It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by memyself
Your answer to overpopulation seems to be believing in Star Trek. You seem to think we can rely on science, and then suggest we use science in ways beyond our ability to.
"When he demand of wood exceeds that available, you use these genes to make fast growing trees. When the o2 demand exceeds that available, you make trees that have more leaves and o2 output."
Well, there are trees that grow faster than others, and I am sure some cross-hybridization can help this, but there's still a limit to how fast we can get trees to grow, and if we've over-populated the earth and changed the climate so large areas are now arid, there will be less room to plant any forests. Finally, no matter what our genetic science, there will be an upper limit to how much O2 one tree or one forest can produce. This is a limited answer at best, and possibly no answer at all.
"So you see, there's this awesome little thing in nature called evolution. And evolution allows things to change."
Sometimes things don't change until after a big extinction event. You are right, but it doesn't mean we aren't the next dinosaur or dodo.
"And there's also this awesome thing called space. Space happens to have other orbs just like the one we are on with resources just like what we have, with oxygen, just like what we have, and water, just like what we have."
No, in our current understanding, space has NO other 'orbs' like earth. Venus is too hot with a poisonous, crushing atmosphere. Mars is 0 farenheit on a summer day without enough air pressure to breath or terraform. Beyond Mars it gets even colder and the closest star will take centuries to reach in spacecraft our grandchildren won't have the technology to build.
You are looking for a deus ex machina. I'd rather look for a solution in reality, which may mean encouraging more people to buy a rubber and take the pill.
Originally posted by OhZone
To all you folks who want to have as many children as you want--(5+?)
I want you to consider that
we have a huge problem disposing of garbage
and disposing of sewage (feces etc)
Now then, if you can put a limit on the amount of garbage and the amount of feces that your children produce so that the oceans do not become open sewers........
Do the logistics and get back to me.
Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by thegreatone
"There should be a limit on the amount of children ANY family can have. Until we start colonizing space this should be a high priority."
Please Explain to me how such a thing will work.
Originally posted by itinerantseeker
Originally posted by pynner
Originally posted by sos37
Originally posted by pikypiky
It doesn’t matter if environmentalist or TPTB suggest that two children per family is the limit. Bottomline: If babies are not wanted and the family cannot afford to take care of more babies and if making more babies entitle baby makers welfare, then yeah no more than two is a good start.
Would you like to hear a real horror story? Okay, picture this:
'A woman, pregnant with her third child, is reported by one of her neighbors because she has made public comments about how she refuses to get an abortion and this conflicts with the two-child rule.
So while this woman is out and about, she is stopped by armed military men who usher her into a waiting vehicle. She is forced unconcious in the vehicle. She awakens, some time later, in a government-run hospital bed. She tries to get up but a sharp pain runs through her belly-area. She looks down and notices bandages and pads and some blood. She freaks out and the machines hooked up to her begin to beep loudly. A nurse enters and the woman begins to scream "What happened to my baby!?"
The nurse injects her with a shot of tranquilizer and then informs her that because of the law, her child was forcibly removed as per government mandate. '
Yeah, that's a worst-case scenario, but how's this: enact such a law and what will it be - receiving mail from the local government informing you or your wife to report to the nearest "enviromental care by birth suppression" facility? What happens to women who resist? Prison and forced abortions?
Or what about a proactive solution - does the government require that a woman's uterus be removed after the second child is born so there is no chance of a third conception?
You still think that's a good start? I don't.
yeah.. or not.
this is the kind of non-sense that stops constructive conversation.
what if? what if? what if?
Actually, this isn't a what if scenario. It's funny how this possiblity, which would likely happen if population control were to happen here, makes you suddenly claim the conversation has ceased being constructive. You think this scenario is non sense? They do this kind of thing in China, in fact if the government finds out you have child number two they will do said things in the other post, but the only difference, they don't knock you out, they'll just do a forced abortion, kickin and screamin. Parent says something, bullet in the head. If the second child is born, there have been eyewitness accounts that they'll just come out and kill the baby. Not a what if, it's a reality. A reality that this could happen everywhere, even in the states.
Oh btw, I notice in your posts that you tend to us stupid a lot and that people need to be educated. Must be nice on your little self made pedestal and it must be nice that you can never make a mistake. Must be great to be so infallible!
Originally posted by Alternative
My goal in life is to have 5 children. Im 24 and so far have 0 of my own. My fiance has one from a previous relationship.
Theres very little point of suggesting such things as 2 children per couple. maybe a country can say that, but to think the whole world is going to follow suit? Never.
Ultimately my only purpose in life is to reproduce. If these "green" people want us to have less children then I suggest they have no children. Allowing for others to have more kids. as to balance out the statistics.
Originally posted by DrumsRfun
In a world with 4 billion people I wonder why people have kids to begin with.
Why not adopt??
Having kids seems like a selfish decision in my opinion.