Is the earth really over populated?

I think we're overpopulated with ignorant and lazy people who live off their government and really have only one true gift, and that's making babies they can't afford.

So you mean Obama supporters?

reply to post by xweaponx


No-one knows. There is no evidence for it, just some paranoid rantings folks collate into one massive over-arching nefarious plan. The aims are not clear, the players change depending on who you ask, the outcome also changes depending who and when you ask.

It's just one more baseless conspiracy theory paranoid folks like to trot out to explain why things suck and will get worse.

reply to post by SGSPatriot


I hope that was a joke, otherwise you are most likely going to get reported to the mods...

So there is 6 billion acres in australia? I have no idea, but that claim seems to be a bit "out there". I'm sure we can look to find out how many acres that is. But 1 acre isn't that much land really, so maybe.

I think all the people who think the world is too crowded should volunteer to "leave". Somehow, I doubt these peoples thoughts of a less populated world include them as being one of the ones who are gone.

I don't think the world is overpopulated. I just think we are overpopulated in ignorant people. Which is actually easier to fix than killing off the population.

reply to post by xweaponx


Every human being on the planet would fit into Jacksonville, Fla county. This has been mathematically shown and proven. So no the Earth is NOT and can not become overpopulated. The problem arises not from the land available but from the food available or how much food can the earth produce. I believe that this too is not a problem and that the earth can provide for as much as 100 times as many people as we have today.

Humankind will need two planets by 2030 to keep up with its demands for goods and to make space for surging populations. This is according to the influential WWF Living Planet Report 2008, which warns that humanity is consuming the resources provided by Earth's natural systems much too fast.

SOURCE

so to answer the question, YES.

reply to post by badmedia


Australia Surface Area

7686.85 thousands sq. km
Source (www.cia.gov...[/u rl])

7686.85 sq. km = 1899454 acres

World Population
([url=http://www.ibiblio.org/lunarbin/worldpop]http://www.ibiblio.org/lunarbin/worldpop)

Population = 6857224225

Surface Area / Population

= 2.77 acres per person



[edit on 4/11/08 by WatchNLearn]

Originally posted by WatchNLearn
reply to post by badmedia

 

Australia Surface Area

7686.85 thousands sq. km
Source (www.cia.gov...[/u rl])

7686.85 sq. km = 1,899,454 acres

World Population
([url=http://www.ibiblio.org/lunarbin/worldpop]http://www.ibiblio.org/lunarbin/worldpop)

Population = 6,857,224,225

Surface Area / Population

= 2.77 acres per person

Umm, how is it possible that 6 billion people can get 2.77 acres of land, in an area that has only 2 million acres? That can't be right. Would it not require a minimum of 6 billion acres to give each person only 1 acre?

The video that I posted in this thread was where the "all the population in the world in Australia" information came from.

Global Non Complicance! Fight the NWO!

I think its in the 3rd part.

reply to post by xweaponx

If you divide the land mass on equal parts, each person would be allocated and live on 5.4 acres of land. Not bad, but there is a huge difference between having your land located in Wiltshire, England and somewhere in Sahara Desert. So if if you consider equally dividing only productive land, then every person would live on 1.9 acres of land without suffering from malnutrition.

Since the productive land is disappearing and world population is growing, the overpopulation should take place in the future, all depending on the rate of increase in the population and the rate the good land is disappearing. But at this moment, 1.9 acres for one person is more than enough in a global sense.