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.

 

Overpopulation Makes No Sense!

page: 1
70
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+40 more 
posted on May, 31 2009 @ 06:36 AM
link   
Overpopulation doesn't make sense. Anyone who thinks the world's overpopulated needs to sit down and do some research.

The world has grown from around 790 million people in 1750 to about 7 billion by 2009. (look it up)

en.wikipedia.org...

So the world has grown by about 9 times since 1750. During those times I'm pretty sure their "scientists" and "experts" thought that the world's population was too big, and therefore "bad" for the earth.

They didn't have the technology we have today, so back then food and other such stuff were limited. Today, genetics as well as meat, chicken, etc manufacturing companies take care of the food, and people go to places such as stop and shop to get their food.

Today, people are once again saying the world's population is too big, and therefore "bad" for the earth and our environment.

Now look at it this way. China (1.3 billion) and India (1.15 billion) combined have a population of 2.45 billion people.

This is about a third of the entire world's population.

China (3,600,927 sq miles) and India (1,147,949 sq miles) only take up 4,748,876 sq miles).

www.cylist.com...

Land covers 29.22 percent of the Earth's surface. This is about 57.5 million square miles.

Russia takes up 6,593,852 sq miles and has a population of only 141 million.

Now look at this logically.

Russia ALONE has about 2 million MORE sq miles than China and India COMBINED. And it only has about 6% of China and India's population.

This would mean that Russia ALONE can sustain about 3 Billion people!

Now imagine the entire world's land mass of 57.5 million square miles!

So now some "problems" people say you run into with a population that big:

1)Not enough food-
I would like to say that this is a total myth. The ONLY reason there's not enough food is because there's a monopoly on food control.

An example: Look at places like Sudan, Somalia, etc. where at some point (even today) the "war lords" take control of the food supply and starve the population to death.

We live in a world where ANYTHING is possible. However, a group of greedy psychos control and monopolize and "patent" certain things and products, so that the world would be under their power. Look at Monsanto. They are trying to have all foods genetically modified, patent seeds, and get rid of organic products. Why? So that they can control the food supply, and decide who eats and who doesn't.

Whoever controls the food, controls the people.

2)Not enough land-
The world has 57.5 million square miles of land. Need I go further? Once again it's all about monopolizing and controlling the people. Take a look at America. There's OVER 19 million empty homes in this country because the bank and mortgage companies decided that people couldn't pay their rents and loans, so they don't deserve to live in a house. They use IMAGINARY money to control the market place.

Yes, and it IS imaginary money because OVER 95% of the world's money is digital. In other words it's an illusion and it's fake. The bank decides who's going to have $50 million dollars and who gets hit with a 25% interest, and guess what? Whoever controls the banks also controls the money.

And by the way, did you know 1% of the world's population controls 80% of the world's wealth? Talk about control.

3)Not enough money-
Are you kidding me? America is supposedly trillions of dollars in debt, but yet they can manage to hand over like $100 million dollars in aid to Pakistan. Oh there's problems with North Korea? No problem, let us give $50 million in aid to South Korea, and actually while we are at it why don't we set up 1,000 military bases in the world? Did I tell you 95% of the world's money is digital?

Do you think Bill Gates will ever go bankrupt? Of course not, he donates hundreds of millions to planned parenthood, which use to be ran by a Nazi by the way. Planned parenthood or in other words Hitlerian philosophy of Eugenics.

We are only at the tip of the iceberg when it comes to technology. Do you know we have unlimited fuel supplies on this planet? Do you know we could use ocean, volcano, sun, etc. energy for fuel? It's INFINITE!

And one other thing, no matter how big the world's population gets there will ALWAYS be people starving, and living in poverty. This is how the system and the deck of cards are placed in society, so that the few at the top live wealthy and have good lives while everyone else barely makes a living and dies. The ants (us) support the grasshoppers (lazy bastards), but we don't have to.

And I wouldn't be surprised if people start leaving comments and defending people like Henry Kissinger and that we need "population reduction". Those people are just sick.

So the next time someone tells you the world's over populated remember that they are just repeating what they have been brainwashed to say.

Overpopulation...get out of here..




posted on May, 31 2009 @ 07:18 AM
link   
Wonderful thread man, S&F for you



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 07:49 AM
link   
i totally agree.

the problem is not the number of people that are eating, but the increase of people living a consumerist lifestyle.


+5 more 
posted on May, 31 2009 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by bobbylove321
 


You are considering the earth as a human possession and purely from a human point of view.

Our use of energy and resources makes us well over populated. We need to consider ways to determine a good level of population and work towards it - we can't keep growing on a finite planet.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 08:15 AM
link   
As far as there being enough room on earth to harbor many more times the current population, I agree.

As far as there being enough food.. I completely and utterly disagree. As you mention, the problem is life-style and the monopoly of food. But you shouldn't underestimate this problem. The average American eats enough meat to require some 9 hectares for himself each year. These hectares are used to create food. You cannot do this in Siberia, where all this space is left - the ground is frozen. You can't do this in the ocean. You can't do this in the Sahara (unless you throw away billions of dollars to create some kind of dome). If you'd add up all the places where you can manufacture food, you'd still need about half the size of another earth..
www.footprintnetwork.org...

So yes, this is kind of a 'fake' problem - if Western people would just stop eating so much - most of all meat-products, which take about 15 times as much room to produce as vegetation - then all our problems would simply dissipate. But so far we're all still eating meat (including me!). Now I'm talking mainly about food, but the article makes a good point of how long it takes to clean out the waste of 1 year .. and that seems to be 1 year and 4 months. That means we're heavily accumulating waste as well.

If you want to check the data, its here and here.

[edit on 31-5-2009 by scraze]


+23 more 
posted on May, 31 2009 @ 08:52 AM
link   
OK , you seem to have missed some things.

1. Factories do not make food, they combine products grown in feilds to produce food, it still takes lots of acres for the crops. just because you get your food at a store doesn't mean it is made on site.
2. there may be a huge amount of land in Russia but only some of it is habitable. and even less can be used for producing food, same as in arrid parts of the globe.
3.If money was just an illusion, some digital 1's and 0's then why would banks go broke? the more money you print the less value it all has.
4.in the sudan example you say the warlords take over the food, you are reffering of course to the food that is SENT TO THEM. as they cannot produce crops to sustain themselves where they live.
5. you say Monsanto is trying to control the food supply, yet previously you praise the Genetically modified foods that produce far more than regular "organic" food. Organic food is awesome for an individual family or small community, to raise enough for a large city the space needed would be 3-10 times as much. and would be very easily damaged by bad weather, onslaught of pests etc.
6.Fresh water: you will need abundant fresh water to grow the crops and use for human consumption, and don't act like de-salinating ocean water would be a solution because the amount of resources to do that would be horrendous. If it were easy L.A. would be doing it as would all of the coastal cities.
7. you quote 57 million or so sq miles total , you seem to forget a large chunk of that is not able to be either lived on or farmed. so what would you do with the mountain ranges, ice covered areas, desserts? oh yeah that is where you would put all of the trash that the hundred billion consumers generate daily.
8. what about room for all of the other inhabitants of earth, or do you suggest we kill all of the animals?
9. What about room for tree's grass, etc ? we need them to convert CO2 to oxygen for us to breathe. and the arrid/cold climates cannot do this.
10.besides garbage what do you plan to do with all of the fecal matter produced from your utopia? what about all of the toxins from the manufacturing processes?

The issue is known as sustainability. There is a certain amount of room needed to provide for human life, by your logic we can fit 60 people into a bus so if we park a billion busses side by side and end to end we could fit 60 billion people in the USA alone.

People who live in a city or suburb seem to see the country side as wasted space. I hear it from people often. They seem to not realise that the "space" we could be building on would be space that is needed for the natural balance of ecology.

What happens to the Billions of people when a hard late spring freeze kills 40% of the crops? I guess lots of people die!What about droughts? bacteria infestations, remember you are advocating "organic" crops which have no ability to resist those things.

I do however agree with you that we are not at the limits of sustainability yet. but the key word is YET!! we must decide soon how we will tackle this issue. waiting till fifty million peole starve because some locusts decimate the wheat crop is not an option. We must answer these questions before it is too late.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darkothe problem is not the number of people that are eating, but the increase of people living a consumerist lifestyle.


I disagree with that. Consumerism is not good, that is true, but in reality a lot of the population explosions are occurring in places where they need outside assistance to live. That is a HUGE problem when they cannot feed their own people, or create sustainable societies, but must depend on outside help.

Many of the top "consumer" societies (Japan, Western Europe, etc..) have zero population growth, or negative population growth. Wealth and education are inversely proportionate to the number of kids they have.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Amagnon
 


What you just said makes no sense, and also how is this a finite planet?

You know all the boundaries of the earth, and your putting limits on it?

Exactly, YOU are putting a limit on it.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by scraze
 


Yes, but you also got to understand that you are not thinking outside of the box. You know food can be grown underground right? So you take the area that is able to grow food, and you pretty much just doubled it.

The technology is available to make this happen.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by bobbylove321
reply to post by Amagnon
 


What you just said makes no sense, and also how is this a finite planet?

You know all the boundaries of the earth, and your putting limits on it?

Exactly, YOU are putting a limit on it.


Nature placed the limits, we can't pretend they don't exist. There are only so many acres of usable land, only so much space on earth. It is a reality. I mean even you figured the land mass with your post. you didn't say we had an infinite amount of land did you?



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by uncommon-sense
 


The earth has a way to carry its own through mother nature. If 40% of food crops are destroyed, then that doesn't mean all of a sudden lots of people die.

The technology is called genetic engineering, and what scientists are saying they could use genetics for is just a tip of the ice berg. The earth should have no problems. It's a monopoly by a certain handful of individuals that are causing destruction and death around the world.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:36 AM
link   
I agree with the premisse of this thread. We don't have over anything really, just hideous missmanagement of resources because we are being led by psychopaths. That's the basic truth. Most of our leaders, once they pass the natural selection process for political and economical supremacy, turn out to be certifiable psychopaths. Which is why politics is the cluster**** it is.

With rational, loving policies and behaviour this planet could probably sustain 30 billion people easily. And with open source technology we would have a stellar civilization way before we reached that number. God made the universe so mind numbingly big for a reason folks, and it wasn't to validate Ted Turners retarded politics and the moronic parasites that think and feed like him.

However, if we do not wake up as a civilization and move on, then yes, we are overstaying natures welcome on this planet. It's a choice which the group mind of mankind has to make, whether to change it's ways and embrace natural abundance, or to keep going down the path of selfishness, which as a negative energy will only lead our civilization to one end: death.

This spring the fruit trees around my house were literally dripping fruit onto the ground. Wild trees that nobody is taking care of. Yet people, in all their moronic sheepness were still droning to the supermarkets, buying food from the corporations, as their land laid idle. What the heck do we expect if we piss away our freedoms out of lazyness and repetitive behaviour? Does anyone really expect honest leadership anymore? All they can talk about is ways to kill and control us... Be your own leaders and find your own truth. Be it about overpopulation be it about any other of the control memes, like terrorism, security, education, yadda yadda. There is a deeper reality out there, just staring everyone in the face, daring them to embrace abundance.

Go for it.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by uncommon-sense
 


We have not even touched the surface of the potential on earth. I think you are underestimating it.

We can TRULY see the capabilities of mother earth ONLY when the technology that is hidden from public view is released. Once that is done, then we shall live as immortal beings.

The land is finite only if you want it to be finite. As I said, you can't start thinking about the end when you haven't even started at the beginning. More doors open up the farther you travel on the right direction and path.

Right now there's 7 Billion people on earth, and there's corruption down to the core, and it's really sickening. We can easily have OVER 30 Billion people on earth.

Once you reach the point where you do need to move on to somewhere else in order to sustain bigger population, then you start new colonies on other planets. There's a reason why the galaxy was created, and here we are fighting over bits of bread with some deranged morons in power who want an imaginary currency.

[edit on 31-5-2009 by bobbylove321]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sonya610

Originally posted by Donnie Darkothe problem is not the number of people that are eating, but the increase of people living a consumerist lifestyle.


I disagree with that. Consumerism is not good, that is true, but in reality a lot of the population explosions are occurring in places where they need outside assistance to live. That is a HUGE problem when they cannot feed their own people, or create sustainable societies, but must depend on outside help.

Many of the top "consumer" societies (Japan, Western Europe, etc..) have zero population growth, or negative population growth. Wealth and education are inversely proportionate to the number of kids they have.


That's because places like Africa and India aren't meant to support their populations, but places like North America can supply much more than the amount of people who live there.

The population isn't too big, it's just too clustered.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by bobbylove321
 


Sure, we could dig underground food factories on half the surface of the world. The technologies are simply hidden from view. While this could very well be true, do you honestly expect it to ever happen? In an absolute sense the world may not be over-populated - but why would we talk about such a hypothetical situation? Fact is that we're doing a terrible job managing our impact on the earth and thus ourselves, and whether you say we're over-populating the earth or just not using the solutions we have at hand is in my opinion the same thing.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by bobbylove321
 


Wow, really?

Please, I dont know how many times I have posted on this website about the RULE OF 72, but please refer to that in this instance.

First you need to find out what percentage the world is growing at population wise.

Once you get this, you divide it by 72.

After you get this information, lets call it "x" we will divide "x" into 72. Once you get that number we will call it "a".

Now "a" is the amount of years it will take for the population to DOUBLE in size.

Now every x years, we will have more people on this planet than ever before in history.

Bobbylove, I say this very nicely, please do some homework and investigation into this issue.

[edit on 31-5-2009 by GreenBicMan]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 11:02 AM
link   
Another thing there is that people eat more food now... Look at the size of people in north america. Half of them are over weight. I live in
Canada and it's unbelievable. Some people here eat enough to feed a family of 5. I dont know if they put something in the food to make you hungry but it's definilty on the increase.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Overpopulation simply means too many people for the NWO to fully control without possible repercussions.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by GreenBicMan
 


What you said makes no sense at all.

The world's population projection for 2050 is 10 Billion, so your calculations are clearly messed up.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by bobbylove321
 


I didnt give you any calculations, I said you need to find out the % the world is growing at population wise.

Please, look up the RULE OF 72 - ITS A MATHEMATICAL LAW!






new topics

top topics



 
70
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join