Nature alwasy found a way to balance things out, no matter what.
With dinosaurs, it was a meteor, with other pre-historic beasts, it was the ice age, I'm sure something will come along to even things out, no need for humans to intervene and throw other people's right away.

Well, Nature already tried a few things. For example, she blessed us with AIDS, which has been pretty effective knocking off people in Africa and South America who - due to a stupid religion or some other form of ignorance - don't use condoms. Unfortunately, mankind always thinks it knows better and our idiot leaders are pouring money down the drain trying to intervene.

What's so bad, I say, about a virus that efficiently cuts down junkies, deviants, backward foreigners and the poor? Especially one that pases through to their offspring?

[edit on 7-7-2008 by EverythingYouDespise]

Sure god/nature created Hitler . Look at the great job he did . You guys seems to have a common goal . He just happen to go after one race at a time .

I mean really . When does the "But our race is more useful" "There should be more of us"
"We deserve to have more kids than you"
Ect start ?
Do you really want to be the "figure" that takes on all these things? Neither does anyone else.

Personally i would like to see religious/stupid people sterilized. Is my argument going to be overlooked ? If so why?

Even tho i agree that something needs to be done . It wont . China is the only place i know of that has taken steps to safegaurd against MORE over population . Look at how great that is going .

Anything related to "PC" is going to be related to these horrible things .
Unless we can sterilize the stupid . Were doomed.


[edit on 7-7-2008 by d11_m_na_c05]

Originally posted by eradown


The odds for life are not good to begin with. At any moment all life in this planet could be wiped out by asteroid.

true

Originally posted by eradownIt is only through the benevolence of a higher power that life exists at all.

you have some proof of this?



they say that the US population is slowing down. well, that is fine and dandy but i wonder just who has the bigger "effective footprint", a US citizen who consumes 100x what he/she should or a citizen from kenya born 10'th child who's on the brink of starvation.

which one taxes the environment more?

Talk about colonizing other planets or the moon? How about being realistic?
The Earth is at present overpopulated. Those miles and miles of nothing out West are not fit places to live. Again you are being unrealistic. Don’t believe me – go try it. Let me know how you make out.

How does anyone figure that everyone has a “right” to reproduce?
Exactly why should people with heritable defects be allowed to reproduce?
Passing on defects should be regarded as child abuse.
Why should mental defectives be allowed to reproduce?
Why should the poor who cannot afford to raise a child be allowed to reproduce?
This is just another way to force others to pay for its upbringing – and there go your precious rights to enjoy the fruit of your labors.

What is so great about “being here”. What if you were never born? Would you know? Would you care?

Why do you who want 12 billion people in the world only talk about food?
How about waste management? How about disposing of the 3 pounds of so bodily waste produced by each of those 12 billion people? We can’t even dispose of what we have now. This is part of why ALL of our waterways are polluted. Septic tanks in areas that use them are contaminated the private water wells in the area. Sewage plant cannot handle all the waste that they receive and the overage is let out into the oceans and rivers.

Come on folks – get real. Think in terms of mountains of human feces. Tell me what do you plan on doing with it?

It seems that the problem with allowing the human population to just expand until disease/war/famine sort it out ignores a deeper problem. We have such a grip on this planet that our excesses are destroying beautiful animal species, as well as the more commercially interesting bacterium that are being deprived from our pharmaceuticals by increasingly destroying natural habitat for humans. It seems to me that we need to decide between destroying the rest of the species on the planet and behaving with some human responsibility. No animal in history has come close to the position that we have, and if we do not control our population, we are failing our duties to the planet that spawned us amongst other life forms.

[edit on 7-7-2008 by redled]

Originally posted by redled
It seems that the problem with allowing the human population to just expand until disease/war/famine sort it out ignores a deeper problem. We have such a grip on this planet that our excesses are destroying beautiful animal species, as well as the more commercially interesting bacterium that are being deprived from our pharmaceuticals by increasingly destroying natural habitat for humans.

[edit on 7-7-2008 by redled]

You believe this because an environmentalist told you this. The concerns of environmentalists seem to dove tail in the United States with big bussiness. It is not uncommon for environmentalists to move in on area have it declared a protected zone which forces people to sell the land at below market rates to the government and then once it is owned by the government it is sold to private developers.

Get real people. If you check out the people who support phony socialist evironmentalist scams, you find out they are the same people running the big companies. Many of them come from the same families and they went to the same schools. Dig a little further and you discover that they are all racists to the bone. They do not support population control because they want to save a rare bacteria ; they support population control because think people who are not like themselves deserve to die.

I am not worried because the Mexicans are not and will not be drinking this poisoned coolaid. If the people responsible for this depopulation agenda do not stop they will be very rudely sent back to where they came from by Hispanics. The American hemisphere will not be repopulated by there kind ever.



[edit on 7-7-2008 by eradown]

Originally posted by eradown

Originally posted by redled
It seems that the problem with allowing the human population to just expand until disease/war/famine sort it out ignores a deeper problem. We have such a grip on this planet that our excesses are destroying beautiful animal species, as well as the more commercially interesting bacterium that are being deprived from our pharmaceuticals by increasingly destroying natural habitat for humans.

[edit on 7-7-2008 by redled]

You believe this because an environmentalist told you this. The concerns of environmentalists seem to dove tail in the United States with big bussiness.


[edit on 7-7-2008 by eradown]

lol, I am the environmentalist that told me this. I'm not going to take you out on Penecillin (because I can't even spell it), rather big business. I suspect you believe that Exxon-Mobil when they say they are being advanced by compressing gas (it's 'liquified technology') that they are doing something for the environment. They are not, and people with increasing information work out which companies are not. I hate environmental dove tailing, but I don't use it as an argument against this planet.

Originally posted by Question
Nature alwasy found a way to balance things out, no matter what.
With dinosaurs, it was a meteor, with other pre-historic beasts, it was the ice age, I'm sure something will come along to even things out, no need for humans to intervene and throw other people's right away.

Yes, but wouldn't it be nice if we could kerb the problem in advance so that some of the human race can survive, rather than Mother Nature having to wipe us all out like the dinosaurs?

To those people claiming that "there's plenty of land left":

- Where do you think the oxygen to support 18 billion people is going to come from when all those forests have been cut down and all that vegetation drowned in concrete?
- Where will wildlife thrive? Where will the vital food chain be preserved?
- Can food be grown on that land? If not, how will the world's existing arable land supply those extra billions of people with food?
- Where are the cattle who provide meat going to graze?
- Where are the bees going to pollenate, undisturbed?
- What about all the extra billions of tonnes of waste and pollution produced? More landfill? Where?

As I try to argue so often, it's not a simple case of filling up all the empty space with people. Nature doesn't work that way. You can't literally crowd every square mile on the planet with people because it takes an enormous amount of relatively untouched land to support - not only the human race, but the world's wildlife.

Originally posted by mullet35
there is already population control in this world its called the united states government by way of straight out war or by undermining governments around the world causing unrest and the deaths of thousands of people

Yes, all the problems for the world are because of the USA
And if you are Australian, then you are even stupider then I thought because, guess what, you have fought side by side with the USA and Briton and every major conflict of the last 100 years (and that includes invading Iraq)...

So you are as responsible as the USA. Nice logic though

Originally posted by Izarith

When I get looked down at I only feel terrible if I did something wrong. If I did nothing wrong then I just look up at them and say “Wow your tallllll”.

# off.



[edit on 8-7-2008 by Anti-Tyrant]