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 justsomeboreddude
I think everyone who thinks there are too many people in the world should do the right thing and kill themselves to save the planet.
Originally posted by d2che
Maybe because we, the human race, all share the same planet and are entitled to live wherever which choose to?
Aren't humans a nomadic species by nature? Aren't we all immigrants to some extent? Shouldn't we be above petty namecalling and territorial pissing by now?
Originally posted by BigfootNZ
Originally posted by Animal
Not getting at you directly but heres the rub to me, I personally live on the outskirts of a small town, my neighbor is a farmer and from my backyard i can see most of the extent of his and a few other farmers properties out to the horizon... now guess what.
All that pasture (not sure of the size but the 3-4 farms it encompasses go out to at least 10x10 sqaure kilometers) for what amounts to around just 200 cows for producing milk and meat for the dairy industry... I mean you could easily build enough comfortable housing with a decent backyard for the kids and pets for at least 1000 families on that alone, with enough space for parks and community gardens to help support them to a degree to boot.
All i see from this is the high ups are using any old excuse to bring in depopulation, and unfortunately theyve found the green movement to be rather popular at the moment, which destroys any good the movement does. They kill two birds with one stone, give people the idea population reduction is for the best, and ruin any human shift to an environmentally friendly mindset by making it sound all crazy like.
In r/K selection theory, selective pressures are hypothesised to drive evolution in one of two generalized directions: r- or K-selection. These terms, r and K, are derived from standard ecological algebra, as illustrated in the simple Verhulst equation of population dynamics:
(REMOVED EQUATION - see link)
where r is the growth rate of the population (N)
and K is the carrying capacity of its local environmental setting.
Typically, r-selected species exploit empty niches, and produce many offspring, each of which has a relatively low probability of surviving to adulthood.
In contrast, K-selected species are strong competitors in crowded niches, and invest more heavily in fewer offspring, each of which has a relatively high probability of surviving to adulthood.
In the scientific literature, r-selected species are occasionally referred to as "opportunistic", while K-selected species are described as "equilibrium".
In areas of major ecological disruption or sterilisation (such as after a major volcanic eruption, as at Krakatoa or Mount Saint Helens), r- and K-strategists play distinct roles in the ecological succession that regenerates the ecosystem. Because of their higher reproductive rates and ecological opportunism, primary colonisers typically are r-strategists and they are followed by a succession of increasingly competitive flora and fauna. The ability of an environment to increase energetic content, through photosynthetic capture of solar energy, increases with the increase in complex biodiversity as r species proliferate to reach a peak possible with K strategies. Eventually a new equilibrium is approached (sometimes referred to as a climax community), with r-strategists gradually being replaced by K-strategists which are more competitive and better adapted to the emerging micro-environmental characteristics of the landscape. Typically, biodiversity is maximised at this stage, with introductions of new species resulting in the replacement and local extinction of endemic species.
Originally posted by 27jd
The earth has it's ways of dealing with over population, we don't need any government regulations regarding the size of families. How many were killed in that tsunami in a matter of minutes? I know it was in the hundreds of thousands range. One little earthquake in the middle of the ocean, and nobody knew what was coming quietly at over 500 mph. That's what nature does, it regulates. It uses tools like new viruses and asteroids. We will be depopulated sooner or later....
Originally posted by Animal
as a species we without a doubt MASSIVELY exceed the carrying capacity of the planet.
i agree, our population must be reduced in size for our species survival as well as the survival of many other species on the planet.
how this is to be achieved is what makes this diabolical or rational and good.
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Why is that so? because the elite, and some crazed environlunatics claim it is so?...
We have seen starting a few years back from "some" environlunatics claiming that there must be some kind of "depopulation in the world to save it", to now several environlunatics, and more and more environmentalists getting on the bandwagon believing this lie, and even the elite is now going along with the whole "let's save the planet by depopulating the world"...
Can people not see what all of this has been really about?