in.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 08:31 PM
link   
I agree in population reduction, and, global warming and mans rape of the earth is very real the info is out there if you look How strange that in Australia where I live the government pays you $6000 for having a child and also plenty of other family benefits.. I got $950 this financial year for 1 dependant, and yes I work...so we aussies are on the increase..damned if i can understand it??



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 08:37 PM
link   
what many people forget is that in many countries more people are dieing than are being born. Most of the new population comes from immigrants in those places.

Also what happens if you limit the birth of new people. The ratio of young to old will be drastically leaning to the old population.Then their will be many more old people than new and possibly not enough people who can work to support the whole country. Look at China for example.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by elleaquarius
I agree in population reduction, and, global warming and mans rape of the earth is very real the info is out there if you look.




Mans rape of the planet ?

I don't know about you. But me personally. I have done nothing to rape the planet. And I'm guessing if your not a big time corporate CEO you have done nothing either.

Maybe it should rich peoples rape of the planet.

At this point in my life I am no longer on the side of the environmentalist.

Why you may ask ?

Because I'm tired the environmentalist constantly nagging at the everyday person.

Its not the everyday person dumping benzine into parks were kids play.

Its not the everyday person dumping old bio-weapons into the ocean.


Oh and by way. If let a bunch " intellectuals " decide what the right number of people is for the planet. I can almost guarantee you the next thing they will decide is who is fit and not fit to have children. And then they will decide who is fit to live and who should die.

Just ask a Nazi. They knew all about eugenics. Because that seems to be what some of you want.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Personally I believe a lot more than just global warming is at stake if the the human overpopulation problem is not solved soon. For example just look at whats going on in madagascar, in 50 years they destroyed 90 percent of the wildlife habitat, polar bears are drowning because the ice shelf is receding, the amozonian rain forests being cut down like theres no tommorow, 320 blue whales left, and we could go on and on. Now in my thread I avoided to talk about solutions because of the main problem being different countries in the world would have to come together and abide by rules set in solving this problem. So lets take madagascar for example, what if there is some world regulation on wildlife conservation and population control, and they dont abide and continue with disregard. What do you do about it. Obviously you cant just run in with the military, sanctions usually dont work, so what kind of disiplinary action can be taken, to tell you the truth I havent got a clue. Its going to take a lot of guts for a scientific community to start proposing solutions one way or the other. I remember back in the early 80s I read an article in omni magazine that according to calculations at the time 3billion was the number of what the world population shoud be in order to remain in harmony with this planets ecosystem. I truly believe its the worlds greatest problem and a solution must be found, because if we can find a solution, the rewards for the far future of humanity in our galaxy will be great. Like my thread on this subject, it surprises me to see so few replies to this very important issue.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarkMile77
I don't know about you. But me personally. I have done nothing to rape the planet. And I'm guessing if your not a big time corporate CEO you have done nothing either.



Because I'm tired the environmentalist constantly nagging at the everyday person.


I agree very much, dark
I recycle, I don't "rape" the planets resources, why should I pay a price for others' wrong doing, especially greedy corporations? The only time corporations go "green" is when they can spin it to make themselves look better, earning them more profits in the end.


Oh and by way. If let a bunch " intellectuals " decide what the right number of people is for the planet. I can almost guarantee you the next thing they will decide is who is fit and not fit to have children. And then they will decide who is fit to live and who should die.


Well said, if we open the flood gates now there will be no telling what they could take control of in the future. Although they don't talk about things like this now, population control brings us one step closer to ideas such as the one you metioned here.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join